Acle B.N.P.

[Maxwellian]

Tut.... grown adults!

[Wussername]

Deuce. BB to serve. Set match.

.

[grendel]

4 hours ago, batrabill said:

Like talking about the speed restrictions and not mentioning that Sandford wasn't invoked.

still on about those speed restrictions you introduced to the discussion, to me the speed restrictions are just a red herring. diverting from the main discussion.

[D46]

Wimbledon has come round pretty soon this yr I figured it was in summer .

[batrabill]

1 hour ago, grendel said:

still on about those speed restrictions you introduced to the discussion, to me the speed restrictions are just a red herring. diverting from the main discussion.

Grendel, yes you are right, but you introduced Gentlemen’s Yachts!

This was all about a harmless sign a long while ago. 

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

6 hours ago, batrabill said:

Grendel, yes you are right, but you introduced Gentlemen’s Yachts!

This was all about a harmless sign a long while ago. 

Yes it was about a sign, but hardly harmless. A sign that has been put up to advertise something false. A falsehood that a certain individual in high UNELECTED authority wants the public to believe is true long enough to allow said falsehood (weii, Lie actually) to be finalised through the back door, enabling Sandford to govern the Broads. 

[Paladin]

8 hours ago, batrabill said:

That doesn’t really make sense Paladin(e). What you have said there is ‘I’m happy with my prejudices, and I don’t like the fact you don’t agree with me’

Didnt your attitude to the BA change greatly when your tolls went up a couple of years ago?

Is that what I said? Thank you for explaining it to me. Perhaps I can now leave you to write my posts for me.

What I thought I said was that I came to the debates years ago, with no preconceived ideas about the BA and eventually came to the opinions I hold today, having undertaken considerable research and having personal experiences of how the BA, from top to bottom, staff/members/officers, operates. My change of attitude towards the BA considerably predates the recent tolls realignment, and is based on evidence and hard fact, not suspicion, rumour or gossip.

Over many years, whatever arguments I have put forward I have backed up with facts and figures. I haven’t simply made derogatory comments about other people’s opinions. Unless you can provide similar evidence to support your criticisms, there seems to be little else to discuss with you. Just repeatedly saying opinions are wrong, without justifying that criticism, isn’t discussion. It is, as I said earlier, symptomatic of belief perseverance.

[Vaughan]

9 hours ago, batrabill said:

That doesn’t really make sense Paladin(e). What you have said there is ‘I’m happy with my prejudices, and I don’t like the fact you don’t agree with me’

But surely that is you putting your own spin on what Paladin has said.

[D46]

7 hours ago, batrabill said:

Grendel, yes you are right, but you introduced Gentlemen’s Yachts!

This was all about a harmless sign a long while ago. 

Harmless how can it be harmless it's an information sign that's totally inaccurate , any tourist who's visiting for the very first time is highly likely to believe they are in a national park and that's not true .

Is lieing to people is definitely not harmless , lier's generally get found out eventually .

[marshman]

Whether or not the sign should or should not be on the post, perhaps the point is in reality, it is easier for this Forum to take a pop at the BA than all the other agencies/firms that now use that slogan and also who were directly involved in the original decision to erect that sign.

That means, the local authorities concerned, including probably the Highways Agency under whose auspices the A47 will fall, and then everyone who uses the "lie" on their material from the OS downwards.

Off you go then boys, and do your duty!!   I wish you well and many hours of  happy correspondence - and no ST that does not mean that I support the introduction of a full NP for this area 

[rightsaidfred]

I  came to the Broads several decades ago purely as a holidaymaker with no preconception of what I was about to experience, for many years having fallen in love with the area I just returned to enjoy its ambience, as time has passed I have taken a bigger interest in the area as a whole especially once I became a boat owner spending more and more time in fact all my leisure time on my boat consequently joining this forum, meeting numerous people including BA staff and have spoken to JP himself while also observing the changes that have taken place so my opinions have been formed over a period of time by personal experience in much the same way as my opinions on the conduct of my local authority and national government have been formed and whether anyone else agrees with them or not they are opinions largely based of fact, some of what I see I am happy with some I am not, when I express displeasure about a topic it is on that topic alone and the affect it has or could have on the future as I see it  that is not prejudice it is simply an expression of concern, over the many decades of my life I have witnessed or experienced many attempts to circumvent existing regulations or laws often simply by establishing something by repetition or by putting something in place and then legitimising it retrospectively.

Fred

 

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

27 minutes ago, marshman said:

Whether or not the sign should or should not be on the post, perhaps the point is in reality, it is easier for this Forum to take a pop at the BA  

Had the BA (who are responsible for the signs) not had the signs installed, this discussion (NOT arguement) would not be taking place, so, nobody would be "having a pop at the BA". 

As has been said many times by many members of this forum, the vast majority of the BA are decent honest hard working upright members. Unfortunately, there are one or two at the top who forsee a much more (financially?) rewarding future for themselves if the Broads, along with its surrounding countryside, were to become something it is NOT.  Have any members of the Norfolk and Broadland public, be they residents / tenants, business owners, farmers, the boating community including fleet operators and private owners etc etc etc, ever been canvassed as to whether they want their livelihoods overseen by yet ANOTHER authority they cannot elect, who also may impose ridiculous rules and restrictions on how they then have to live their lives and work?. I think the answer to that is a big fat NO. 

And i still stand by my earlier belief that if ANYBODY thinks this branding of the Broads as an NP is NOT a definite back door attempt to bring it into full NP status, they are seriously naive at best, deluded at worse.

Talk about the blind leading the blind?.

[rightsaidfred]

40 minutes ago, marshman said:

Whether or not the sign should or should not be on the post, perhaps the point is in reality, it is easier for this Forum to take a pop at the BA than all the other agencies/firms that now use that slogan and also who were directly involved in the original decision to erect that sign.

That means, the local authorities concerned, including probably the Highways Agency under whose auspices the A47 will fall, and then everyone who uses the "lie" on their material from the OS downwards.

Off you go then boys, and do your duty!!   I wish you well and many hours of  happy correspondence - and no ST that does not mean that I support the introduction of a full NP for this area 

Do I take then you would be quite happy for Wroxham or Horning or any other small town or village to describe themselves as a City and erect signs proclaiming that.

Fred

[floydraser]

On the side: I wonder if I can put this Gentleman's Yacht thing to bed. Has anyone here actually been to Grasmere? On google, zoom so you have the southern tip of Windermere at the bottom of your screen and the northern tip of Bassenthwaite at the top. You'll see Grasmere just below the centre; in Lake District terms it's just a large puddle! Ten 40 footers would struggle to line up across it.

Now go on to Google Earth and zoom in to find the tiny slipway for rowing boats. Where are they going to launch and service 40 footers? They need buildings etc. Now drag the little man on to the road alongside the lake and you'll see why it shouldn't be spoiled.

Her Majesty's Lake District is in good hands IMO.

OK, said my bit now get back to deliberately misinterpreting each others comments for the sake of perpetuating the argument.

Of course, if someone thinks the case is strong enough they could propose a government petition to get it sorted, or is that too practical? 

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

2 minutes ago, floydraser said:

Her Majesty's Lake District is in good hands IMO.

Have you ever asked the people of the Lake district how they feel about the situation though?.

[batrabill]

27 minutes ago, rightsaidfred said:

I  came to the Broads several decades ago purely as a holidaymaker with no preconception of what I was about to experience, for many years having fallen in love with the area I just returned to enjoy its ambience, as time has passed I have taken a bigger interest in the area as a whole especially once I became a boat owner spending more and more time in fact all my leisure time on my boat consequently joining this forum, meeting numerous people including BA staff and have spoken to JP himself while also observing the changes that have taken place so my opinions have been formed over a period of time by personal experience in much the same way as my opinions on the conduct of my local authority and national government have been formed and whether anyone else agrees with them or not they are opinions largely based of fact, some of what I see I am happy with some I am not, when I express displeasure about a topic it is on that topic alone and the affect it has or could have on the future as I see it  that is not prejudice it is simply an expression of concern, over the many decades of my life I have witnessed or experienced many attempts to circumvent existing regulations or laws often simply by establishing something by repetition or by putting something in place and then legitimising it retrospectively.

Fred

 

Fred I respect your view and have no beef with any individual - I rather admire the Jenny woman for her relentless work on one side of the debate. But we ALL have prejudices and biases. I heard a fascinating report that those with the highest level of education - PhD and Masters were found to be most blind to their own biases. (They thought they were right because they knew they were clever)

So yes I’m biased and have my prejudices.

But for me, that is actually the point, and why I enjoy putting an alternative view here. I live on the water here in the Broads and it’s wonderful and beautiful. 

I go on my computer and I read on here and on Facebook and elsewhere, that the Broads are in a terrible state, in the grip of one mans megalomania, and that if we don’t all rise up boating will be banned!

My bias is that I look around and that view appears to be just wrong.  

If you don’t notice that many, many, many threads here are started with a negative view (spin) of the BA, then that is a bias. 

Because life is short, I don’t want to go back and do the research, but I would stake my house on being able to demonstrate that there is a marked tendency for news to arrive about the BA in negative form. 

I enjoy, as Marshman also said, putting the alternative view. Why?because I like this forum - it’s a local news site, but I don’t like seeing things I think are wrong go unchallenged. 

26 minutes ago, rightsaidfred said:

I  came to the Broads sveral decades ago purely as a holidaymaker with no preconception of what I was about to experience, for many years having fallen in love with the area I just returned to enjoy its ambience, as time has passed I have taken a bigger interest in the area as a whole especially once I became a boat owner spending more and more time in fact all my leisure time on my boat consequently joining this forum, meeting numerous people including BA staff and have spoken to JP himself while also observing the changes that have taken place so my opinions have been formed over a period of time by personal experience in much the same way as my opinions on the conduct of my local authority and national government have been formed and whether anyone else agrees with them or not they are opinions largely based of fact, some of what I see I am happy with some I am not, when I express displeasure about a topic it is on that topic alone and the affect it has or could have on the future as I see it  that is not prejudice it is simply an expression of concern, over the many decades of my life I have witnessed or experienced many attempts to circumvent existing regulations or laws often simply by establishing something by repetition or by putting something in place and then legitimising it retrospectively.

Fred

 

[rightsaidfred]

6 minutes ago, floydraser said:

Of course, if someone thinks the case is strong enough they could propose a government petition to get it sorted, or is that too practical? 

I think you will find there have been many representations to Defra over the years regarding different issues, sadly as in most cases where a Quango is put in place by any government having established the Quango those overseeing it have very little interest in its conduct unless it becomes politically embarrassing.

Fred

[Vaughan]

4 minutes ago, batrabill said:

I rather admire the Jenny woman for her relentless work on one side of the debate.

He is not a woman and that is not my opinion, but a fact. I went to school with him.

He uses the name of the vane of a Norfolk Wherry as his avatar on this forum.

[batrabill]

4 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

He is not a woman and that is not my opinion, but a fact. I went to school with him.

He uses the name of the vane of a Norfolk Wherry as his avatar on this forum.

I am aware of that Vaughan, but I am banned from using his real name as he is banned from using mine. It’s a long story. 

[Vaughan]

Still doesn't add anything to this debate though.

By the way, we can now see why my post at the very start of this thread suggested that the placing of those signs was a red rag to a bull!

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

11 minutes ago, batrabill said:

 . I heard a fascinating report that those with the highest level of education - PhD and Masters were found to be most blind to their own biases. (They thought they were right because they knew they were clever). 

Hence why Packman is treated with so much suspicion.

13 minutes ago, batrabill said:

  go on my computer and I read on here and on Facebook and elsewhere, that the Broads are in a terrible state, in the grip of one mans megalomania, and that if we don’t all rise up boating will be banned!

I don`t think anybody on this forum has ever said the Broads are in a terrible state, but the navigations are in desperate need of dredging in a great many areas, along with the fact several of the navigations are becoming overgrown with reed and tree ingress. Then of course there`s the loss of moorings, and the loss of refuse disposal. Our tolls are supposed to be spent on keeping the navigation open, providing adequate moorings, and to keep the rivers and their banks clean and clear, not for funding misleading lies, ie, advertising the Broads as a National Park in the press and road signs.

[grendel]

right - I think we have argued this one to death now, and things are starting to stray into the realms of the personal, so before we get any further into infringements of the TOS than we have already, i think its time we gave the thread a rest. 

if anyone has anything new to add to this then PM me and i will consider reopening the discussion.

 

I have now unlocked the topic for further discussion, if we could all remember to be civil towards each other and discuss the matter in a reasonable way without getting personal about it, the moderation team feel we can continue the debate, just remember a close eye will be kept on the thread to ensure that it remains civil and within the terms of service.

[RumPunch]

Not having trawled through the numerous pages on this thread ( just popped in and out as a lot is irrelevant ) but I noticed another of these signs has appeared on the Coltishall sign as you come over the bridge from Norwich.

Apologies if already mentioned

[JennyMorgan]

Thank you, Rum Punch. Inevitable I am afraid. Good arguments have been made & for some the jury is still out so other than taking the issue up with Authorities and MPs I am not sure what can be done. In the meantime the vandals are at work! 

[grendel]

Naughty Photoshop Vandals