On 26 Sep 2008, at 21:34, sean neill wrote:

>  But when you remove a boat from the water, more water is required to
>  fill up the gap where the boat once was. So shouldn't there be a
>  charge every time the canoe is removed?
>
>  (or at least in the "take everything five steps beyond its logical
>  conclusion" world in whioch much of this debate is taking place.)
>  --
>  Nigel Stanley
>
> Shirley this implies that people who don't have a boat at all should  
> pay
> a charge for the water BW has to put into the system to compensate for
> their boats which aren't there?

Thank goodness you are back Sean, to bring some sanity to the  
proceedings.

Beeky

Reply via email to