|
SPAM!! MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
katysails wrote:
Jax cried: SPAM!! I'm of the opinion that the guy is a MacGregor infiltrate, sent by the company to turn the attention of the group on their sorry product... Katy, the following note lists five advantages of the Mac 26M, while recognizing some of its limitations and disadvantages. How about addressing some of these substantive issues, rather than posting more ridiculous, childish personal attacks? Whether or not the Valiant is a "better" boat depends on your particular criteria, however. With respect to safety for coastal cruising, the Mac seems to have several advantages. (1) - If the lower hull is compromised, the inner hull remains. (2) If both hulls are compromised, or if the side hull is penetrated as in a collision, the integrated flotation keeps the Mac afloat. By contrast, if the hull of the Valiant (or other keep boats) is compromised, or if the through-hulls leak, or if substantial water enters the boat for some other reason, the keel of the Valiant will quickly pull it to the bottom. In this respect, the MacGregor is a "better" boat. (Galveston-Houston has its share of drunk red-necks racing around the bays at 60 mph while downing another six-pack.) (3) Regarding access to good sailing areas, the MacGregor can plane out to the desired sailing are at around 15-18 knots, whereas the Valiant, while considered relatively fast, only make around 7-8 knots under power. So, with respect to convenience, and ability to get to a preferred sailing area within a given day or weekend, the MacGregor is a "better" boat. (4) The ability to return to port quickly, ahead of impending weather, is also a safety factor in the Mac. When we sailed the Valiant, there were several channels in the Galveston area that weren't clearly marked and in which we could not maneuver safely at low tide. So, we had to turn back from a preferred anchorage we were trying to reach. In contrast, the dagger board of the MacGregor can be raised incrementally as desired, with a minimum draft of around 18 inches. Again, with respect to its ability to maneuver in shallow or unmarked channels, or to anchor in shallow water, or beach on shore to permit grandkids to play on the sand, the MacGregor is a "better" boat, since the Valiant must be kept in much deeper water and doesn't have the versatility of the Mac for such shallow water activities. I have no doubt that the Valiant has better sailing characteristics, will point higher, and would be more comfortable in heavy weather. - In that sense, it is a "better" boat than the MacGregor (although I understand that the MacGregor can actually plane under sail and may therefore be faster under sail in some conditions). (5) However, if I can't get out to the blue water on weekends because of the requisite hours of motoring time it takes to get from our area to the blue water, then the fine sailing characteristics of the Valiant wouldn't be of much benefit to me. (With the exception of being able to talk about it on the newsgroup.) Under those circumstances, if I could only get out once or twice a year, it may make more sense to charter a larger boat for extended cruising when I can time off for a week or so. Again, an evaluation of the quality of the boat depends on the criteria used in the evaluation, and how the boat will be used. Jim |
SPAM!! MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Jimbo, did you ask your silly questions on the Mac list, like I suggested?
SV Yes. The great majority on the Mac lists have one of the the older models. I did correspond with and speak with some 26M owners. Jim |
SPAM!! MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Johathan, the following note lists five advantages of the Mac 26M, while
recognizing some of its limitations and disadvantages. How about addressing some of such substantive issues, rather than posting more ridiculous personal attacks? Whether or not the Valiant is a "better" boat depends on your particular criteria, however. With respect to safety for coastal cruising, the Mac seems to have several advantages. (1) - If the lower hull is compromised, the inner hull remains. (2) If both hulls are compromised, or if the side hull is penetrated as in a collision, the integrated flotation keeps the Mac afloat. By contrast, if the hull of the Valiant (or other keep boats) is compromised, or if the through-hulls leak, or if substantial water enters the boat for some other reason, the keel of the Valiant will quickly pull it to the bottom. In this respect, the MacGregor is a "better" boat. (Galveston-Houston has its share of drunk red-necks racing around the bays at 60 mph while downing another six-pack.) (3) Regarding access to good sailing areas, the MacGregor can plane out to the desired sailing are at around 15-18 knots, whereas the Valiant, while considered relatively fast, only make around 7-8 knots under power. So, with respect to convenience, and ability to get to a preferred sailing area within a given day or weekend, the MacGregor is a "better" boat. (4) The ability to return to port quickly, ahead of impending weather, is also a safety factor in the Mac. When we sailed the Valiant, there were several channels in the Galveston area that weren't clearly marked and in which we could not maneuver safely at low tide. So, we had to turn back from a preferred anchorage we were trying to reach. In contrast, the dagger board of the MacGregor can be raised incrementally as desired, with a minimum draft of around 18 inches. Again, with respect to its ability to maneuver in shallow or unmarked channels, or to anchor in shallow water, or beach on shore to permit grandkids to play on the sand, the MacGregor is a "better" boat, since the Valiant must be kept in much deeper water and doesn't have the versatility of the Mac for such shallow water activities. I have no doubt that the Valiant has better sailing characteristics, will point higher, and would be more comfortable in heavy weather. - In that sense, it is a "better" boat than the MacGregor (although I understand that the MacGregor can actually plane under sail and may therefore be faster under sail in some conditions). (5) However, if I can't get out to the blue water on weekends because of the requisite hours of motoring time it takes to get from our area to the blue water, then the fine sailing characteristics of the Valiant wouldn't be of much benefit to me. (With the exception of being able to talk about it on the newsgroup.) Under those circumstances, if I could only get out once or twice a year, it may make more sense to charter a larger boat for extended cruising when I can time off for a week or so. Again, an evaluation of the quality of the boat depends on the criteria used in the evaluation, and how the boat will be used. Jim |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
wrote
It seemed to throw me. And that's why wrote in message ... It is double hulled, You're sinking fast. SV |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 23:49:36 -0400, "Scott Vernon"
wrote: are you under the impression that a mac26 is double hulled? SV He may be thinking that a liner is a second hull, which will prevent him from sinking if one of those drunken powerboaters hits him doing 60mph. Perhaps Macs have foam floatation, as most of them would otherwise be on the bottom. If I make it up to the Valiant yard in the next few days, perhaps I will suggest that they may want to "improve" their boats with some of these innovations:) Here is a question for Jim...a drunken powerboater is heading towards you. You can elect to be in a Valiant or a Mac. Which do you choose?:) If you are really so naive as to think that a Mac 26 is a more survivable boat in any scenario than a Valiant or any other "real" sailboat, then thanks for the comic relief. The obvious solution to your dilemma was to have chosen a marina closer to where you wish to sail. You can drive a car faster than even the motorboat you have chosen will go. I will grant you that if your only criteria was how fast you can motor in your "sailboat", then you have probably chosen wisely. For $30k you could have bought a pretty decent powerboat instead. Live and learn. "Jim Cate" wrote 6 times... (1) - If the lower hull is compromised, the inner hull remains. |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
I think you guys need to get a room...
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com wrote in message ... On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 09:23:34 -0400, "Scott Vernon" wrote: wrote It seemed to throw me. And that's why wrote in message .. . It is double hulled, You're sinking fast. SV The problem here, portly one, is that you are not thinking fast. BB |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
I try not to speculate too much.
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Martin Baxter" wrote in message ... Jonathan Ganz wrote: Because he's either stupid, a troll, or trying to justify his poor choice. All three? Cheers Marty |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
"katysails" wrote in message ... Jim boasted: I'll be here for whatever time it takes for you to come to the realization that you aren't going to intimidate me or drive me away. Time to call in Bertie and troop..... Oh gawd ... I hope that Oz doesn't read that. Regards Donal -- |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Jim Cate wrote:
This isn't what happened at all. I posted my questions several times on this an on the cruising ng and scanned the reponses for over a month hoping to get some factual or substantive information regarding the 26M. It was only after weeks of "Mac bashings" ... What, you came into a sailing newsgroup to enquire about about a boat you knew little about, it's gets slagged off something rotten for a month... ....and then you go and *buy* one? Nobody is that stupid. -- Wally www.artbywally.com www.wally.myby.co.uk/music |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Jim Cate wrote:
Would I be permitted to buy a chart plotter, depth-knot, autosteering, or VHF? What's a "depth-knot"? -- Wally www.artbywally.com www.wally.myby.co.uk/music |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
In article , Jonathan Ganz
wrote: Sure, I'm bored Jhm. Well, he's good for something, then. My thoughts on his list of points was exactly the same as yours - get a catamaran. As someone else said, let's see that thing plane or move at 18 knots in a nasty chop and 30 knot headwind. Isn't going to happen. PDW |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Wally wrote: Jim Cate wrote: Would I be permitted to buy a chart plotter, depth-knot, autosteering, or VHF? What's a "depth-knot"? Some log or other? -- Flying Tadpole ------------------------- Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace! http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Flying Tadpole wrote:
What's a "depth-knot"? Some log or other? Sink-rate meter? -- Wally www.artbywally.com www.wally.myby.co.uk/music |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Wally wrote: Flying Tadpole wrote: What's a "depth-knot"? Some log or other? Sink-rate meter? Oh. The perhaps he has a depth-wish? -- Flying Tadpole ------------------------- Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace! http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Flying Tadpole wrote: Wally wrote: Flying Tadpole wrote: What's a "depth-knot"? Some log or other? Sink-rate meter? Oh. The perhaps he has a depth-wish? Dam dam dam. The "" o this keyboard is't workg aymore, would't you kow it. A real uisace whe oe is tryg to commet o the most recet utcase and attemptig to respod to ew sappy postigs. -- Flying Tadpole ------------------------- Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace! http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Flying Tadpole wrote:
Oh. The perhaps he has a depth-wish? Dam dam dam. The "" o this keyboard is't workg aymore, would't you kow it. A real uisace whe oe is tryg to commet o the most recet utcase and attemptig to respod to ew sappy postigs. Don't worry about t - my '' key is flakey as well. -- Wally www.artbywally.com www.wally.myby.co.uk/music |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Scott Vernon wrote: "Jim Cate" wrote I'll be here for whatever time it takes for you to come to the realization that you aren't going to intimidate me or drive me away. Then you'll die here. I'm not afraid to die. Jim Get used to the idea that I'm just wasting everyone's time. Jim Yup. |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Jonathan Ganz wrote: I think he's already brain dead. Does anything else matter? Johnathan, if I'm that dense and that brain dead, why do you continue to spend your time following this discussion? Jim |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Jim Cate wrote: Jonathan Ganz wrote: I think he's already brain dead. Does anything else matter? Johnathan, if I'm that dense and that brain dead, why do you continue to spend your time following this discussion? Because he's a sadist with a bent to necrophilia. Tell us more about a Macgregor 100 miles offshore. The local ones don't seem to handle a five-foot chop very well. -- Flying Tadpole ------------------------- Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace! http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Scott, in case you hadn't realized it, there's no law requiring you to
continue following this discussion. If I'm really that stupid, and if my remarks are really that vacuous, why in hell do you continue to waste your time in this discussion string? There are lots of others that you might be interested in. (Actually, of course, you are obviously stressed out over your inability to put me down, even with the help of your buddies. It's just not supposed to happen like this, is it? Everyone knows that any half-way knowledgable sailor should be able to put down a Mac-lover with just a few sarcastic remarks. - But I'm still here and still cheerfully stating my position. In fact, I'm actually more confident in my position than I was when I came on the ng, since it's increasingly obvious that you and your buddies have almost nothing to say of substance. It's obvious that you have given up on citing any objective issues, and you are increasingly resorting to personal, ad hominem attacks. You obviously aren't making any progress at all, and it's obviously getting to you.) Jim Scott Vernon wrote: "Jim Cate" wrote Really? If I'm that stupid and my notes are that insignificant, why is this discussion string the most extensive on the ng, with over 400 responses? The 'ol bobspit ploy, start a stupid troll, keep fueling it with dumber than **** remarks, then claim to 'WIN' because ''his thread'' has the most posts. Yup, you're a winner Jim, you and bob****, a couple of winners. SV |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
katysails wrote: Jim, still not gettingIf I'm that stupid and my notes are that insignificant, why is this discussion string the most extensive on the ng, SHADES OF LONG ISLANDWE HAVE A MACKEREL!!!!!!!! But why are you wasting your time in this discussion, if what I'm saying is that insignificant and doesn't have an element of truth? Jim |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
I'm not afraid to die.
Jim afraid to? looks like you are deliberately trying to. |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Johnathan, if I'm that dense and that brain dead, why do you continue to
spend your time following this discussion? Jim because you are a dishonest flack for the company. keep it up jimmy boy and every last person who even considered buyin one of those things for flat, calm water will puke hearing the word "Mac" even the context of hamburgers. |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Scott Vernon wrote: are you under the impression that a mac26 is double hulled? SV "Jim Cate" wrote 6 times... (1) - If the lower hull is compromised, the inner hull remains. Yes it is. If the outer (lowermost) hull is penetrated, water is still retained wihin the water ballast cavity located above the lower hull for most of the length of the boat and is prevented from entering the cabin. Also, if both hulls are penetrated, the boat remains afloat due to the built-in foam floatation. Jim |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
|
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Scott Vernon wrote: wrote are you under the impression that a mac26 is double hulled? It is double hulled, but the space in between the layers is water ballast, which gives you a head start on filling up the rest of the boat with water. and the space in-between your ears is a vacuum if you think the Mac is double hulled. SV In other words, you lost that one, so you now have no response other than to resort to your usual personal, ad hominem attacks? Isn't that about the size of it Scott? (Scotty, for a change, why don't you just admit that I was right? Some little attempt at honesty and balance isn't all that difficult, after all, and it might even make you feel better.) Jim |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Jim Cate wrote: katysails wrote: Jim, still not gettingIf I'm that stupid and my notes are that insignificant, why is this discussion string the most extensive on the ng, SHADES OF LONG ISLANDWE HAVE A MACKEREL!!!!!!!! But why are you wasting your time in this discussion, if what I'm saying is that insignificant and doesn't have an element of truth? Jim, you keep asking this question in one form or another, so it appears you don't really see the answer. As I'm a kind and generous soul, much more so than the rest of these bottom-dwellers here, here's a bit of help for you. This newsgroup has been notable for years in its exercise of virtual cruelty, especially on the innocent, to the point where even the FAQs are full of dire warnings. The cruellest of the virtual cruelties is, of course, the goading of the uncomprehending. When such goading has been done expertly, these sadists can sit back, and apply only the lightest of touches, while the suffering goad themselves into increasing frenzy, in an almost self-perpetuating cycle, providing hours of entertainment for the watchers, for minimal effort on their part. Do you now see why most of the regulars in this group are here "wasting their time in this discussion?" -- Flying Tadpole ------------------------- Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace! http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com COmpulsory sailing content The Light Schooner http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/index.htm SquareBoats! http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/sbhome.htm Bolger Boats netted! http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/sites2.htm |
SPAM!! MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
SPAM!!
Scott, in case you hadn't realized it, there's no law requiring you to continue following this discussion. If I'm really that stupid, and if my remarks are really that vacuous, why in hell do you continue to waste your time in this discussion string? There are lots of others that you might be interested in. (Actually, of course, you are obviously stressed out over your inability to put me down, even with the help of your buddies. It's just not supposed to happen like this, is it? Everyone knows that any half-way knowledgable sailor should be able to put down a Mac-lover with just a few sarcastic remarks. - But I'm still here and still cheerfully stating my position. In fact, I'm actually more confident in my position than I was when I came on the ng, since it's increasingly obvious that you and your buddies have almost nothing to say of substance. It's obvious that you have given up on citing any objective issues, and you are increasingly resorting to personal, ad hominem attacks. You obviously aren't making any progress at all, and it's obviously getting to you.) Jim Scott Vernon wrote: "Jim Cate" wrote Really? If I'm that stupid and my notes are that insignificant, why is this discussion string the most extensive on the ng, with over 400 responses? The 'ol bobspit ploy, start a stupid troll, keep fueling it with dumber than **** remarks, then claim to 'WIN' because ''his thread'' has the most posts. Yup, you're a winner Jim, you and bob****, a couple of winners. SV |
SPAM!! MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
SPAM!!
Jim, still not gettingIf I'm that stupid and my notes are that insignificant, why is this discussion string the most extensive on the ng, SHADES OF LONG ISLANDWE HAVE A MACKEREL!!!!!!!! But why are you wasting your time in this discussion, if what I'm saying is that insignificant and doesn't have an element of truth? Jim |
SPAM!! MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
SPAM!!
are you under the impression that a mac26 is double hulled? SV "Jim Cate" wrote 6 times... (1) - If the lower hull is compromised, the inner hull remains. Yes it is. If the outer (lowermost) hull is penetrated, water is still retained wihin the water ballast cavity located above the lower hull for most of the length of the boat and is prevented from entering the cabin. Also, if both hulls are penetrated, the boat remains afloat due to the built-in foam floatation. Jim |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Taddy, how did you know that????
JHHM, did you even read my other post about catamarans and tri? Can you read? -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Flying Tadpole" wrote in message ... Jim Cate wrote: Jonathan Ganz wrote: I think he's already brain dead. Does anything else matter? Johnathan, if I'm that dense and that brain dead, why do you continue to spend your time following this discussion? Because he's a sadist with a bent to necrophilia. Tell us more about a Macgregor 100 miles offshore. The local ones don't seem to handle a five-foot chop very well. -- Flying Tadpole ------------------------- Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace! http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
I don't think it's a question of "if" you're stupid.
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Jim Cate" wrote in message ... Scott, in case you hadn't realized it, there's no law requiring you to continue following this discussion. If I'm really that stupid, and if my remarks are really that vacuous, why in hell do you continue to waste your time in this discussion string? There are lots of others that you might be interested in. (Actually, of course, you are obviously stressed out over your inability to put me down, even with the help of your buddies. It's just not supposed to happen like this, is it? Everyone knows that any half-way knowledgable sailor should be able to put down a Mac-lover with just a few sarcastic remarks. - But I'm still here and still cheerfully stating my position. In fact, I'm actually more confident in my position than I was when I came on the ng, since it's increasingly obvious that you and your buddies have almost nothing to say of substance. It's obvious that you have given up on citing any objective issues, and you are increasingly resorting to personal, ad hominem attacks. You obviously aren't making any progress at all, and it's obviously getting to you.) Jim Scott Vernon wrote: "Jim Cate" wrote Really? If I'm that stupid and my notes are that insignificant, why is this discussion string the most extensive on the ng, with over 400 responses? The 'ol bobspit ploy, start a stupid troll, keep fueling it with dumber than **** remarks, then claim to 'WIN' because ''his thread'' has the most posts. Yup, you're a winner Jim, you and bob****, a couple of winners. SV |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Its funny, the drawing on the web site don't show this to be "double hulled".
The water ballast is on the center line, not around the chine - it would be easy to penetrate the hull with a glancing blow to a rock. BTW, what would happen to the daggerboard if it touched bottom? "Jim Cate" wrote in message ... wrote: On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 23:49:36 -0400, "Scott Vernon" wrote: are you under the impression that a mac26 is double hulled? It is double hulled, but the space in between the layers is water ballast, which gives you a head start on filling up the rest of the boat with water. BB Of course, if only the lower hull is penetrated, water doesn't get into the cabin at all. Also, as mentioned above, the built-in flotation will keep the boat afloat even if water enters the cabin. Jim SV "Jim Cate" wrote 6 times... (1) - If the lower hull is compromised, the inner hull remains. |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Flying Tadpole wrote:
Do you now see why most of the regulars in this group are here "wasting their time in this discussion?" Jeeze Taddy! Why do you have to spoil our fun, you bucking for the Mother Theresa award? Cheers Marty |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Would agree. It's definitely not double hulled, and from the drawings
I'd say it's not completely double bottomed. Jeff Morris wrote: Its funny, the drawing on the web site don't show this to be "double hulled". The water ballast is on the center line, not around the chine - it would be easy to penetrate the hull with a glancing blow to a rock. BTW, what would happen to the daggerboard if it touched bottom? |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
"Flying Tadpole" wrote in message ... Jim Cate wrote: katysails wrote: Jim, still not gettingIf I'm that stupid and my notes are that insignificant, why is this discussion string the most extensive on the ng, SHADES OF LONG ISLANDWE HAVE A MACKEREL!!!!!!!! But why are you wasting your time in this discussion, if what I'm saying is that insignificant and doesn't have an element of truth? Jim, you keep asking this question in one form or another, so it appears you don't really see the answer. As I'm a kind and generous soul, much more so than the rest of these bottom-dwellers here, here's a bit of help for you. This newsgroup has been notable for years in its exercise of virtual cruelty, especially on the innocent, to the point where even the FAQs are full of dire warnings. The cruellest of the virtual cruelties is, of course, the goading of the uncomprehending. When such goading has been done expertly, these sadists can sit back, and apply only the lightest of touches, while the suffering goad themselves into increasing frenzy, in an almost self-perpetuating cycle, providing hours of entertainment for the watchers, for minimal effort on their part. Do you now see why most of the regulars in this group are here "wasting their time in this discussion?" -- Flying Tadpole ------------------------- Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace! http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com COmpulsory sailing content The Light Schooner http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/index.htm SquareBoats! http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/sbhome.htm Bolger Boats netted! http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/sites2.htm Tadpole, I don't think this guy is an innocent. Either he's a troll or he's pimping for mac, no one could possibly be this gullible or stupid. He quotes mac sales literature like it came from a burning bush. It was slightly entertaining for a while but I notice when his statements get taken apart like an overdone piece of chicken, he doesn't respond. I would guess he's a pimp. John Cairns |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Dam dam dam. The "" o this keyboard is't workg aymore, would't
you kow it. A real uisace whe oe is tryg to commet o the most recet utcase and attemptig to respod to ew sappy postigs. Hot dang! Taddie's finally learnt katytype~!!!!! -- katysails s/v Chanteuse Kirie Elite 32 http://katysails.tripod.com "Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Jim claimed:
I'm not afraid to die. Prove it. -- katysails s/v Chanteuse Kirie Elite 32 http://katysails.tripod.com "Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Jim excoriated:
If I'm really that stupid, and if my remarks are really that vacuous, why in hell do you continue to waste your time in this discussion string? YOU JUST DON'T GET IT!!!! This is what we do here to people like you. And there is a rule...it is OUR rule....if you don't like it, then I suggest you complain to Mr. Fortin. He's a very understanding person and will make sure that we're all punished for making his newsgroup such a nasty place for you. -- katysails s/v Chanteuse Kirie Elite 32 http://katysails.tripod.com "Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein |
MacGregor 26M - Valiant 40
Jim asked: But why are you wasting your time in this discussion, if what I'm
saying is that insignificant and doesn't have an element of truth? Because we're all sick s*its who have nothing better to do than make you miserable. -- katysails s/v Chanteuse Kirie Elite 32 http://katysails.tripod.com "Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:47 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com