So You Can Go Swimming!

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, grendel said:

Mel wasnt hounded out, she was advised by the supporters of the event to leave, otherwise we would all be addressing our concerns to her and getting answers.

I still think that the event would be a success at a location where a bigger safety margin could be allowed between swimmers and other river users, I think the biggest concerns here are the proximity of the boats and swimmers.

A question to you as a moderator, please was one of Mel's posts removed as I thought there were 2?

[vanessan]

1 hour ago, JohnK said:

We’d all agree there’s an inherent risk in this swim wouldn’t we?
But doesn’t almost everything have an inherent risk?
It’s about reducing or managing that risk to acceptable levels isn’t it?
Probably making sure participants and other stakeholders aware of the risks too?

Following on from Bill’s post ... If you applied the same criteria to boating on the Broads that seem to be applied to the swim here .... would you allow novice skippers? Would you allow alcohol? Would you allow unqualified skippers? Would you allow limited companies to make a profit from hiring boats out? Would you allow boats on tidal waters (non tidal would be safer wouldn’t it?). Would you allow powered and non powered to share the same water? Would you insist on redundant engines in case one fails? How about people boating without road access in case of a medical emergency? Who has approved the boating?

Someone on a swimming forum where it was proposed to introduce boats to “their” swimming area might say all of the above mightn’t they? Would they be right?

On a lighter note, would we have let JohnK become a member had we known he was going to ask all these questions? 

[vanessan]

6 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

A question to you as a moderator, please was one of Mel's posts removed as I thought there were 2?

There were 2, one Wednesday and one Thursday. 

Sorry to jump the gun mods. 

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, vanessan said:

There were 2, one Wednesday and one Thursday. 

Sorry to jump the gun mods. 

Thank you, I've found it and re read it.

[batrabill]

35 minutes ago, grendel said:

Mel wasnt hounded out, she was advised by the supporters of the event to leave, otherwise we would all be addressing our concerns to her and getting answers.

This is wrong on two accounts, neither of which you would be aware of.

My advice to Mel to leave it at what she had already said actually crossed with her post stating it was her last. So she had already come to the same conclusion as me that endlessly answering each objection on was not a sensible way to go.

I think the response was at best "unfriendly". Did she feel 'hounded out'? I dunno, why don't you ask her? 

So secondly, the "otherwise we would all be addressing our concerns to her and getting answers" is wrong.

 

Just to be clear, I don't know this woman, I contacted her because I thought it would be better to ask her the questions being asked here. Did I feel bad that many people found the response unfriendly? Yes.

 

 

[Bound2Please]

13 minutes ago, vanessan said:

There were 2, one Wednesday and one Thursday. 

Sorry to jump the gun mods. 

Mel Holland in fact made 4 posts on Thursday, thats all she has contributed.

[MauriceMynah]

18 minutes ago, vanessan said:

On a lighter note, would we have let JohnK become a member had we known he was going to ask all these questions? 

Taken in  jest... but... I'm glad he does and would be disappointed if he stopped.

[rightsaidfred]

1 hour ago, JohnK said:

 

Absolutely ... but is it fair to expect the organisers to demonstrate it here? Or that because they haven’t demonstrated it here they haven’t demonstrated it?

 

The easiest way to dispel speculation is to publish the facts, and as this appears to be Mel`s first attempt at organising an event their is bound to be an element of trepidation amongst anyone with experience of H & S or organising public events, as far as feeling hounded out I guess the defining line between a friendly or unfriendly response depends on whether you are hearing what you want to hear or not.

Fred

[batrabill]

19 minutes ago, vanessan said:

On a lighter note, would we have let JohnK become a member had we known he was going to ask all these questions? 

I never voted for him! 

[vanessan]

3 minutes ago, Bound2Please said:

Mel Holland in fact made 4 posts on Thursday, thats all she has contributed.

Sorry, I was referring to the two main posts she made as I assumed they were the ones Philosophical meant. 

[grendel]

24 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

A question to you as a moderator, please was one of Mel's posts removed as I thought there were 2?

to my knowledge we have not hidden any of her posts, the initial post was however put in by RanworthBreeze while the topic was still locked

[vanessan]

4 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

Taken in  jest... but... I'm glad he does and would be disappointed if he stopped.

Me too. I’m sure he’ll have a laugh at it, hope so anyway. 

[Bound2Please]

1 minute ago, grendel said:

to my knowledge we have not hidden any of her posts, the initial post was however put in by RanworthBreeze while the topic was still locked

I just went throught from page 1 - 21 no posts removed (Hidden) all 4 posts She made are still there to be read as required.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, grendel said:

to my knowledge we have not hidden any of her posts, the initial post was however put in by RanworthBreeze while the topic was still locked

Thank you I have managed to view all of the postings that I recall as being there last week, sorry if I have wasted any of your time.

Reason for the question was so that I could be as sure as possible that I had not missed any input from Mel that should be considered in my postings.

[MauriceMynah]

I notice that the discussion has started to include "Passage swimming" generally. I have no problem with passage swimming as long as the swimmers make themselves highly visible to me, allowing me to slow down and keep well clear of them. I wouldn't think them wise to swim where novices cruise, but would be happy that they have weighed the risks. Their decision, their risks.

But it is in my mind that I might have a bit more difficulty if there were in excess of 200 people in the water when I'm confronted by a novice helmed 45 footer trying to pass a tacking yacht !

Now, In fairness I have to admit, I will be 100 miles away from the event. It doesn't effect me, but the president does.

 

[JohnK]

Me too. I’m sure he’ll have a laugh at it, hope so anyway. 

Damn right I laughed.
I’m having a mare of a day with SQL, VBA and ADODB (be glad if you don’t know what these things are!!!) and needed a laugh, these posts cheered me up no end.

[grendel]

I know the first two, but not the last, and that scares me enough.

[Vaughan]

53 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

 

I notice that the discussion has started to include "Passage swimming"

 

I have a feeling I may have introduced this expression, subconsciously. It is just that anyone cruising from A to B, on rivers or at sea, is "making a passage" in maritime law. I don't see this as a race, although it may well be timed over the distance. It is certainly a different thing from doing a number of lengths in an Olympic pool!

What concerns me is that such a large event may well take over from all those other legitimate users of the navigation, who wish to make the same "passage".

[Guest]

1 hour ago, batrabill said:

I never voted for him! 

I'm pretty certain I proposed him 

[Guest]

I see that JMs letter has been published on another forum now .

 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:

 

This is an important point, passage swimming is a new activity for the Broads, it must surely be assessed as such. Good point, Vaughan.

 I think this gets to the heart of why I am so uneasy about this event, I'm sure that swimming events can be held on the broads in harmony with other users of the navigation and with an acceptable level of safety comparable with other events/activities which already take place, BUT this event has seemingly sprung from nowhere and the company behind it are already telling people that more events and expansion are planned. I really hope the BA can give more details soon,, I would have expected at least consultation with other groups that use the river before sanctioning such a large event.

[JohnK]

I would have expected at least consultation with other groups that use the river before sanctioning such a large event.

Isn’t that exactly what happened? Just not here.
Perhaps Mel’s mistake is not knowing who we are (joke)

[grendel]

9 minutes ago, JohnK said:

 

Isn’t that exactly what happened? Just not here.
Perhaps Mel’s mistake is not knowing who we are (joke)

 

how else would you consult with the general boating fraternity on the broads?

[vanessan]

10 minutes ago, JohnK said:

 

Isn’t that exactly what happened? Just not here.
Perhaps Mel’s mistake is not knowing who we are (joke)

 

Mel quoted consultations with ( from memory) the BA, RNLI, local council, Waveney River Trust, Beccles Charter Weekend, Beccles Harbour Master. I would have liked the NSBA included in that list. 

[JohnK]

how else would you consult with the general boating fraternity on the broads?

 

Erm through the BA or NSBA?

If that wasn’t a serious question then my apologies.