ACC now have a chat forum on their site.

[carlt]

Grow up.

Considering your childish insults when I try to hold a sensible discussion I would suggest it is not me who needs to grow up.

[Guest]

Bit of a screw up there eh, it does not have the name Carl quoted does it??

(shakes head)

 

Interesting - Carl quoted the name 'Jenkins'. You then asked him to get your name right in a post following that and if not, your forum name would suffice,

 

I wish you would get my name right carl, if you cannot, my forum name will suffice. After all, we should abide by forum etiquette.

I use jenlyn on here, because I choose to do so, It's a pity that you have to use spite to further your "cause" :-)

 

So no actually I don't think it's a screw up at all. I think it's reasonable to assume 'Jay' is your correct name, but now you seem to be saying it isn't that either....or is it?

[Jerra]

So no actually I don't think it's a screw up at all. I think it's reasonable to assume 'Jay' is your correct name, but now you seem to be saying it isn't that either....or is it?

I don't know his real name and don't frankly give a tinkers cuss. However if he is using a pseudonym as a member of the ACC council (is that the correct term?) that to me is entirely wrong. Those wishing to join the ACC have IMO a right to know who is running the organisation and not be fobbed off by assumed names.

[LoneWolf]

Well it certainly reads like that to me especially following your post agreeing with Richard's...

 

Which makes your next statement even more ironic...

 

 

Why continue the discussion when you are fed up with reading about it?

 

You could have expressed your opinion without making personal comments about me expressing mine.

 

Where did i say i was fed up with reading about it?

And what 'personal comment' did i make about you expressing yours?

 

Your 'debating technique' had now descended to putting words into my mouth

 

 

 

I don't know his real name and don't frankly give a tinkers cuss. However if he is using a pseudonym as a member of the ACC council (is that the correct term?) that to me is entirely wrong. Those wishing to join the ACC have IMO a right to know who is running the organisation and not be fobbed off by assumed names.

 

Thats interesting if true. Funnily enough I looked at the ACC site with the intention of joining but was put off by the amount of personal information they were asking for without giving any indication of who this would be available to.

I still may join but i haven't got around to asking them this question yet. Perhaps Jenlyn could let me know now?

[jenlyn]

Where did i say i was fed up with reading about it?

And what 'personal comment' did i make about you expressing yours?

 

Your 'debating technique' had now descended to putting words into my mouth

 

 

 

 

 

Thats interesting if true. Funnily enough I looked at the ACC site with the intention of joining but was put off by the amount of personal information they were asking for without giving any indication of who this would be available to.

I still may join but i haven't got around to asking them this question yet. Perhaps Jenlyn could let me know now?

Only Acc membership secretary has your details, and they would never be passed to a third party. That includes CRT.

[Ex- Member]

I still may join but i haven't got around to asking them this question yet. Perhaps Jenlyn could let me know now?

 

 

Hope you do LoneWolf there's little doubt you're one of the saner and more balanced members here, your membership and any input would certainly be an asset for the ACC

[carlt]

Where did i say i was fed up with reading about it?

 

 

Some day, we will have a thread mentioning the ACC that doesn't leap into the past, have founder members having to defend their position (or yawning), doesn't discuss the constitution or voting rights

 

God, I hope that day is soon and we can start to see what the ACC is doing, not how it was formed

 

Richard

Just what i was thinking

 

 

And what 'personal comment' did i make about you expressing yours?

 

Carl - Your posts show you still do feel resentment - get over it

Your 'debating technique' had now descended to putting words into my mouth

 

No it hasn't I think the words you use make that unnecessary but if I have misinterpreted them perhaps you could clarify.

[billS]

Cotswoldman - I am glad to see you back.

 

I felt that meeting with CRT without the legitimacy of an association was counterproductive - you formed one, and I support it's aim's. I, like many others, was dissapointed that it was not aimed at a broader membership, especially as I thought that a conscensus was building for a CWDF based alternative to NABO - but that's water under the bridge. If I cared enough. or had the time, I would get off my own backside to form one.

 

Carlt - your arguments as usual are robust, right, and entertaining to read, but they are starting to look a little ungracious.

[mayalld]

.

 

Steve Jay is yet another alias.

 

He can't even give his real name out on the ACC website.

 

 

Carl,

 

whilst I share some of your misgivings about what went into the formation of ACC (although I am prepared to see whether it proves to be a good organisation despite this), and am curious as to why at least one individual on the council appears to use two different "real names" as well as his boat name, there is a degree of "people in glass houses" here.

 

99% of people on here don't know YOUR surname (I think I do, but I'm not sure, and I'm not about to say, because I respect your choice not to say)

[carlt]

there is a degree of "people in glass houses" here.

 

99% of people on here don't know YOUR surname (I think I do, but I'm not sure, and I'm not about to say, because I respect your choice not to say)

Now that Jenlyn has expressed a wish to only be known by his forum name here I am happy to respect his wishes but it is also fair to say that he has openly used his real name here so it is not me who put it in the public domain.

 

Now that he has requested that I do not repeat it I won't.

Carlt - your arguments as usual are robust, right, and entertaining to read, but they are starting to look a little ungracious.

Ungracious?

 

I merely responded to someone else's comments.

 

It's a discussion forum and if people want to discuss something then why shouldn't I join in?

 

I think the lack of graciousness comes from those who criticise and display exactly the same traits that they are accusing me of.

Edited January 30, 2014 by carlt

[Jerra]

Thats interesting if true. Funnily enough I looked at the ACC site with the intention of joining but was put off by the amount of personal information they were asking for without giving any indication of who this would be available to.

I still may join but i haven't got around to asking them this question yet. Perhaps Jenlyn could let me know now?

I am not saying it is true I was merely commenting on the suggestion by those who do appear to know the man that he may be using another pseudonym on the ACC site.

 

If that is correct it is IMO wrong.

[LoneWolf]

Only Acc membership secretary has your details, and they would never be passed to a third party. That includes CRT.

 

ok, thanks jenlyn

 

 

 

No it hasn't I think the words you use make that unnecessary but if I have misinterpreted them perhaps you could clarify.

 

sorry, i haven't worked out how to do quotes within quotes

 

the 1st thing you quoted was me echoing the sentiments that we would start to hear about what the ACC was doing rather than how it was formed. This is a different thing than saying i'm fed up with hearing about it.

 

The second was advice on how your posts are perceived (by me obviously) followed by some more advice - i could have put it in a gentler way perhaps but i'd already done that. Consider it a 'personal remark' if you want to but i dont think there's anything wrong with me saying it

 

I'm bored with this discussion now, you carry on if you want but you're doing yourself a disservice

[Guest]

ok, thanks jenlyn

 

When you asked the question though it did occur to me how secure the personal information they request is kept, it's OK saying it's 'only kept by the membership secretary' and maybe I am doing them a disservice but I trust they have this aspect covered.

[carlt]

 

 

I'm bored with this discussion now, you carry on if you want but you're doing yourself a disservice

Yes I'm pretty fed up with defending myself against criticism when you display exactly the traits you accuse me of so I welcome you putting an end to it.

 

Your comments were not "advice" they were uncalled for criticisms

 

If you don't like the way I conduct myself on the forum please put me on your ignore list because I have no intention of taking your advice because it is sheer hypocrisy.

[bassplayer]

When you asked the question though it did occur to me how secure the personal information they request is kept, it's OK saying it's 'only kept by the membership secretary' and maybe I am doing them a disservice but I trust they have this aspect covered.

Well that's one thing that put me off joining TBH. If the information stops at the secretary then why ask for that detail of information?There's always a threat it's a back door route for information to CRT (another reason why it's important to be able trust the members forming the constitution).

 

It's not unreasonable to be concerned about threats before 'going public' with one's personal information. At the same time being anonymous can be an easier way to say what you think without fearing retribution. It's a big step and a brave step to go public. If you are truly going to get behind an organisation like this you have to make that step.

[Ex- Member]

Well that's one thing that put me off joining TBH. If the information stops at the secretary then why ask for that detail of information?There's always a threat it's a back door route for information to CRT (another reason why it's important to be able trust the members forming the constitution).

 

It's not unreasonable to be concerned about threats before 'going public' with one's personal information. At the same time being anonymous can be an easier way to say what you think without fearing retribution. It's a big step and a brave step to go public. If you are truly going to get behind an organisation like this you have to make that step.

 

I'm sure they have to abide by the same legalities as any business or organisation has to with regard to this sort of information. I really don't see an issue, the information required of us to join the ACC is just our names and occupation boat name, e-mail and a postal address.

 

Although I don't necessarly see the need for an occupation, the other info is pretty basic.

[LoneWolf]

Yes I'm pretty fed up with defending myself against criticism when you display exactly the traits you accuse me of so I welcome you putting an end to it.

 

Your comments were not "advice" they were uncalled for criticisms

 

If you don't like the way I conduct myself on the forum please put me on your ignore list because I have no intention of taking your advice because it is sheer hypocrisy.

 

I disagree. Hypocrisy is saying you wish them well and then trying to trash them at every opportunity

[carlt]

 

I disagree. Hypocrisy is saying you wish them well and then trying to trash them at every opportunity

Perhaps you should go back and read what was actually posted.

 

Somebody raised the issue of their formation and I politely posted my opinion on the matter.

 

There was a brief, civilised exchange between myself and Cotswoldsman, interspersed with the usual random insults from Jenlyn but at no time did I "trash" the ACC.

 

I may have offered criticism but no different to that posted by others and certainly not as strong as some.

 

It then descended into you and others criticising my part in the exchange yet choosing to ignore the contributions of others which was frequently less polite than me and certainly less relevant to the discussion.

 

Now I am forced to defend myself against these pointless, off-topic criticisms which are a personal attack and add absolutely nothing to the discussion nor the forum as a whole.

 

Continue having a go at me if you wish but I will continue defending myself because whatever crap you write I didn't start it and I don't believe I deserve it.

[matty40s]

Will you two get a room.......

[carlt]

Will you two get a room.......

I don't think that would help, somehow.

[jenlyn]

I'm sure they have to abide by the same legalities as any business or organisation has to with regard to this sort of information. I really don't see an issue, the information required of us to join the ACC is just our names and occupation boat name, e-mail and a postal address.

 

Although I don't necessarly see the need for an occupation, the other info is pretty basic.

Initially, we asked your occupation to see if there was a resource we could use to help the Association in any way. Nothing sinister.

The other contact details we asked for will in time be used interactively with the website if you so wish. That means help with any difficulties, ie breakdowns, illness etc.

Again, nothing sinister.

The Association will I hope, develop into a club sort of atmosphere with banters, socials and suchlike.

[Ex- Member]

Initially, we asked your occupation to see if there was a resource we could use to help the Association in any way. Nothing sinister.

The other contact details we asked for will in time be used interactively with the website if you so wish. That means help with any difficulties, ie breakdowns, illness etc.

Again, nothing sinister.

The Association will I hope, develop into a club sort of atmosphere with banters, socials and suchlike.

 

That sounds ok to me.

 

The new forum will be a great asset I think too, it's certainly kicked off pretty well and some new faces I've never seen on this forum before as well and loads we already know from here. I reckon opening up a small section of the forum to everyone might also be a good idea.

[madcat]

Ancient history now but I was a bit sad that the association formed was for a specific group of boaters but in part that was because I was very uneasy about the policies CaRT were introducing.

 

X many months on I'm pleased to see Cotswoldman back and hope he stays.

I'm also optimistic that what's good for one set of boaters is likely to be good for others too.

[Mick and Maggie]

I guess if anyone in ACC learns something that would benefit us here on Canal World then they would post a thread.

 

I learned that 99 percent of people who post on here give the rest a bad name.

[carlt]