On Aug 6, 12:08*pm, "Roger Long" wrote:
wrote

How far did you sail in the last 10 days?

Oops. *I see I left out the "non-stop" which makes it a bit more of a
yardstick.

Sucks, I'm a big fan of Skip & co. but I think your challenge is
purely bogus. I don't want to take anything away from Skip at all.
He has lots to say, I enjoy reading his stuff and it's clear to me
that he's having a good time. What more could a reader of rbc want?
But, what's so special about passages made in the last 10 days? Does
that mean I don't get cred for making an offshore passage over more
than twice as many miles this season? None for passages of seasons
past? And whats so special about passage making? It has its joys but
to me the real cruising starts when you've finished the passage and
gotten someplace new and exciting. Discussions around here would be
pretty thin if corespondents had to complete some arbitrarily long
passage before they could post.

-- Tom.

wrote

"Sucks" which I am sure from the context was meant to be "Sure".

Sure, the "10 days" was poor writing and distracting to the point I was
trying to make but, how much time do you think I spent dashing these posts
off? It was a purely retorical comment and a bit wide of the mark I was
trying to make.

There are two ways to respond the abundance of information S&L provide about
their cruises and mistakes. One is specific discussions of strategy, what
to do, what not to do, etc. that these accounts bring up. The other, which
is much more prominent here, is the "S&L are dangerous idiots who have no
business sailing." The fact that the latter generally comes from posters
who clearly are not cruising at all or are just puttering about locally in
trailer sailer class boats I find annoying.

S&L are on a learning curve and will be for the rest of their cruising days.
I made mistakes on my last cruise, the one before that, the one before that,
and .... I'll make mistakes on my next cruise. I've watched an Unlimited
Master of everything, no licenses left to sit for, nearly put his ship
aground (I was on it). Every experienced cruiser sailing once made a
passage with no prior passage making experience in command and every time
you cast off the lines there is the opportunity to learn something.

I'm not trying to make a point or judgement here about S&L actually but
about the nature of discussion which would be more useful and interesting to
read.

--
Roger Long

On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 06:49:00 -0400, "Roger Long"
wrote:

wrote

"Sucks" which I am sure from the context was meant to be "Sure".

Sure, the "10 days" was poor writing and distracting to the point I was
trying to make but, how much time do you think I spent dashing these posts
off? It was a purely retorical comment and a bit wide of the mark I was
trying to make.

There are two ways to respond the abundance of information S&L provide about
their cruises and mistakes. One is specific discussions of strategy, what
to do, what not to do, etc. that these accounts bring up. The other, which
is much more prominent here, is the "S&L are dangerous idiots who have no
business sailing." The fact that the latter generally comes from posters
who clearly are not cruising at all or are just puttering about locally in
trailer sailer class boats I find annoying.

S&L are on a learning curve and will be for the rest of their cruising days.
I made mistakes on my last cruise, the one before that, the one before that,
and .... I'll make mistakes on my next cruise. I've watched an Unlimited
Master of everything, no licenses left to sit for, nearly put his ship
aground (I was on it). Every experienced cruiser sailing once made a
passage with no prior passage making experience in command and every time
you cast off the lines there is the opportunity to learn something.

I'm not trying to make a point or judgement here about S&L actually but
about the nature of discussion which would be more useful and interesting to
read.

But here's the issue, Roger. We all make mistakes. However Skip, like
yourself, has an ego that won't let him benefit from his experiences,
or those of others. He revels in his ineptness, and rationalizes his
blunders, rather than being humbled by them. That may be why you feel
such empathy for him, and are so dismissive of criticisms and the hard
won experience of others.

The rest of us, understand that everyone makes mistakes, but Skip
needs to change his over-riding attitude about them if he wants to be
a better sailor. So far, he's been a kid, who when told not to stick a
knife in the toaster, grabs a fork, instead. You can follow a kid
around and tell him no at every turn, or you can try and teach him to
do a better job at deciding what is a good idea and what is a bad
idea.

I criticize Skip in the hope that at some point the light will go on
over his head, and he will realize that thinking ahead, and using
better judgement may lead to fewer problems, and help mitigate
problems that do happen anyway. Nobody can anticipate everything that
may happen, but it's a good idea to do it as much as possible. Skip
does too many things that show a complete lack of foresight or caring.
Sailing is somewhat akin to chess. You succeed by anticipation of all
the possible places you may be several moves from now.

wrote

However Skip, like yourself, has an ego that won't let him benefit from
his experiences, or those of others.

Now, how could you possibly know that? Especially in the case of myself who
has posted far less of my experiences here. That's where your otherwise
excellent observation that everyone makes mistakes (although it usually
*sounds* as if you and others don't) goes off the track.

Why, just the other day I learned that, if you are in very familiar waters
where navigation doesn't seem like a real issue, you can look down at your
GPS, see the asterisks you expect to be there, and turn left. Oops. The
GPS was zoomed way too far in and there was still one asterisk off the
screen. Bump. You really think I didn't learn something from that?

During my years of observing aviation human factors (where they are far more
critical), I noticed that such assumptions about others are generally
accompanied by dangerous arrogance about ones self. I don't know that that
is true about you individually but it is statistically probable. Why don't
you focus on specifics that would be useful and instructive discussion
instead of jumping to general value judgements about others that just appear
self-serving.

--
Roger Long

On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 09:04:25 -0400, "Roger Long"
wrote:

wrote

However Skip, like yourself, has an ego that won't let him benefit from
his experiences, or those of others.

Now, how could you possibly know that?

Based entirely on the aggregate of his postings... And your own.

This is Usenet, Roger. I don't know your innermost feelings or demons.
All I know is what you post. That's what I draw from. If you have more
information about why you do the things you do, and the way you do
them, that you would like me to take into consideration when forming
my opinions, please post it. Same for Skip.

You post some bizarre assumptions about me, that don't even correlate
to anything I post.

On Aug 7, 2:49*am, "Roger Long" wrote:


I'm not trying to make a point or judgement here about S&L actually but
about the nature of discussion which would be more useful and interesting to
read.
Roger Long


Roger here ya go again trying to make this place in your immage.......
Give it up. I like it just the way it is so who will prevail?
Bob

On Aug 7, 5:04*am, "Roger Long" wrote:
wrote

However Skip, like yourself, has an ego that won't let him benefit from
his experiences, or those of others.

Now, how could you possibly know that? *Especially in the case of myself who
has posted far less of my experiences here.

Roger Long

My dear roger,

A writers words are extreamly revealing. To get a flavor of what is
possible I recomend starting with one of the most basic concepts
availible: Binjamin Worf and Ed Sapair's theory of linguistic
relitivity. An anthropologist and linguist teamed up in the 1930s to
study the Hopi indians. One descovery was:
Language Reflects Culture
Language Affects Culture
In other words we all live in a language that forms our view of the
world at a very fundamental level. The traditial textbook example is
the number of single words used by "Eskimo"to describe snow. Well over
113 singel words are used to describe snow while we are hard pressed
to list a ten. Assumption.... snow is a pretty important thing to
Northern lat natives and less to us. So we can say that language is a
window alowing us to understand a culture.
Next the flip side is also true. That is, if we are raised in a
language it will structure how we see/view the world. A simple example
of this is spanish compared to english. they have gendered words La
Messa El Torro, El Libro while we have few. Assumption....... for the
child raised in a heavily gendered language they will grow up seeing
the world (people) as genders who must comply to gender roles very
closly.... can you say MACHO.

The interesting thing assumtion with all this if we change the
language can we change a culture????????????

Hummm,
FIRE MAN = FIRE FIGHTER
POLICE MAN = POLICE OFFICER
FISHER MAN = ANGLER
Ya ever wonder why the us gov changed job titles????????? Just think
Worf - Sapier

NOw, what the **** does that have to do with us here?
Everything. every word you chose, and how you nit it together screams
who you are and what you belive. A simple count of referencing to
authorties and accomplishments or the simple number of times you make
a reference to your self... You have to remember that that the Worf
Sapier Hypothysis was develdoped in the 1930s a robust field of
Rhetorial Anlysis tools have develped since.
Be careful................. be very carful..........

That will be $200 please.

Bob

On 7 Aug 2008 09:58:03 -0500, Dave wrote:

On Thu, 7 Aug 2008 07:36:37 -0700 (PDT), Bob said:


The interesting thing assumtion with all this if we change the
language can we change a culture

"Interesting thing assumtion?" Is that Eskimo?

Are you re-reading Cheaper By The Dozen, Dave?

On 7 Aug 2008 10:40:02 -0500, Dave wrote:

On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 11:14:33 -0400, said:


"Interesting thing assumtion?" Is that Eskimo?

Are you re-reading Cheaper By The Dozen, Dave?

Never read it in the first place, so I'm missing your allusion.

The main character used to say something was "Eskimo" if it wasn't
quite kosher.

On Aug 7, 3:49*am, "Roger Long" wrote:
wrote

"Sucks" ...

I meant to type "shucks". One reason I don't type long posts like S&L
is that I'm illiterate. Probably the same reason that the point of
your initial post flew over my head. Actually, I'm still struggling a
bit with your argument. I don't see how it follows that now that S&L
have managed to get from one place to another and that they are still
on a "learning curve" that they should be immune from negative
feedback on their posts. I don't even see why they should be immune
from folks who only cruise around in their home waters. I don't need
Joyce to tell me I can't write. Anybody who can read is qualified to
make that observation. To be sure, Skip's sailing skills are superior
to my writing skills, but I still think that when he posts here and
folks say (with more or less tact) "don't quit your day job" that they
have every right to do so no matter how they sail. Their criticism is
valid or not based on the facts (some of which only Skip is privy to)
not on some arbitrary rite of passage.

-- Tom.