Broads Authority - Petition

[Guest]

......307 people out of 428 = over 71% agreeing with petition. Any politician would give his eye teeth for such support.......

 

 

Maybe I'm going to regret this, because I'm finding your responses increasingly difficult to understand Paladin,

 

....but that specific quote from your post is a main point (I think) that Bill was questioning, and which I also felt was surprising

 

That Facebook group appears to be specifically opposed to the BA, so any ePetitions raised from it would surely expect almost 100% support.

 

The fact that over a quarter of the  "party" membership have not signed is quite surprising....

[JennyMorgan]

My guess is that some members of the group are not supportive of some of the issues raised in the petition. Perhaps, for example, some folk don't want Hoveton Great Broad opened to the masses. Perfectly valid concern but perhaps the petition is suggesting that rather than closing waters the BA should actually be opening them up, something that I agree with. Had the petition stuck to the core subject then perhaps the number would be higher. On the other hand the petition writer has chosen to take this opportunity to raise a number of issues, quite understandably. Whatever, the writer has got of his/her nether regions and done something positive rather than just sitting on the sidelines, nitpicking, point scoring and trying to undo the good work of others. 

[batrabill]

I note that to disagree is to "pointlessly argue" and "sitting on the sidelines, nitpicking, point scoring and trying to undo the good work of others" and to be disappointed is "aggressive".

Mote? Plank? Eye?

Good luck with everything. I'm done.

[Guest]

I note that to disagree is to "pointlessly argue" and "sitting on the sidelines, nitpicking, point scoring and trying to undo the good work of others" and to be disappointed is "aggressive".

Mote? Plank? Eye?

Good luck with everything. I'm done.

 

I hope your last sentence refers to nothing more than just this one thread Bill.

 

To paraphrase a recently popular quote on here,

 

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of bias and one-sided debating is for the other side to say nothing".

 

I've been accused of being a "BA fan" and a "BA Groupie" , but that reveals more about the accuser's motivation  than mine. 

[JennyMorgan]

One for Strow, is this the rebirth?

 

http://www.broadly-speaking.co.uk/forum/topic1255

[Guest]

One for Strow, is this the rebirth?

 

http://www.broadly-speaking.co.uk/forum/topic1255

 

Yes Peter, the continuation of Speakers Corner, a perfect example of what happens to Forums that have a a primary agenda with its own very small band of posters.

 

Let's hope the  other Broads forums don't get dragged down the same path. Far more would be lost than gained, and by far more people.

[batrabill]

One for Strow, is this the rebirth?

http://www.broadly-speaking.co.uk/forum/topic1255

Since you have linked to a thread on another site, I will post here one more time.

You accuse me on that other place of being "Bumble Bee". I am not Bumble Bee and you should swiftly apologise.

A discussion forum is a place for people to air different views. It seems that if you disagree with some people you get attacked.

[Guest]

.....A discussion forum is a place for people to air different views. It seems that if you disagree with some people you get attacked.

 

Bill, I'm afraid anyone that dares to question anti-BA rhetoric on forums will frequently be attacked verbally, and even sometimes of being a fifth columnist !

I know I have, for many years now, on several forums.

 

If we ever gave up though, the BA anti-spinners might have even greater scope to turn more broads forum "newbies" to their way of thinking, in the mistaken belief that it's the ethos of everyone with local knowledge here.

 

I'm sorry to say that all of the Broads Forums have been used by a minority of people to insidiously build up a discontent against the BA generally, and its CEO in particular.

 

The BA do make mistakes, and these should definitely be debated, but the proportion of toll payers with a total "no confidence" in them is a much disputed figure.

 

The protagonists have also tried more openly motivated websites from time to time, ( Speakers Corner/Broadly Speaking, the Broads Toll Payers Association, and now the Facebook group), but the membership numbers always peak out at a fraction of more general broads forums like this one.

 

Hence their need to regularly post their agenda on here as well, to try to reach as many more open-minded Broads users.

[JennyMorgan]

Strowager, numerous good folk do have an agenda, The Broads.

 

It is not to be unexpected that such folk would want to highlight failings that impact on their great love. They might even ask forum members for support, after all this is a Broads forum. Clearly you have a problem with this, fair enough, got to say that I don't understand your attitude but then you obviously don't understand mine, or those of others who are concerned enough to make a stand. 

 

Time to step back from the brink?

[Paladin]

Hence their need to regularly post their agenda on here as well, to try to reach as many more open-minded Broads users.

Unfortunately, it's the more open-minded Broads users who just read the forums, but don't post for fear of being caught in the cross-fire. It would be nice to read their views, as well, but I fear that, apart from the danger of incoming fire, the BNP issue is possibly too embroiled in legal arguments and historical events for them to understand, or they are so remote from the area that it doesn't really matter to them one way or another.

 

I have no problem with any agenda being discussed, as long as it is done in a civilised manner. Baiting, IMO, is both juvenile and counter-productive to any discussion. It indicates the lack of any real argument to make.

 

I too have, in the past, been a staunch opponent of rhetoric, from whichever side it came. I still am, but, now I have my own facts about the conduct of the Broads Authority to rely on, my rose-tinted glasses have been firmly consigned to the recycling bin.

[Guest]

Strowager, numerous good folk do have an agenda, The Broads.

 

It is not to be unexpected that such folk would want to highlight failings that impact on their great love. They might even ask forum members for support, after all this is a Broads forum. Clearly you have a problem with this, fair enough, got to say that I don't understand your attitude but then you obviously don't understand mine, or those of others who are concerned enough to make a stand. 

 

Time to step back from the brink?

 

One can have a "great love" of the Broads without having a total disgust for the Broads Authority Peter.

 

I'm afraid I don't fully comprehend your "Time to step back from the Brink" comment.

 

The only problem I have is when people are being told that their "inactivity" in supporting these initiatives is sufficient for "Evil to triumph". etc.etc...

 

Everyone has a freedom of choice, and if they choose to not sign something, there is no way that they should be criticised for exercising that free will.

[marshman]

Don't worry BatraBill - Strow and I are just so happy to have you aboard!!! Quite a few of the "antis" are really quite ordinary people, really helpful and nice too, but just a teensy weeny bit myopic!!!!

 

Just every so often though its up to us to try and broaden their vision!!!

 

Equally a few are just  a bit "narrow minded" and you soon learn not to get into arguments with them as they only have one track minds!!!!!!  

[Paladin]

The only problem I have is when people are being told that their "inactivity" in supporting these initiatives is sufficient for "Evil to triumph". etc.etc...

 

Everyone has a freedom of choice, and if they choose to not sign something, there is no way that they should be criticised for exercising that free will.

Strowager, can you point me towards the "Evil to triumph" post, please? I have re-read this thread and the BNP thread, and have even done a site search, but have failed to find it.

[JennyMorgan]

We are now down to a pointless level of discussion that is helping no one. Paladine used the term 'baiting', just about sums it all up, in my opinion, totally pointless and helps no one.

 

People either will or won't support the petition. I just hope that I won't be in a position of being able to say 'I told you so', but that is for the future. 

[MauriceMynah]

MM... somebody once said I had a "one track mind" but then added that it was "closed to traffic"!

I never did get him back for that one !

[JennyMorgan]

MM... somebody once said I had a "one track mind" but then added that it was "closed to traffic"!

I never did get him back for that one !

From a man who admits to having learned all he knows about life from Health & Efficiency!! 

[Guest]

Don't worry BatraBill - Strow and I are just so happy to have you aboard!!! Quite a few of the "antis" are really quite ordinary people, really helpful and nice too, but just a teensy weeny bit myopic!!!!

 

Just every so often though its up to us to try and broaden their vision!!!

 

Equally a few are just  a bit "narrow minded" and you soon learn not to get into arguments with them as they only have one track minds!!!!!!  

 

Seconded !!

 

To quote another one of Paladin's avatars,

 

"I'm Happy, I'm Here, Get used to it" , very apt, I think.  

 

The largest credible Broads Authority Watchdog is probably the Norfolk and Suffolk Boating Association, the ("NSBA"). With well over 1000 individual members, 52 local boating clubs and organisations, and current representation on the BA Navigation Committee. They therefore have had "inside knowledge" about most things affecting the Broads  for many decades.

I believe that their efforts on behalf of all Broads boaters are strongly appreciated and supported by most of the people on here, even those that are urging for support of the new facebook group and the current ePetition. Indeed, Peter himself has often included a link to the NSBA website in his forum signature, and often extols their virtues, urging boaters to join them as well.

The NSBA chairman has published their detailed stance opposing this specific NP renaming issue in their newsletter, which has been linked to in the forums.

 

https://nsbagreenbook.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/newsletter_nov2014.pdf

Yet (so I believe), at no time have they advised their membership to support the ePetition, nor even mentioned it or the Facebrook group.

IMHO they collectively have at least as much "inside knowledge" than individuals may profess on this forum, so my own support is guided by them, with their very much wider overall view of the BA's execution of their task on all fronts.

The task of monitoring and challenging the BA's activities is complex, requiring skill and resources, and the ability to appreciate the wider view, rather than just wanting it dismantled.

[BroadScot]

 

 

The task of monitoring and challenging the BA's activities is complex, 

Just like their website is at times Strowy

 

 

Iain.

[Paladin]

...To quote another one of Paladin's avatars,

 

"I'm Happy, I'm Here, Get used to it" , very apt, I think.  

 

I have, and ever have had, only one avatar. I don't use one on this forum. If you want to comment on what I may do or say elsewhere, may I suggest you do it in the particular arena concerned. I have the feeling I'm being stalked.

 

The largest credible Broads Authority Watchdog is probably the Norfolk and Suffolk Boating Association, the ("NSBA"). With well over 1000 individual members, 52 local boating clubs and organisations, and current representation on the BA Navigation Committee. They therefore have had "inside knowledge" about most things affecting the Broads  for many decades.

 

1,000 individual members out of 10,000 individual toll payers? I wonder why that number is so small. I would prefer it to be 10,000 members, but recognise that it is for each individual to decide who or what they wish to support.

I believe that their efforts on behalf of all Broads boaters are strongly appreciated and supported by most of the people on here, even those that are urging for support of the new facebook group and the current ePetition. Indeed, Peter himself has often included a link to the NSBA website in his forum signature, and often extols their virtues, urging boaters to join them as well.

The NSBA chairman has published their detailed stance opposing this specific NP renaming issue in their newsletter, which has been linked to in the forums.

 

https://nsbagreenbook.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/newsletter_nov2014.pdf

 

I was disappointed by the NSBA response. IMO, the response of the Broads Society was, to my surprise, a much more carefully-prepared, detailed and hard-hitting response.

Yet (so I believe), at no time have they advised their membership to support the ePetition, nor even mentioned it or the Facebrook group.

 

Why would they? The NBSA is an organisation which represents its members. It would, IMO, be an admission of defeat if it encouraged its members to take their own independent action. One also has to ask oneself, 'If the BA can be trusted to act fairly and properly at all times, why is it necessary for the NSBA to exist?"

IMHO they collectively have at least as much "inside knowledge" than individuals may profess on this forum, so my own support is guided by them, with their very much wider overall view of the BA's execution of their task on all fronts.

The task of monitoring and challenging the BA's activities is complex, requiring skill and resources, and the ability to appreciate the wider view, rather than just wanting it dismantled.

 

With no more skill than the ability to read and understand, and no more resources than a computer, printer and a telephone, I have been able to monitor and influence an area of the BA's activity important to me. Perhaps you underestimate the knowledge and skills of some of the BA's detractors, not to mention their determination.

[Guest]

 

......I have the feeling I'm being stalked......

 

Now there's a coincidence Paladin, so do I.

 

I now seem to be the main target of your angst.

 

This debate is now getting very close to breaking the TOS, and with an attempt to reawaken inter-forum bickering as well.

 

I have no intention of being led down that path, so will try to  refrain from fanning the flames with another response.

 

(to this person, on this subject)

[Paladin]

Now there's a coincidence Paladin, so do I.

 

I now seem to be the main target of your angst.

 

This debate is now getting very close to breaking the TOS, and with an attempt to reawaken inter-forum bickering as well.

 

I have no intention of being led down that path, so will try to  refrain from fanning the flames with another response.

 

(to this person, on this subject)

I didn't bring in anything from any other forum. If there is no valid argument to be made, criticise the poster.

 

Angst? You seem to have missed the fact that I was responding to your arguments.