batrabill

There will be a range of people who hire. Can you tell me how you know one of them isn’t an idiot? Because I’ve met lots of people and some of them are smart and some of them a blithering fools. Unless you can prove to me that the Boat yards have done special way of filtering out the fools then we can be certain that some hirers are idiots. Not EVERY hirer, but some. Clear?

So this swim has become the benchmark has it? What about the 2 day paddle board event which has successfully run for a couple of years is also run by a LTD company. For Money! Is that “safe” ??? What I am saying is that nothing in life is truly safe. Everything has a risk and many things have quite s high risk If you drove in a car today you took a considerable risk, much greater than any boating event here If the 3 rivers race were subjected to the same scrutiny this event has it would never have happened No one here knows what the safety plan for this event looks like. Speculation speculation Speculation

Safety is obviously paramount, but apparently it’s safe to put an idiot with no boating experience whatsoever, at the helm of a 6 ton 45 foot monster after a 10 minute “handover” That is “safe” is it.

This may surprise people. Went through the Swimming thread Individuals clearly against 21 Individuals clearly in favour 15 No obvious view 10 Now, I wasn't really being careful about counting, but its there out thereabouts... I But it doesn't really matter if the numbers are 2, 3 or 4 out, the point remains - there isn't much of a majority at all is there? Yet the debate was very often talked about in majority/minority terms. So what we have is two sides in a debate.

BTW I’m not making any complaints. I have a thick skin. I don’t use the bullying word, but I have said “playground ganging-up” which is what it feels like from here.

You must also accept that once 3 or 4 of the usual suspects have agreed on something it gets less and less likely someone will present a counter argument. So the “consensus” is self-reinforcing. I have a PM from someone who said they agreed with me but “wouldn’t dare” say it on open forum. Worth thinking about?

A there you go. I think we can assume I am one of that ‘faction’. But I contacted the organiser and encouraged her to contribute so we could get some facts. Creating discontent?? For those that still don’t get it, she found the response far from ‘friendly’. That’s where things kicked off. I have looked back at the thread and the only instance of creating discontent from this side of the argument is Bobdog adding “National Park” to his response. Sorry Bobdog but that’s true right? BUT that’s only as annoying it is to me and many others to read all the non-fact based insults against the BA. The difference is, the “majority” find one annoying and not the other.

To the next round... Ding ding

Trouble is, if you say something like “National Parks are a good thing “ something that probably 95% of the British public agree with you are seen as being provocative. Where does the problem lie?

Isn’t “I don’t know “ the key point here?

I think you’re all over sensitive. So many in a huff all the time. JM on the other hand, is never ruffled. If you catch him out he switches the point of attack. Textbook.

Someone has to

I do genuinely admire you Mr Waller, you are the Terminator - you never stop.

I never thought I would read such a statement here on the nbn.

I don’t think it’s bullying in the modern workplace sense of the word but there’s an awful lot of playground ganging up on the fat kid. Of course, those that do it won’t think they are.

What JohnK said.

Financial liabilities are limited, yes. But if you are suggesting safety liabilities are limited you are quite wrong, there are a few people in jail right now who will attest to that.

I have literally nothing to do with this event, nor does anyone else here. Hence asking her to post.

Contact Mel

That’s a gloriously fine distinction but if you say so.....

I'm sure you can play, "and another risk..." all day. If this goes ahead - and it might fall on safety, or maybe people won't sign up - we will all be playing "I told you so" as JM has already posted in several locations.

Mel wrote this, perhaps you have forgotten? "I have addressed numerous safety concerns raised by this forum already which have been documented within risk assessments, normal operations procedures, an emergency action plan, and go/no go criteria. All those documents have been assessed or are being assessed by the Broads Authority, insurers and the RNLI to name a few. It's not been simply write a document and you're good to go, the reviews are rigorous and for the right reasons which I welcome."

Tow floats are compulsory.

Not a popular view that, I've discovered.

What JohnK said.