I guess I’m guilty in having made two mistakes in my first (and some of the next) postings here.

·         The minor one is not to read the original posting properly. That boat was built in Germany, but is now on the west coast (?) of Scotland. It may well be that this area is not swamped with good, cheap, secondhand boats.

·         The big one is that I produced some ‘straight talk’ which doesn’t sound that bad over a beer in the pub, but which looks bad in print on the web.
Once, in the Yahoo JR forum, this matter was up, and I then produced this text:

Stavanger, Sat 20091024

Well said, Bertrand.
This Web, which has brought the world together and let us discuss matters like in this JR forum also has created a lot of confusion - and some negative vibes. Although we are able to more or less write the same language, we still bring with us very different style (learnt in our home countries) when it comes to how to discuss things; what is regarded as straight talk and what is regarded as rude or even insulting.

This distance in style got very clear to me when watching a TV-program some years ago:
A Japanese gentleman and his daughter (around 20) "were doing " Norway. After their journey the daughter was asked how the trip was. Among many things she said "The Norwegians are very impolite, but also very helpful". She was probably both right and wrong: Norwegians are fairly informal, but being helpful to strangers is actually our way (maybe clumsy) to be polite.
The challenge for a forum like ours is to find a way to exchange and discuss our ideas quite freely without hurting each others.

I have of course no right to produce any rules for such discussions, but since I am a quite straight talker myself in my real world, I try to run my own writing here through some sort of diplomatic filter:
1. I use my real name in any forum. That alone discourages me from being too rude
2. Any critics should be positive i.e. with an alternative presented. This is a good old general rule.
3. Hot arguing over ideas that have not been tried makes no sense to me. I try to restrain myself from butching somebody's ideas unless I have practical evidence to back me up. Even then, the words must be chosen with some care.
4. I try not to be sarcastic. Sarcasms are just intelligently wrapped wickedness.
Bridges are easy to burn but slow to re-build...

So let us smoke the peace pipe and keep on sharing ideas and experience! And let us encourage each other!

Arne
..the fjord ape from the country which even has no word for "sir"...

Excellent advise  -  I only must learn to follow them...

Sorry,
Arne

(PS: Lesson to myself: Never turn off the diplomatic filter in any public web forum. Period.)

With respect, Zane, you should note that this is not the “general” forum.

It’s the “buy sell or swap forum” where people really oughtn’t to weigh in too heavily from the sidelines with their personal opinions, unless they are positive and helpful to the fellow member.

The purpose of the original posting was to offer something for sale to members, not to open a debate about cabin tops or to deride restorations or the unsightliness of a transom-mounted outboard motor or any other particular likes or dislikes, we all have them. These issues no doubt make good subjects for discussion but should really belong to the “general” forum.

A reputable member (boat-builder no less) posted a project folkboat restoration for sale and the comments it subsequently attracted don’t make the junk rig “buy sell or swap” column a very attractive proposition for the next time someone has something to offer for sale.

I think Daniel has quietly made that point already, if you look back through the postings. It is not fair, and also it seriously reduces the value of what should be a useful forum.

While on the subject, I think I have made mistakes like this too. I wonder if it would be possible to alter the “recent posts” column to include the forum category (eg general, technical, buy sell or swap) with each post, along with what we already see (topic, date and poster’s name.) Just a suggestion, I am not sure if it would be easy to do or not. But I suppose some people who follow the forums, like me, just read the recent posts, and if it were clear from the outset which forum category the post belonged to it would probably help to raise the general quality. I must admit, I would find it helpful.

In this case the forum category should have been fairly obvious, but it is not always so.

Zane Krajancic wrote:

Graeme Kenyon wrote:

With respect, Zane, you should note that this is not the “general” forum.

It’s the “buy sell or swap forum” where people really oughtn’t to weigh in too heavily from the sidelines with their personal opinions, unless they are positive and helpful to the fellow member.

The purpose of the original posting was to offer something for sale to members, not to open a debate about cabin tops or to deride restorations or the unsightliness of a transom-mounted outboard motor or any other particular likes or dislikes, we all have them. These issues no doubt make good subjects for discussion but should really belong to the “general” forum.

A reputable member (boat-builder no less) posted a project folkboat restoration for sale and the comments it subsequently attracted don’t make the junk rig “buy sell or swap” column a very attractive proposition for the next time someone has something to offer for sale.

I think Daniel has quietly made that point already, if you look back through the postings. It is not fair, and also it seriously reduces the value of what should be a useful forum.

While on the subject, I think I have made mistakes like this too. I wonder if it would be possible to alter the “recent posts” column to include the forum category (eg general, technical, buy sell or swap) with each post, along with what we already see (topic, date and poster’s name.) Just a suggestion, I am not sure if it would be easy to do or not. But I suppose some people who follow the forums, like me, just read the recent posts, and if it were clear from the outset which forum category the post belonged to it would probably help to raise the general quality. I must admit, I would find it helpful.

In this case the forum category should have been fairly obvious, but it is not always so.

Fair point Graham, I just saw this thread on the front page, read the to and fro before me, and then made my post.

More than happy for the moderator to remove my post and any others if this was just meant to be a 'for sale' thread only,

But to be fair to me, others before me, including yourself, had made your opinions felt.   And no, I pay no attention to the categories of threads on the front page, so I've made an honest mistake.

Update: I've deleted my opinion post with a nod to the opening poster trying to sell his boat.

Dear Annie

I like to think that I am a romantic realist. I too once (1977) fell for a 40 years old, nail-sick wooden boat, just two notches above wreck standard.  Maggi, a 26’ clinker-built double-ender, simply was the sweetest boat I had seen ( within my low budget). Somehow, I pulled it off. Over 1500 replaced nails, 15 pairs of frames, a new cockpit and a rudimentary interior, plus new standing rigging was produced in a frantic spring 1978. The key to my ‘success’ was to set a low standard: Only the cockpit was made to last. The interior was temporary and meant to be replaced little by little. Now that boat is 80 years old and is going through a full professional restauration. I am not sure if she has stayed afloat for so long because of my quick-and-dirty work  -  or in spite of it.

Arne

PS: I always rowed an extra round around her at the mooring after each sail. Doesn’t that qualify me as a romantic?