Sue Burchett wrote: >>> Consistent rules! This is canal boating not the army. Lets have the minimum >>> of rules then we won't have to break them too often. >>> >> I like your sense of humour Sue ;>). >> >> But in case anyone takes that comment seriously, I would just like to >> point out that in circumstances where people have made what is probably >> their single or second largest investment and are often spending several >> thousand pounds per annum just to maintain and enjoy that investment, a >> few rules are appropriate. >> > > And that I believe is the problem. As more people buy more expensive boats > they expect higher standards and are more intolerant of others who don't live > up to their standards. >
I don't think it has anything to do with the price of a boat. It has to do with fairness in society. How can you expect people to behave in a civil manner if authority applies rules one way for some and another for others? > >> Of course I agree that we don't want rules for the sake of them. In fact >> I never advocated more rules; just that those that exist are applied >> consistently and fairly? > > Life isn't fair and I don't believe rules are ever applied fairly. Gosh Sue, you are sadly cynical. I'd be a miserable bugger if I believed that. >Why use prisons for the mentally ill. Can't get more unfair than that. > Well, that's somewhat off topic but I guess its because they committed crimes and Govt has got it wrong by not building more secure mental hospitals. But what has that got to do with consistency in the application of rules? If anything > >> So I take it that your liberal point of view finds it acceptable that >> one boater can be fined for overstaying a week and another can stay in >> the same place for over a year? And one lives in the community and pays >> his community tax as well as for a full year mooring whilst the other >> pays neither? > > The one who was fined should have appealed. He didn't because he realised that it was a fair cop. He had overstayed and that broke the rules. > I am assuming he was on designated visitor moorings with a time limit. He was. > Why the other boater is allowed to stay, I would want a lot more details > before I commented. > But that is a cop-out. I asked you whether you thought it was fair that one person is fined and another is 'ignored' (he hasn't asked formally for permission...he has, in in own words, just got a mate). We are talking about someone that has been bucking the system for several months. I'm off to clean the boat....(I said that an hour ago and I'm still here!) Cheers... Will Chapman nb Quidditch ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Something is new at Yahoo! Groups. Check out the enhanced email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/SISQkA/gOaOAA/yQLSAA/ygtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/canals-list/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
