Hit And Run..

[Guest]

Don't shoot the messenger, saw this on YouTube, makes interesting viewing..The green vessel without this footage may have taken the blame for the damage to their hireboat.

 

[ranworthbreeze]

The videos on this topic have been removed for breaking TOC.

[Guest]

Oops..

[TheQ]

well, they are available elsewhere and on the internet..

Richo's I think should at least get a copy as it was both their boats involved..

It's behavior I've seen many times particularly on the moorings between the Swan Pub in Horning and the sailing club. I've several times had to go over and show tourists how to get a boat off a lee shore, and even when the wind is not blowing how to get out from between two other boats. I bet many other club members have also done so over the years..

[Guest]

Sorry wasn't aware.

[Smoggy]

That was easy enough to find, definately one for Richos to see, there's no way they did not notice that one and should not be covered by the CDW.

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

1 hour ago, Jemaki said:

Don't shoot the messenger, saw this on YouTube, makes interesting viewing..The green vessel without this footage may have taken the blame for the damage to their hireboat.

 

Yes I saw that last night on YouTube, if it's allowed to be viewed by a billion people+ on the worldwide Web, why does it break the forums TOS?. 

[grendel]

it breaks the forum naming and shaming clause as both the boat registrations and boat name of the offending vessel are clearly shown, what is allowed elsewhere is beside the point, its not allowed here.

[JennyMorgan]

1 hour ago, ranworthbreeze said:

The videos on this topic have been removed for breaking TOC.

Got to say it, Alan, but I really don't see the justification for that. However, it's out there for all to see, just visit YouTube and search for Norfolk Broads Ludham Bridge Boat Crash. It wasn't an accident, it was wanton, thoughtless damage and deserves to be highlighted. No faces to embarrass, no need to remove, in my opinion. 

It is relevant to a discussion started by Bluesman where he stated that he would not be returning to the Broads because of such appalling boat handling. Such behaviour is unacceptable by any reasonable standard. Imagine had it been a forum member's boat on the receiving end. Should we really be brushing such incidents under the carpet? It is relevant to all forum boat owners and some ongoing discussions.

[Smoggy]

Besides being a hireboat no-one's being named, I doubt Richos would release that info freely.

[Meantime]

My opinion and that's all it is and I realise it doesn't agree fully with the TOS as they currently stand is that if someone were to record that video and then post it to this site and discuss the antics, then clearly it would breach the TOS. However when a video has been uploaded elsewhere and it is only the link to that video, then it's a bit like bolting the door after the horse has bolted to remove the link. Enough people already know it's on Youtube and have seen it and are still discussing it here anyway. Posting a link to a video is probably not a lot different to posting a link to a planning application for discussion, as I did yesterday, or a link to the EDP to discuss a newsworthy Broads story. What's more important is how people carry out the ensuing discussion about an incident and it's irrelevant where they watched the video, or viewed the planning application, or read the story. IMHO 

[ExSurveyor]

The ToS have been around as long as I have been a member and I agreed to them when I joined.

The incident has been described, why do people actually need to see the video.

What is of more concern should be why someone felt the need to video it rather than help the helm by pushing the front out.

All sorts of rubbish exist on FB, do we really need it here.

Some sites encourage or allow racist and sexist content, personal insults, that appears to make them popular. Do we really want to follow them to the lowest common denominator.

 

[grendel]

the scenario is thus, you post a video naming and shaming on someones first day of their holiday, then all through the holiday people are coming up to you and saying - you are the idiots that deliberately crashed into that other boat.

or they are at the end of their holiday and hand over to the next hirer, who goes out and is tarred with the same brush, despite having nothing whatsoever to do with the incident.

would you then in either case come back next year.

this is why the rule is in the TOS, it comes under the aspect of safeguarding. I am surprised it is being allowed elsewhere as it definitely falls foul of several safeguarding regulations, in case you didnt already know we have a team that checks the current regulations in force with regards to all forms of social media and what is allowed legally and what isnt, and then makes sure that we comply with these.

[BroadsAuthority]

This video has been sent in to the Authority via Facebook and I have advised that they need to contact the yard (Richardson's) directly if they wish to make a formal report.

Best,

Tom

[Meantime]

3 minutes ago, psychicsurveyor said:

The incident has been described, why do people actually need to see the video.

What is of more concern should be why someone felt the need to video it rather than help the helm by pushing the front out.

I guess to form their own opinion of the incident, rather than rely on someone's description of the event?

With regards to the video comment and pushing the boat out. We do not know the health or physical condition of the person doing the videoing. However I did see another video of a boat in a similar position and someone came along and offered to push them out. The guy without lifejacket on put one foot on what looked like a very slippery quay heading and pushed the front of the boat out quite a way. My immediate thought were for his safety and hoping he didn't slip and fall forward into the water without a life jacket on. He didn't by the way, but probably more by luck than anything.

I would also point out that the person doing the videoing may have been reluctant to help, because there was no one else from the boat on the outside of the boat.

Speaking personally I'm only too willing to help others who are willing to help themselves as well.

[StillCruising]

I'm always willing to help others provided I don't put myself in danger and have done so for many years. It's remarkable the different reactions you receive when offering help ranging from people being unbelievably grateful to others that tell you to bugger off (yes its happened more than once).

[DAVIDH]

That boat has room for 10 to 12 "inhabitants". Where were they all when coming alongside the other boat? Where were Mr and Mrs Fendoff?

[MauriceMynah]

20 minutes ago, Meantime said:

I guess to form their own opinion of the incident, rather than rely on someone's description of the event

Good point. I have not seen this video, and can't imagine what you are describing let alone form an opinion.

I agree we don't want to become one of the "tabloid" forums, but should we not at least permit some way for people to get to the footage if they wish? (as I admit I do) 

[JennyMorgan]

9 minutes ago, DAVIDH said:

Where were Mr and Mrs Fendoff?

Hopefully not being squeezed between two boats like their namesakes should have been!

[Meantime]

Part of the problem with that video and ensuing descriptions of the event is that it only tells part of the story. A fuller video which includes more of that instance is available if people want to search for it. 

It might look as if they are trying to depart the mooring, but in fact that is the end sequence of a complete turn in front of the bridge, presumably because it was unable to pass the bridge.

If that had of been me, I would have made it look like I'd executed the perfect mooring, got off and tied up the boat and then walked up the road to The Dog and had a few beers. No one would have been any the wiser that it was not an unintentional mooring. 

[ExSurveyor]

41 minutes ago, Meantime said:

I guess to form their own opinion of the incident, rather than rely on someone's description of the event?

With regards to the video comment and pushing the boat out. We do not know the health or physical condition of the person doing the videoing. However I did see another video of a boat in a similar position and someone came along and offered to push them out. The guy without lifejacket on put one foot on what looked like a very slippery quay heading and pushed the front of the boat out quite a way. My immediate thought were for his safety and hoping he didn't slip and fall forward into the water without a life jacket on. He didn't by the way, but probably more by luck than anything.

I would also point out that the person doing the videoing may have been reluctant to help, because there was no one else from the boat on the outside of the boat.

Speaking personally I'm only too willing to help others who are willing to help themselves as well.

All very true, then don't do anything, especially get the phone out to video, instead use it to call broads control or the yard.

[grendel]

the video is out there if you want to search it out, so not necessary on the Forum, as Meantime suggests what is being shown elsewhere is not the whole story, giving a different perspective to the incident.

[CambridgeCabby]

So that members are aware , I forwarded a copy of this video yesterday 20 mins after it was posted online to Richardson’s .

[andyg]

I think its fair to assume someone at Richardsons would of seen this by now. I don't agree with the vid being taken down as it was already in the public domain,but respect the forum's decision. Just another example of lack of respect for others property. All in a days work for clives team I guess and sadly this is what you get when you don't have a substantial refundable damage wavier. Saying that if you have 250 odd boats earning 45 quid a week for nothing then dealing with half a dozen bumps like this is good business. I'm sure it will be made good and delt with during its time in the shed over the winter. Just another day in yhe life of a hire boat.

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

2 hours ago, grendel said:

it breaks the forum naming and shaming clause as both the boat registrations and boat name of the offending vessel are clearly shown, what is allowed elsewhere is beside the point, its not allowed here.

We'll, if that's the case, I think the TOS need to be relaxed, absolutely no need for over zealous modding in my opinion.