Jump to content

Is C&RT's Boat/Location Logging System Fit for Purpose?


Tony Dunkley

Featured Posts

 

This from a C&RT E-mail in response to the question I asked in the OP. . .

 

". . . the information held within our corporate systems can be extracted and displayed in many different ways depending on the reason or purpose it is needed."

. . . that's reassuring, isn't it.

 

 

 

Reviewing the question you asked in your OP, I found it pretty difficult to understand and I expect CRT did too.

 

You asked how should request information needed to assess their IT system, by FOI or by SAR. You didn't define the information you would be requesting.

 

I agree they have ignored your question, but probably because like me, they don't know what a SAR is. Mind you, I'd have given you the answer 'by FOI please'. Short, sweet and just what you asked for.

 

 

MtB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know of many who wish to do precisely this, but are reluctant to do so for fear of attracting special attention from the over zealous, vindictive and bullying elements within the C&RT Enforcement Team. The systematic and relentless intimidation of targetted, usually liveaboard, boat owners by BW/C&RT really has worked. The originators of this shameful campaign have now either gone or been moved to where they can do less harm, but,sadly, the evil that men(and some women) do will live on after them.

 

And there you have it.

 

You are utterly convinced that they are out to get you simply because they don't like you.

 

CRT aren't trying to persecute liveaboard boaters.

 

This from a C&RT E-mail in response to the question I asked in the OP. . .

 

". . . the information held within our corporate systems can be extracted and displayed in many different ways depending on the reason or purpose it is needed."

. . . that's reassuring, isn't it.

 

 

Yes.

 

That is how computer systems work.

 

They have raw data, and they present that raw data in the way required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Reviewing the question you asked in your OP, I found it pretty difficult to understand and I expect CRT did too.

 

You asked how should request information needed to assess their IT system, by FOI or by SAR. You didn't define the information you would be requesting.

 

I agree they have ignored your question, but probably because like me, they don't know what a SAR is. Mind you, I'd have given you the answer 'by FOI please'. Short, sweet and just what you asked for.

 

 

MtB

Look at what I said( quoting Stuart Garner) in the opening paragraph of the OP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And there you have it.

 

You are utterly convinced that they are out to get you simply because they don't like you.

 

CRT aren't trying to persecute liveaboard boaters.

 

Yes.

 

That is how computer systems work.

 

They have raw data, and they present that raw data in the way required.

Is it true that if you put crap into a computer then you will just get crap back out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, a computer program cannot normally correct crap. However the crap frequently comes looking neat, tidy, and with suitable headings that make it look as if it's correct and is actually information. Also computers tend to push out a lot of data at one time making it very tedious to go through line by line. All computer output should be treated as suspect, regardless of it's source.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at what I said( quoting Stuart Garner) in the opening paragraph of the OP.

 

I have looked.

 

I still can't see a question in there. Lots of waffling - but no question.

 

(Other than how you should make your request, by FOI or SAR.)

 

MtB

Edited by Mike the Boilerman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I have looked.

 

I still can't see a question in there. Lots of waffling - but no question.

 

(Other than how you should make your request, by FOI or SAR.)

 

MtB

Alright then, look at what Stuart Garner said ,and forget about the question I asked C&RT just for the moment . . . now look at the post title . . . it's a question . . . now, can you remember the first eight words at the beginning of this sentence? . . . yes . . . well done . . . now relate what Stuart Garner said, to the post title . . . got it now?

Edited by tony dunkley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ignoring the obvious abrasiveness of Mr Dunkley I've just looked at his posting in the opening entry in this thread, and to be quite honest I can't see a question.

 

Since being made aware of the problems with your computer system by Stuart Garner during a telephone call on 14 July 2014, I have sought advice from a specialist IT company experienced in providing software systems for process management and record keeping for such as Government Departments and Police.

They have indicated that the constant retrospective Location Record changes at the time of new entries against Customer or Contract numbers may well be due to the lack of a secure and valid audit trail, rendering the system unfit for purpose.
Obviously more information is needed for full assessment of your system and the implications for boat owners, and C&RT, of your use of it. I am unsure whether we should ask for this information as an FOI Request or an SAR. Please advise.
Edited by Graham Davis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Ignoring the obvious abrasiveness of Mr Dunkley I've just looked at his posting in the opening entry in this thread, and to be quite honest I can't see a question.

 

Since being made aware of the problems with your computer system by Stuart Garner during a telephone call on 14 July 2014, I have sought advice from a specialist IT company experienced in providing software systems for process management and record keeping for such as Government Departments and Police.

They have indicated that the constant retrospective Location Record changes at the time of new entries against Customer or Contract numbers may well be due to the lack of a secure and valid audit trail, rendering the system unfit for purpose.
Obviously more information is needed for full assessment of your system and the implications for boat owners, and C&RT, of your use of it. I am unsure whether we should ask for this information as an FOI Request or an SAR. Please advise.

 

See post 108.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But post 108 is equally incomprehensible.

I'm not sure what you want from the board Tony. You seem to just get shirty with anyone questioning what you post.

 

MtB

 

Isn't 'The Question' in the thread title?

 

I have no idea how to answer it though

 

Richard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not ask explicitly, under FOI, for:

 

1. Any internal documents which include information concerning any problems, issues or concerns about the boat location logging system.

 

2. Any information about the auditing arrangements for the boat location logging system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Isn't 'The Question' in the thread title?

 

I have no idea how to answer it though

 

Richard

 

No.

 

The question I was attempting to discuss with Tony is the question he says he asked CRT in the email he sent, the content of which he pasted into his OP.

 

I can't see a question in the email he pasted into his OP. Can you?

 

 

 

 

MtB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No.

 

The question I was attempting to discuss with Tony is the question he says he asked CRT in the email he sent, the content of which he pasted into his OP.

 

I can't see a question in the email he pasted into his OP. Can you?

 

 

 

 

MtB

 

Well, no. That's because I can't be arsed to wade through all this thread looking for it.

 

Richard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See post 108.

 

Post #108

Alright then, look at what Stuart Garner said ,and forget about the question I asked C&RT just for the moment . . . now look at the post title . . . it's a question . . . now, can you remember the first eight words at the beginning of this sentence? . . . yes . . . well done . . . now relate what Stuart Garner said, to the post title . . . got it now?

 

No, still no question!

Just another abrasive statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since being made aware of the problems with your computer system by Stuart Garner during a telephone call on 14 July 2014, I have sought advice from a specialist IT company experienced in providing software systems for process management and record keeping for such as Government Departments and Police.

 

They have indicated that the constant retrospective Location Record changes at the time of new entries against Customer or Contract numbers may well be due to the lack of a secure and valid audit trail, rendering the system unfit for purpose?

 

Obviously more information is needed for full assessment of your system and the implications for boat owners, and C&RT, of your use of it. I am unsure whether we should ask for this information as an FOI Request or an SAR. Please advise.

 

There you go, it now becomes a question..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be better if the data wasn't behind an FOI request in the first place. Given it's linked to your license number it should be securely accessible via their website. The resulting tidal wave of complaints about inaccuracy would then drive further improvements. This is unfortunately not how bureaucrats roll.

Any logging software that allows the mutation of historical records is probably unfit for purpose. Inaccurate or misattributed sightings should not be edited.

Edited by oarfish
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having gone back and read post 1 it appears the original post has nothing to do with CRT accuracy of recording boat movements.

 

It appears the CRT database has a field for recording a boat's home mooring. When the boat is moved to a new home mooring the old data is overwritten rather than being retained as a historical record.

 

The question is where this is deliberate or a fault in the programming?

 

IMO I can't see why CRT would need to retain a history of former home moorings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having gone back and read post 1 it appears the original post has nothing to do with CRT accuracy of recording boat movements.

 

It appears the CRT database has a field for recording a boat's home mooring. When the boat is moved to a new home mooring the old data is overwritten rather than being retained as a historical record.

 

The question is where this is deliberate or a fault in the programming?

 

IMO I can't see why CRT would need to retain a history of former home moorings?

 

Exactly the point I've been making since the outset. However, people on here didn't appreciate that and preferred a moan about the way sightings of movements are done, and that has ensued instead of the real issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.