Anchor threads

[jordanbasset]

We wos 'appy with our anchors before all this testing of em started! Oughtn't to be allowed.

Panic anchoring, I blame the media

 

[Stemar]

The Mods are in place to 'police' the Forum,

Yes, in the same way as Plod is there to keep us in line in the real world

their rules and interpretation cannot be questioned.

I disagree. Apparently daft decisions by those with power must be questioned, just as in the real world. There may be something we don't know that justifies those decisions. Or there may not, in which case they need to be exposed as daft. Also, as in the real world, there may be a cost to that questioning.

 

[ashtead]

I am sorry to hear this news -while having no expertise personally you have always demonstrated insightful knowledge and learning should always be part of ones life so I trust there is some form of appeal process you might invoke. Unless you have been swearing or suchlike or posting dubious images I am puzzled as to what risks anchor info present to the platform but have you been found guilty of libel or maligning an advertisers product ?

 

[longjohnsilver]

I didn’t agree with what you said, but to ban you from a section of the YBW forums because of your comment/opinion is ridiculous, moderation gone mad.

 

[Bru]

I did not agree with your remarks vis Paul nor did I greatly like the tone in which it was said but I'll defend your right to say it etc. ....

Outright banning a long standing and extremely knowledgeable contributor from the forum for knowledgeable contributions on practical matters seems perverse to me. Especially when I'm agonising over which anchor to buy the missus for Christmas and might need some expert guidance

I fully understand and endorse the efforts to clean up the YBW forums and return them to being the friendly place they used to be but I cant help feeling that at times the nut is being smashed with a sledgehammer

It is becoming a worry almost every time I post ... "is this going to be allowed?" ... "will this get me into trouble?" ... "am I allowed to say this?"

I debated whether to post this but if it gets me into hot water, oh well

I'll add my voice to the appeals for Neeves to be unbanned from the PBO forum

 

[longjohnsilver]

I did not agree with your remarks vis Paul nor did I greatly like the tone in which it was said but I'll defend your right to say it etc. ....

Outright banning a long standing and extremely knowledgeable contributor from the forum for knowledgeable contributions on practical matters seems perverse to me. Especially when I'm agonising over which anchor to buy the missus for Christmas and might need some expert guidance

I fully understand and endorse the efforts to clean up the YBW forums and return them to being the friendly place they used to be but I cant help feeling that at times the nut is being smashed with a sledgehammer

It is becoming a worry almost every time I post ... "is this going to be allowed?" ... "will this get me into trouble?" ... "am I allowed to say this?"

I debated whether to post this but if it gets me into hot water, oh well

I'll add my voice to the appeals for Neeves to be unbanned from the PBO forum

Bru, you need a nice shiny Delta Like wot I have.

 

[laika]

It centred on a thread in which commendation was made of Paul Rainbow.

Personally I'm not a fan of people who regularly start threads with the intention of advertising their business (including where their business is a blog) but in the past when I've raised this others have disagreed so I recognise the bulk of opinion is not with me. PaulRainbow doesn't start threads like that and only seems to post on threads addressing problems people have posted so any advertising element is negligible and I therefore disagreed with your contention but it was a reasonable point to raise and (I thought, I see Bru disagrees) made politely. I did note that another poster was particularly rude in response and wondered whether you'd been banned for responding in a now-deleted post.

I definitely endorse efforts to make discourse polite here but if the only transgression was to question what constitutes a commercial post / advertising then being castigated, never mind banned, is incomprehensible.

If that post was so shocking why is it still there?

 

[Biggles Wader]

I didn’t agree with what you said, but to ban you from a section of the YBW forums because of your comment/opinion is ridiculous, moderation gone mad.

An absurd overreaction by the mods and all too frequent now IMO. A private forum is always going to be an autocratic place but moderation in the moderation would be nice

 

[[2574]]

Jonathan,

I have valued your input over the years, this place will be poorer without you. My advice, FWIW, is to stick to the technical only. There’s just not time in one’s life to get embroiled in argument on here. Generally, if I feel an argumentative response is warranted on the forum I simply leave the thread and don’t look back at it. I’m only going to be stressed if someone is willing to pay me handsomely for the experience….

Rob

 

[Neeves]

Laika,

I was upset by one poster who suggested I posted on threads (other than anchors) about which I knew nothing and was pompous. Someone also suggested that I claimed to be an, anchor, expert - which I would never do. Paul also suggested I was a troll.

I did not respond

I possibly should have been amused by the pompous comment - very un-Australian - it makes me quite unique.

And soon after my ability to respond was denied - which might have been a good thing. . Certainly a cooling off period can be advantageous. - provocation only makes things worse.

With apologies - the sun set here a long time ago, I've almost finished the bottle of red - we are off to bed.

Again - I'm grateful for the support.

Fair winds

Jonathan

 

[LittleSister]

I am shocked and saddened that this has come to pass.

Like many others I have very much valued your detailed and knowledgeable discussions of anchors and anchoring, especially, and will miss that input. The forum will be a poorer place without it.

I have seen minor spats between you and others over the years, but can't recall anything particularly offensive. Given your longstanding highly valued and generally polite input to the forum, I find it hard to understand how whatever transpired in the offending thread (which I haven't seen) could warrant a permanent ban, rather than a slap on the wrist and, say, a temporary ban from all or part of these forums.

I hope that this decision can be reviewed, either now or before too long, and your privileges reinstated.

In the meantime I hope you do stay around to engage on other topics, irksome though it may be to have to be silent on the topic of your particular interest and expertise.

 

[LONG_KEELER]

Bru, you need a nice shiny Delta Like wot I have.

If it ain't got a hoop it's no damn good.

 

[Black Sheep]

Jonathan, I have learnt a lot from your input. Among other things, I am a convert to the idea of keeping the anchor rode light. However, I respectfully suggest you're going too far this time. I'm happy with a 6mm chain. I'm happy with a rope rode of reasonably light construction. But anchor thread? I really can't believe that would hold in even a moderate breeze.

 

[Poignard]

When I bought my boat 25 years ago I followed what I thought was the best available advice at that time, ie I read Eric Hiscock's "Cruising Under Sail", and bought a genuine CQR and a long length of British-made chain with an enlarged link at each end.

Nothing I have read here or anywhere else has made me think I was wrong to do so, and practical experience has borne that out.

But the idea that people should not be allowed to convince me otherwise is unacceptable; always provided the advice and opinions are not delivered in the irritating de haut en bas style adopted by some who give advice here.

 

[Irish Rover]

Laika,

I was upset by one poster who suggested I posted on threads (other than anchors) about which I knew nothing and was pompous. Someone also suggested that I claimed to be an, anchor, expert - which I would never do. Paul also suggested I was a troll.

I did not respond

I possibly should have been amused by the pompous comment - very un-Australian - it makes me quite unique.

And soon after my ability to respond was denied - which might have been a good thing. . Certainly a cooling off period can be advantageous. - provocation only makes things worse.

With apologies - the sun set here a long time ago, I've almost finished the bottle of red - we are off to bed.

Again - I'm grateful for the support.

Fair winds

Jonathan

I'm sorry to see a valuable contributor such as yourself being banned or partially banned. It may have been an over reaction by the Mods but, in my humble opinion, some action was warranted. I believe your contribution on the PR thread was provocative, begrudging,, confrontational and extremely personal. It was also totally unnecessary as you could have privately contacted the mods to express your concerns. I also saw another thread where you effectively told PR to butt out and stick to what he knows [electrics]. I hope you will be fully reinstated soon and that lessons may have been learned all around.

 

[Poignard]

I wonder how long before this thread is closed down.

I get the impression our moderators do not like public discussion of their decisions.

Bad for discipline!

 

[jimi]

it’s a bit of a shame you’ve been banned cos you are certainly capable of provoking discussion as well as being very knowledgeable,. which is what this forum is about. However PR is also a very knowledgeable and helpful man and your attack on him was unwarranted. Perhaps an apology might go a long way to help

 

[Boathook]

I would answer but Scuttlebutt is not a technical forum and you really need to ask the question there - and I cannot then comment. But maybe if video is not a technical discriminator - maybe......

Jonathan

All the forums are technical in my view.

 

[dunedin]

I would answer but Scuttlebutt is not a technical forum and you really need to ask the question there - and I cannot then comment. But maybe if video is not a technical discriminator - maybe......

Jonathan

As you know that is a nonsense argument if it was put forward. Anchoring is a core cruising skill and very much central to the Yachting Monthly target audience of cruising yachtsmen - if YBW is still in any way associated with the magazines.

Indeed, I thought you had recently had technical articles on anchoring published in Yachting Monthly article - or have I got that wrong?
If so you should drop a note to Theo to alert him to the actions of “his” team, and suggest he browses the comments and likes on this thread to see the adverse impact on his readership, paper and virtual.

 

[Bru]

If it ain't got a hoop it's no damn good.

Ackcherly, the one decision I've definitely made is it won't be one with a hoop

There, that should get a ruddy good argument going and I do like a ruddy good argument

Unfortunately, a good argument is a risky thing these days, and not just hereabouts