I hate to do this...but

[vyv_cox]

IIRC Rocna said that Whaleboy was Mr Grant. I think Whaleboy has never posted on YBW. So YBW mods can't be the source of that. Has there been another sock puppet accusation? I'd be amazed if there hasn't, I strongly suspect that all of the keen Anchor protagonists are actually one person with about 12 log ins.

Graham or another of the site support people will hopefully confirm, but I understood that this is no longer possible. A number of years ago it was and posters were logging in under the names of other forum members, posting various defamatory and offensive material. The forums were closed down for quite some time while this was being sorted out.

 

[Dockhead]

Graham or another of the site support people will hopefully confirm, but I understood that this is no longer possible. A number of years ago it was and posters were logging in under the names of other forum members, posting various defamatory and offensive material. The forums were closed down for quite some time while this was being sorted out.

Well, you can't really sort it out. There have been sock puppets as long as there have been BB's, and likely always will be, unless we are some day required to use some kind of biometric unique indentifiers (God forbid).

You can program some BB systems to flag different users creating accounts from the same IP addresses, but IP addresses can be anything from entirely unique (I have a unique static IP address on my corporate desktop, for example -- me and only me) to meaninglessly vague (some large internet providers have nothing but a huge range of IP addresses randomly assigned and covering large geographic areas) and anything in between.

And it is not hard to spoof an IP address using a proxy server. There are various free services for finding open proxy servers, and there are commercial services like HideMyAss! (www.hidemyass.com) which are extremely efficient at providing bulletproof internet anonymity.

So you don't even have to try very hard to create an undetectable sock puppet.

 

[vyv_cox]

Well, you can't really sort it out.

I don't doubt what you say, but the problem has never occurred again for ybw.com, so I suppose they did something.

 

[Dockhead]

I don't doubt what you say, but the problem has never occurred again for ybw.com, so I suppose they did something.

Oh, it occurs every day. It's the nature of the beast.

Note that Grant himself was talking about a sock puppet he set up for Rocna while he was working there. He said it was for "monitoring" the boards, but you don't need a user account just to monitor. It's done every day and on every board, so don't take everything you read here at face value.

 

[Rigger Mortice]

I've got no idea what a "sock puppet" is and I'm not overly interested.

What I do know is that Racno claimed to have got hold of someone's IP address from YBW. YBW say they didn't. Given the track records of both organisations, I know which I believe. Yes, more porkies from Racno.

In answer to the rather silly suggestion that the many anti-Racno people are just one person using different sign ins....I've seen no evidence of that. Neither has Mark-1. Just another conspiracy theorist.

Let's get back to the real issue. Quality and deception in the Anchor business.

 

[Mark-1]

What I do know is that Racno claimed to have got hold of someone's IP address from YBW. YBW say they didn't.

I think that was whaleboy, who hasn't posted on YBW. So I was asking if there was a second such claim.

In answer to the rather silly suggestion that the many anti-Racno people are just one person using different sign ins....I've seen no evidence of that. Neither has Mark-1. Just another conspiracy theorist.

That was a joke and was followed by a smiley. My joke didn't mention anti-rocna people. Guilty conscience?

 

[Rigger Mortice]

I think that was whaleboy, who hasn't posted on YBW. So I was asking if there was a second such claim.

The claim was by Rocna, over on the AS forum.

That was a joke and was followed by a smiley. My joke didn't mention anti-rocna people. Guilty conscience?

My comment was not a joke. It was a serious response to your "joke".

Let's return to the real issue.

 

[Dockhead]

I've got no idea what a "sock puppet" is and I'm not overly interested.

You might want to be interested, as it is directly relevant.

Rocna accused "Whale Boy" of being the sock puppet of either Manson or Grant King.

A "sock puppet" is a false internet identity set up to create the illusion of third parties' supporting some idea which the puppetmaster is trying to propagate. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_(Internet)

So Rocna accused Manson of creating a fake disgruntled Rocna customer who decided to cut up his anchor and have it tested for inferior steel. The Whale Boy rants were created to look like a real customer having a real crisis over his Rocna anchor -- quite dramatic propaganda.

Since Whale Boy disappeared right about the time that Manson went public with their metallurgy tests -- and since Whale Boy's presence on the other site was rather flimsy -- I think Rocna was probably right. I think it was probably Manson engaging in the kind of behavior which Rocna have engaged in for a long time -- anyone else notice the collective insanity of the anchor manufacturers?

I guess it's a footnote now, since Manson have had independent testing done, and have done it openly. The test results appear plausible to me, although it baffles me that such a thing could have happened.

I can hardly wait to see what Rocna's response is going to be.

 

[Rigger Mortice]

Not even Rocna have accused Whaleboy of being anything to do with Manson. They did claim that Grant King/Whaleboy were synonymous but provided no supporting evidence except claims that they had tracked the IP addresses from YBW. YBW disputed that claim.
It was just another wild accusation by Rocna. Unfortunately some people get taken in by these things which is why Rocna do it. You can fool some of the people some of the time...........

 

[GrantKing]

You might want to be interested, as it is directly relevant.

Rocna accused "Whale Boy" of being the sock puppet of either Manson or Grant King.

A "sock puppet" is a false internet identity set up to create the illusion of third parties' supporting some idea which the puppetmaster is trying to propagate. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_(Internet)

So Rocna accused Manson of creating a fake disgruntled Rocna customer who decided to cut up his anchor and have it tested for inferior steel. The Whale Boy rants were created to look like a real customer having a real crisis over his Rocna anchor -- quite dramatic propaganda.

Since Whale Boy disappeared right about the time that Manson went public with their metallurgy tests -- and since Whale Boy's presence on the other site was rather flimsy -- I think Rocna was probably right. I think it was probably Manson engaging in the kind of behavior which Rocna have engaged in for a long time -- anyone else notice the collective insanity of the anchor manufacturers?

I guess it's a footnote now, since Manson have had independent testing done, and have done it openly. The test results appear plausible to me, although it baffles me that such a thing could have happened.

I can hardly wait to see what Rocna's response is going to be.

Whaleboy (Adam Andrews) has been keeping quiet at my request as he has information, obtained from me personally, that I did not want him to release.

Despite his desire to "go for the throat" there are unresolved issues of what is confidential information and what is not in regard to knowledge I have of Steve andhis operation style.

Adam has visited me several times since first contacting me in August last year after reading several threads on discussion boards about rumoured problems with Rocna anchors.

I have had the same fixed IP address for the last 12 years and easily traced through emails sent by myself from my home or from my various business premises.

I do not need to hide my identity from Rocna or anybody else, I have nothing to hide. If Steve is crapping his boots about what I will say then too bad for him, honesty will always win.

Personal attacks on people do not do the attacker any good and certainly do not make the original questions go away.

 

[Nostrodamus]

Grant,
I respect what you, unlike others, are doing on here by giving us some answers but don't you think its now time to fully explain exactly what has been going on. I know from your postings that you are intelligent and no doubt have evidence to back up what you are saying?

 

[ctva]

Without wishing to read all the posts from the last week or so, what has happened to the original thread? When will it be reinstated?

BTW, saw my first Rocna thingy at the weekend on a boat. Not very comon on the west coast, not paid enough here!!

 

[[55354]]

I tried to contact Boyd Boats who are the importers of Rocna thingys for the UK and Ireland, but all links were down, including the one to the thingy website (and have been for a couple of days) - is this significant, or is it just an internet problem?

 

[vyv_cox]

I tried to contact Boyd Boats who are the importers of Rocna thingys for the UK and Ireland, but all links were down, including the one to the thingy website (and have been for a couple of days) - is this significant, or is it just an internet problem?

I tried the same about a week ago, with the same result. I bought my anchor through them several years ago.

Current UK agents as far as I know are Piplers of Poole, whose Rocna page is opening as normal.

 

[[55354]]

Rocna UK Distributor

Thanks Vyv,

At least that mystery is solved - and business continues as usual. I wonder - do the distributors have any comment on the current concerns of under specified shanks? Even if Mr Bambury does not have time to answer surely it is in the interests of the importer and distributor to assure the customer base, past and future, as to the integrity of the product they have bought, or might buy.

I'm not up in this but a link to a website containing claims over RINA certification contravenes a few of UK's laws on misrepresentation etc etc.

 

[GrantKing]

RINA

Thanks Vyv,

At least that mystery is solved - and business continues as usual. I wonder - do the distributors have any comment on the current concerns of under specified shanks? Even if Mr Bambury does not have time to answer surely it is in the interests of the importer and distributor to assure the customer base, past and future, as to the integrity of the product they have bought, or might buy.

I'm not up in this but a link to a website containing claims over RINA certification contravenes a few of UK's laws on misrepresentation etc etc.

The whole question of liabilty over false claims of certification is one that each distributor or reseller are going to have to decide for themselves. They have all been told, in early 2010, that Rocna has SHHP certification by Steve.

The wording of the press releases and information given to distributors and resellers was deliberately misleading so that at first glance it appears to confirm full certification status.

It was a continual battle for me to try to get Steve to change wording of such informations to convey the true situation of the partial certification at that point in time.

He was determined to spin it out his way as that was the best for sales.

The certification originally applied for encompassed not only the seabed tests but drawing approval, metal specifications and testing to match the high standards of the Smith specifications given to the manufacturer ( and contracted by Bambury to meet), Works Process, Welders Testing , Construction Technique, Factory Certification to meet the standards required by Rina and Inspector monitoring of ongoing factory management and processes.

The seabed tests were conducted in Auckland in December 2008 and were passed successfully. The testing was done using a 110kg and a 20kg New Zealand fabricated Rocna's.

Subsequent to this, in early 2010, Rina requested confirmation that the anchors being produced in China currently used the same metal as the fabricated anchors used in testing.
Rina was told yes, although this was not true.

The result of revealing that they were not the same would have been that Rina would demand new seabed testing using current cast Chinese anchors.

I attending many meetings ( along with key factory personel) with Rina in their Shanghai offices during 2009 to try to push the certification process along. There were continual problems with metal specifications not meeting the criteria set on the drawings submitted for approval. To start with, Bambury in his ignorance had submitted drawings for fabricated anchors instead of commissioning new drawings for cast blades and plate shanks.

The manufacturers produced new drawings to match the cast process and so the drawings were approved as a "Type of anchor suitable to qualify a SHHP"

In other words the drawings were approved.

The sizes from 4kg - 55kg did not require individual certification and could be mass produced as SHHP "type" but sizes above 55kg required certificated construction and individual inspection and stamping by a Rina inspector.

An alternative manufacturer was suggested by Rina to make the larger anchors when required. By accepting this recommendation a way around the lack of certification by the manufacturer making the smaller sizes was found.
This other manufacturer was already certified by Rina, however the only made large ship anchors.

The metal still failed to meet specification despite many changes of metal type and submission of alternatives.

At the point in 2010 that my position was terminated new drawings were still with Rina with changed metal specifications lowered to represent a minimum requirement to match available metal and to make final certification easier.

The photo of the bent shank from Venice is typical of the result expected from lowering metal standards. It is only one of many that have occurred and been hushed up.
There will be many more expected in the future.

The same goes for stainless steel where the shanks were all changed to 316 instead of the specified 2205.

We are now another year down the track and they still do not have certification as claimed.

When Steve attended the Sydney Boat show in May 2010 he met with Rina and was told then that they did not have certification. He still advertised to the world that they did.

Even after admitting on the forums that they did not have it he still states in a very confusing way on their website that they do. Joe public, reading the website, will assume the wrong information.

The website still asserts 800mpa metal shanks.

The Manson testing of 2 Rocna's tells the true story and cannot be refuted.

I know that I will be attacked for revealing some of this, however the truth must be found and the safety of vessels and more importantly lives should be of paramount concern to us all.

We all go out on the water and anchor overnight with our families relying on the piece of metal we tossed over the side to hold us safe. We trust in the integrity of the sales pitch put to us in deciding if we are using our best judgement to protect us.

 

[Nostrodamus]

From reading the posts to date the current Rocna has lost all its integrity as a safe anchor and the company produces a website that has so many untruths it cannot be taken seriously.
I don’t know how many units it sells from China a year but there are a lot of boat owners out there relying on them. Most of these users are ignorant to the facts although it would be good to now hear the views of those with Rocnas who have been following the thread. It would also be good to hear the view of Pipplers.
I appreciate what Grant is saying and although he may have his own issues with the company he has not pulled them down and has on occasions even defended the original designer and his son. He has stuck to facts rather than speculating which makes his testimony totally believable.
I am also impressed that Manson has not been drawn into the argument but just got on with testing and produced the results.
There is no doubting that the design of the original Rocna is excellent but on my current understanding I could not buy one. Now if Manson took over production.. well that is another story.

 

[3Sheets]

The Piplers website currently features the Rocna Anchor on its Homepage as a bestseller - perhaps it's true there is no such thing as "Bad publicity" its "All good"

They also have a rolling banner stating " A new standard for anchoring - the Rocna " thats certainly true!!

 

[Ubergeekian]

If I am on a yacht and the anchor fails and causes me 'damage' and that anchor is shown not to meet specification and the owner knew that it did not meet specification then the owner of the vessel is liable under tort.

Cobblers. What matters is whether the anchor is suitable for the boat and for the conditions, not whether it met a manufacturer's specification.

I'd like to take back that "cobblers". Until this matter is cleared up, I think it would be very unwise for anyone to rely on a Rocna, particularly at the limits of the manufacturer's recommendations for a particular size. I had not appreciated previously just how critical the designer appears to have believed the steel specifications to be.

If the Manson results are confirmed and replicated, I cannot see how the makers and distributors of Rocnas can escape liability to replace affected anchors or refund their customers.

 

[GrantKing]

I'd like to take back that "cobblers". Until this matter is cleared up, I think it would be very unwise for anyone to rely on a Rocna, particularly at the limits of the manufacturer's recommendations for a particular size. I had not appreciated previously just how critical the designer appears to have believed the steel specifications to be.

If the Manson results are confirmed and replicated, I cannot see how the makers and distributors of Rocnas can escape liability to replace affected anchors or refund their customers.

What do you mean by "if the manson results are confirmed" ?

They have posted the results certificate from a certified testing facility, what could be clearer than that?

The test certificate says it all as far as those 2 anchors go.

However with the many thousands of anchors that have gone worldwide over the last 3 years from China some more similar results will occur, be under no illusion about that.