smellyloo

Sadly "in jokes" between good friends can seem a tad confusing on a public board. But then as I don't get jokes I never know if what has been writ is a joke or not. Slowly backs towards door, so no one will notice, and hurriedly leaves. :)

I bet you wish you hadn't bothered asking ................... lol

Moderation used to happen as you describe now it seems posts are removed, reviewed and action taken before informing the author. But threads like this with strong feeling held and vented will attract acts of moderation, I know, I have been one, however I'm sure the moderation is carried out in a fair and unbiased way with equal number of moderated posts on both sides of the argument.

I think everybody who wanted to voice an opinion has done so by now. I havn't been swayed by the opinions of those who opposed the swim and I suspect they havn't been swayed by arguments in support. So i'll leave it at that.

Ok, I understand your annoyed with the BA for hiking up the tolls but please don't take it out on other users. I pay road tax (i don't have a diesal so pay a lot) but I wouldn't ban diesal users and if they get away with low road tax good on them. I also don't want to see pedestrians or cyclists pay road tax even though I have to pay to use the roads. I paid river tolls for 15 years whilst I owned a boat. I never resented paying it. I certainly would never have advercated that swimmers pay a river toll. Where would they stick the tolls paid sticker? Answers on bog paper please. LOL

I could fall off a moter boat and be mangled in the prop. I could be clonked on the head by the boom of a sailing boat and killed. I could be moored up in my boat and killed by carbon monoxide poisoning I could fall in the river whilst fishing and drown So WHY the concern for swimmers partaking in an organised swim? I think BetraBill might have identified the underlying coarse ...... the blessed toll issue. If I was lucky enough to own a boat I would and have been happy to pay the toll. Walkers don't pay road tax so why should swimmers pay a toll!! Incidently you can admire the scenery whilst swimming, if I was up to it I would have very much enjoyed swimming that route ...... it really is a scenic part of the Broads.

The Waveney is not a particularly busy river (boating wise) so any disruption would have been to a relatively few users. That disruption, as I recall, was a loss of one or two mooring spots on route and an instruction to follow advice from the course marshalls. The river remained open for all. It feels that some on here are still striving to stop future similar events and trying to concoct any reason to support that action.

I guess anybody who takes wild swimming seriously will know how to stay safe, just as scuba divers do, so in the unlikely event they take a dip should we really get involved. Wild swimming has been around for some time now ....... how many times have you encountered a problem?

No offense taken. It is an age thing but I can't stand the mobiles around be (not mine) beeping everytime somebody posts a statement like ....." i'm walking down the road " and Facebook just seems to the tip of a very jagged iceberg. :)

If I used Facebook I would but sadly I don't.

I suspect, but dont know, contributions will have been made to any organisation that helped police the event. If BA provided resources during the event then I would assume a contribution would have been made to them. Note, I do not know if this happened, although I seem to recall that Mel (the organiser) indicated that this would be so, but I assume this to be true rather than assume the opposite.

You seem to be saying that only events that attract spectators are to be encouraged? Are the NBN meet events designed to attract spectators or press coverage? Or are they more directed towards the enjoyment of the participants. Angling matches can hardly be described as spectator events but have been a part of the Broadland scene for donkeys years.

I dont need to be active in a particular sport to champion their right to enjoy their activity. It is great to see the Broads attracting people other than boaters and anglers ..... we live (well I do anyway) in a beautiful landscape and I enjoy sharing it with people with diverse interests.

But 90+ very happy swimmers that enjoyed a day out on the Waveney plus family friends and supporters that will have enjoyed the hospitality of local hostelries. All in all a very successful event that seems to have been organised in a professional manner. Lets hope it becomes an annual event.

It is seemingly very easy to take offense when none was intended, I guess that's why this thread came about. The mod team have explained what criteria are applied when moderating posts and unless an attack is made on a specific person , if the post can be interpreted as not having the intention to offend an individual then that post is deemed OK. So sadly it seems the only way to respond to aggressive posting is to respond in like fashion being mindful to not target an individual which would most certainly be bullying. So in essence do as advised and grow a thicker skin, that is me not you.

It is a shame Mel felt hounded out by aggressive contributions as if she had been treated with a bit more respect she may have been able to provide a much more detailed explanation of what has actually happened. But we're would be the fun in that?

I think the problem that the moderators have when contributing/policing a contentious debate is that if they have a passionate support for one side it is very difficult to be objective when asked to judge if the TOS has been violated. In many ways it might be helpful if moderators has two handles, the official Nbn one and their own. This would enable them to like postings without the misconception that a post is moderator supported.

OK, we will never know but since unsubstantiated logic seems to be perfectly acceptable do you really think the same arguments would not have been presented were the swim to have been destined for norwich? JM would never allow anything that suggests a restriction to navigation (sandford) to pass without complaint, and his mistrust of the BA is legendary. I'm not at all sure this debate is purely about safety as once again the assumption here is that the organisers have discarded safety concerns in favour of profit.

The fact that you are aware that they post elsewhere under the same name suggests that you also take an interest in things elsewhere. It follows that you can judge whether their arguments are consistent in both places, if not then assuming an ulterior motive to their posts is a reasonable assumption.

If somebody is made to feel their opinion is worthless to the extent that they no longer feel able to make further postings then that could be considered bullying. Now I hear cries from the brave stating that they should grow a thicker skin because that's how forum discourse takes place. However my last statement is also bullying designed to make the unfortunate target feel even more worthless. One of the previous posters, sorry I forget who, stated that the onus is on us all to call out bullying posts so that hopefully nobody has to be made to feel worthless whilst participating on nbn. To make the glib statement that those who have been brave enough to raise the topic are guilty of crying foul to sabotage a thread are just reaffirming that bullying exists.

Now I am really confused I have no clue what you are referring to.

I thought this thread was started by grendel to divert discussions of behavior from the original thread.

Whilst their was some genuine, well thought out arguments against the swimming event there were pages of repetitive dogma rubbishing the event with categorical claims that safety was being compromised in favour of profit. The fact that this thread has been started confirms that the few supporters felt that their input was being held in contempt and being disregarded out of hand. So sadly I felt the swimming thread was being hijacked by the ....... I refuse to share my broads with anybody that hasn't paid for the privilege. A debate it certainly was not ..... just page after page of repeated outrage.

Sadly some of the posts that can be interpreted as bullying are posted by mods. I commented on one but I guess this was deemed to be incorrect.

Sorry Vaughan I have great respect for your views but I think it is justified to raise these concerns on the thread that spawned the issue.