"JimC" wrote in message
.. .

Huh? Either they're appropriate to the size of a 26 ft boat or not that
should go offshore. They're no appropriate on so many levels that I would
run out of bandwidth trying to post them. It's deficient rigging. I've
seen it.

Find your own examples. I'm not interested in doing your homework for
you.

In other words, you simply don't have a rational response and can't come
up one. Is that about the size of it Ganz?

Jim





The size of it is that you are unable to substantiate your own claims and
want me to do your work for you... sorry, not my job.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

Capt. JG wrote:

"JimC" wrote in message
.. .


Huh? Either they're appropriate to the size of a 26 ft boat or not that
should go offshore. They're no appropriate on so many levels that I would
run out of bandwidth trying to post them. It's deficient rigging. I've
seen it.

Find your own examples. I'm not interested in doing your homework for
you.

In other words, you simply don't have a rational response and can't come
up one. Is that about the size of it Ganz?

Jim





The size of it is that you are unable to substantiate your own claims and
want me to do your work for you... sorry, not my job.

What "claims" are you talking about Ganz? Have I made any "claims" that
the Mac26M is a good boat for extended offshore cruising? Have I made
any "claims" that it is a good boat for ocean crossings? Have I made any
"claims" that I would want to take it offshore for extended blue water
cruising? (Helpful hint: Not. - Just the opposite. In fact, I have
stated in several posts that it wouldn't be good choice for extended
crossings or the like.)

Neal, I think it would be helpful if you took the time to actually read
my notes before you post any more of those indignant, sarcastic, snooty
replies.

Jim

"JimC" wrote in message
...
The size of it is that you are unable to substantiate your own claims and
want me to do your work for you... sorry, not my job.

What "claims" are you talking about Ganz? Have I made any "claims" that
the Mac26M is a good boat for extended offshore cruising? Have I made any
"claims" that it is a good boat for ocean crossings? Have I made any
"claims" that I would want to take it offshore for extended blue water
cruising? (Helpful hint: Not. - Just the opposite. In fact, I have stated
in several posts that it wouldn't be good choice for extended crossings or
the like.)

Neal, I think it would be helpful if you took the time to actually read my
notes before you post any more of those indignant, sarcastic, snooty
replies.

Jim


Please don't refer to me as "Neal." That's truly insulting! I think you're
starting to get really frazzled.

You now claim that the Mac wouldn't be a good choice for crossings, so that
makes one wonder why, given what a "great" boat it's supposed be.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:00:32 -0600, JimC wrote:



Capt. JG wrote:

"JimC" wrote in message
.. .


Huh? Either they're appropriate to the size of a 26 ft boat or not that
should go offshore. They're no appropriate on so many levels that I
would
run out of bandwidth trying to post them. It's deficient rigging. I've
seen it.

Find your own examples. I'm not interested in doing your homework for
you.

In other words, you simply don't have a rational response and can't come
up one. Is that about the size of it Ganz?

Jim





The size of it is that you are unable to substantiate your own claims
and
want me to do your work for you... sorry, not my job.

What "claims" are you talking about Ganz? Have I made any "claims" that
the Mac26M is a good boat for extended offshore cruising? Have I made
any "claims" that it is a good boat for ocean crossings? Have I made any
"claims" that I would want to take it offshore for extended blue water
cruising? (Helpful hint: Not. - Just the opposite. In fact, I have
stated in several posts that it wouldn't be good choice for extended
crossings or the like.)

Neal, I think it would be helpful if you took the time to actually read
my notes before you post any more of those indignant, sarcastic, snooty
replies.

Jim

Where does the silly term "extended off shore cruising" come from? The
Mac26M is
unfit for many conditions found regularly on a day sail near shore.

Certainly offshore cruising around here...

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

wrote:

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:00:32 -0600, JimC wrote:



Capt. JG wrote:


"JimC" wrote in message
t...



Huh? Either they're appropriate to the size of a 26 ft boat or not that
should go offshore. They're no appropriate on so many levels that I would
run out of bandwidth trying to post them. It's deficient rigging. I've
seen it.

Find your own examples. I'm not interested in doing your homework for
you.

In other words, you simply don't have a rational response and can't come
up one. Is that about the size of it Ganz?

Jim





The size of it is that you are unable to substantiate your own claims and
want me to do your work for you... sorry, not my job.

What "claims" are you talking about Ganz? Have I made any "claims" that
the Mac26M is a good boat for extended offshore cruising? Have I made
any "claims" that it is a good boat for ocean crossings? Have I made any
"claims" that I would want to take it offshore for extended blue water
cruising? (Helpful hint: Not. - Just the opposite. In fact, I have
stated in several posts that it wouldn't be good choice for extended
crossings or the like.)

Neal, I think it would be helpful if you took the time to actually read
my notes before you post any more of those indignant, sarcastic, snooty
replies.

Jim


Where does the silly term "extended off shore cruising" come from? The Mac26M is
unfit for many conditions found regularly on a day sail near shore.


You are certainly entitled to your opinion, Salty, as I am to mine. The
difference, of course, is that mine are correct.

Not saying that there aren't conditions near shore on some occasions in
which I wouldn't want to go out on a Mac. But "regularly" is not the
appropriate term.

Jim