John Fereira wrote:
wrote in news:1152736173.691216.253060@
75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

novice wrote:
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/3366/00009069xl.jpg
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/865/00009032yh.jpg
What is that, 8 feet or so? I figured you would have one of those tiny
ww boats.

In the context of whitewater boats, 8' is very long. If you look at the
first photo it the label on the hull reads "Pursuit 10" so it's likely 10'
long. In any case, this is rec.boats.paddle, not
rec.boats.paddle.only.boats.longer.than.16feet.all owed

John, did you have any particular motivation for that last comment?
'Cause...galt didn't say anything about 8' WW boats, he was giving an
eyeball estimate of a boat in a picture. And his reaction was very
reasonable, I thought. You can't always go by the number on the side of
boats. Ever seen a QCC 700?

Of course, a 10' Pursuit doesn't actually quite fit in a 240SX. My WW
boat, at 8' (Dagger Redline, imagine) might, though. And yes, the
current crop of those critters is in the sub 6' range.

Steve

--
Steve Cramer
Athens, GA

Steve Cramer wrote in
:

John Fereira wrote:
wrote in news:1152736173.691216.253060@
75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

novice wrote:
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/3366/00009069xl.jpg
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/865/00009032yh.jpg
What is that, 8 feet or so? I figured you would have one of those
tiny ww boats.

In the context of whitewater boats, 8' is very long. If you look at
the first photo it the label on the hull reads "Pursuit 10" so it's
likely 10' long. In any case, this is rec.boats.paddle, not
rec.boats.paddle.only.boats.longer.than.16feet.all owed

John, did you have any particular motivation for that last comment?

It was in response to this statement.

I figured you would have one of those tiny ww
boats.

Putting the emphasis on "you" rather than "figured" makes it sound to me
that he was disparaging novice (whose choice of handle almost invites
elitism) for his choice of kayak, and "tiny ww boats" could have been
written without the "tiny" qualifier.

If he would have written:

"I figured that it was a www boat", I wouldn't have responed. In any case,
novice seemed have read the same thing I did in the response given his
reaction.

Alas, it appears that it was basically a case of unclear phrasing rather
than an intential disparaging. I apologize to galt.


'Cause...galt didn't say anything about 8' WW boats, he was giving an
eyeball estimate of a boat in a picture.

Actually, he did. The "8 feet or so" question combined with "tiny ww
boats" implies that 8' is short in the context of ww boats.

And his reaction was very
reasonable, I thought. You can't always go by the number on the side of
boats. Ever seen a QCC 700?

Yes, but I'm not sure how long it is. I know of quite a few touring boats
with 16, 17, or 18 in the model name but are often a few inches shorter. I
don't know of any that are two feet shorter.

Of course, a 10' Pursuit doesn't actually quite fit in a 240SX. My WW
boat, at 8' (Dagger Redline, imagine) might, though. And yes, the
current crop of those critters is in the sub 6' range.

John Fereira wrote:
[...]
Actually, he did. The "8 feet or so" question combined with "tiny ww
boats" implies that 8' is short in the context of ww boats.
[...]

I didn't see the "10" on the boat. Somehow I thought that was glare.
Anyway I thought ww boats went down to 5 feet something, and I doubt
they are inexpensive, so I am rather surprised by the perceived slight.
Do longer boats attract women or something?

Dave

wrote in news:1152910856.650809.236760
@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

John Fereira wrote:
[...]
Actually, he did. The "8 feet or so" question combined with "tiny ww
boats" implies that 8' is short in the context of ww boats.
[...]

I didn't see the "10" on the boat. Somehow I thought that was glare.
Anyway I thought ww boats went down to 5 feet something, and I doubt
they are inexpensive, so I am rather surprised by the perceived slight.
Do longer boats attract women or something?

Only if it has a large cockpit.

I've built a CLC Northbay several years ago that measures out to 18'6" long
but my wife (and I) prefer my cedar strip Outer Island which is *only* 17'
10" long.

OK, I think this is getting perilously close to one of those
Angels-dance-pinhead* things, but what the hell, dinner isn't ready yet...

John Fereira wrote:
Steve Cramer wrote in
:

John Fereira wrote:
wrote in news:1152736173.691216.253060@
75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

novice wrote:
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/3366/00009069xl.jpg
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/865/00009032yh.jpg
What is that, 8 feet or so? I figured you would have one of those
tiny ww boats.
In the context of whitewater boats, 8' is very long. If you look at
the first photo it the label on the hull reads "Pursuit 10" so it's
likely 10' long. In any case, this is rec.boats.paddle, not
rec.boats.paddle.only.boats.longer.than.16feet.all owed
John, did you have any particular motivation for that last comment?

It was in response to this statement.

I figured you would have one of those tiny ww
boats.

Putting the emphasis on "you" rather than "figured" makes it sound to me
that he was disparaging novice (whose choice of handle almost invites
elitism) for his choice of kayak, and "tiny ww boats" could have been
written without the "tiny" qualifier.

And who placed that emphasis? And when has anyone in r.b.p been
disparaged for paddling a WW boat of any size? Sorry, you couldn't
insult by saying I paddle a WW boat no matter how long it was.

If he would have written:

"I figured that it was a www boat", I wouldn't have responed. In any case,
novice seemed have read the same thing I did in the response given his
reaction.

www boat? I guess that's an occupational hazard for a network honcho
like you


Alas, it appears that it was basically a case of unclear phrasing rather
than an intential disparaging. I apologize to galt.


'Cause...galt didn't say anything about 8' WW boats, he was giving an
eyeball estimate of a boat in a picture.

Actually, he did. The "8 feet or so" question combined with "tiny ww
boats" implies that 8' is short in the context of ww boats.

It does nothing of the kind. It can as easily be interpreted to mean
"I'm surprised you have a boat as long as 8'. Given your sunject line, I
was expecting something much shorter, like one of those tiny WW boats."


And his reaction was very
reasonable, I thought. You can't always go by the number on the side of
boats. Ever seen a QCC 700?

Yes, but I'm not sure how long it is. I know of quite a few touring boats
with 16, 17, or 18 in the model name but are often a few inches shorter. I
don't know of any that are two feet shorter.

What!? You, maintainer of a database of every kayak know to Man
(Person?), demo paddler of hundreds of boats, and you don't know the
specs of all those boats by heart? I'm shocked. Shocked!

Anyhow, my point was that a QCC 700 is not 700 anything long, the 700 is
a model number.

Steve

--
Steve Cramer
Athens, GA

*--No, I didn't call anybody a pinhead.

Steve Cramer wrote in
:

OK, I think this is getting perilously close to one of those
Angels-dance-pinhead* things, but what the hell, dinner isn't ready
yet...

Okay, last post on the matter from me.


John Fereira wrote:
Steve Cramer wrote in
:

John Fereira wrote:
wrote in news:1152736173.691216.253060@
75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

novice wrote:
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/3366/00009069xl.jpg
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/865/00009032yh.jpg
What is that, 8 feet or so? I figured you would have one of those
tiny ww boats.
In the context of whitewater boats, 8' is very long. If you look at
the first photo it the label on the hull reads "Pursuit 10" so it's
likely 10' long. In any case, this is rec.boats.paddle, not
rec.boats.paddle.only.boats.longer.than.16feet.all owed John, did
you have any particular motivation for that last comment?

It was in response to this statement.

I figured you would have one of those tiny ww boats.

Putting the emphasis on "you" rather than "figured" makes it sound to
me that he was disparaging novice (whose choice of handle almost
invites elitism) for his choice of kayak, and "tiny ww boats" could
have been written without the "tiny" qualifier.

And who placed that emphasis?

I did. When I write something on Usenet I'll often put *'s around a word I
want to emphasis to assist the readers in determining my meaning. It could
of helped here.

And when has anyone in r.b.p been
disparaged for paddling a WW boat of any size? Sorry, you couldn't
insult by saying I paddle a WW boat no matter how long it was.

If he would have written:

"I figured that it was a www boat", I wouldn't have responed. In any
case, novice seemed have read the same thing I did in the response
given his reaction.

www boat? I guess that's an occupational hazard for a network honcho
like you

Or it could be the beer I was drinking (Duvel).


Alas, it appears that it was basically a case of unclear phrasing
rather than an intential disparaging. I apologize to galt.


'Cause...galt didn't say anything about 8' WW boats, he was giving an
eyeball estimate of a boat in a picture.

Actually, he did. The "8 feet or so" question combined with "tiny ww
boats" implies that 8' is short in the context of ww boats.

It does nothing of the kind. It can as easily be interpreted to mean
"I'm surprised you have a boat as long as 8'. Given your sunject line,
I was expecting something much shorter, like one of those tiny WW
boats."

I guess we can agree then, that he post as written was open to
interpretation. I interpreted based on the context of some novices previous
posts and some of the responses (looking for a racing boat, ended up with a
10' long boat).


And his reaction was very
reasonable, I thought. You can't always go by the number on the side
of boats. Ever seen a QCC 700?

Yes, but I'm not sure how long it is. I know of quite a few touring
boats with 16, 17, or 18 in the model name but are often a few inches
shorter. I don't know of any that are two feet shorter.

What!? You, maintainer of a database of every kayak know to Man
(Person?),

To be fair, I haven't updated that datebase in several years. I have used
it as a reference application to play with some new technologies that I
might use for my real work, but my real work (and my 3 year old) have taken
priority.

demo paddler of hundreds of boats,

I haven't updated my list in a long time but I think it's more like 130
boats.

and you don't know the
specs of all those boats by heart? I'm shocked. Shocked!

We'll, no, but I could probably identify a QCC boat sitting on a roofrack
from a block away.

Anyhow, my point was that a QCC 700 is not 700 anything long, the 700
is a model number.

I see your point. The 500X is actually 2 inches longer than the 600X (okay,
I cheated and looked at the web site).

John Fereira wrote:
Steve Cramer wrote in
:

John Fereira wrote:
wrote in news:1152736173.691216.253060@
75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

novice wrote:
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/3366/00009069xl.jpg
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/865/00009032yh.jpg
What is that, 8 feet or so? I figured you would have one of those
tiny ww boats.

In the context of whitewater boats, 8' is very long. If you look at
the first photo it the label on the hull reads "Pursuit 10" so it's
likely 10' long. In any case, this is rec.boats.paddle, not
rec.boats.paddle.only.boats.longer.than.16feet.all owed

John, did you have any particular motivation for that last comment?

It was in response to this statement.

I figured you would have one of those tiny ww
boats.

Putting the emphasis on "you" rather than "figured" makes it sound to me
that he was disparaging novice (whose choice of handle almost invites
elitism) for his choice of kayak, and "tiny ww boats" could have been
written without the "tiny" qualifier.

If he would have written:

"I figured that it was a www boat", I wouldn't have responed. In any case,
novice seemed have read the same thing I did in the response given his
reaction.

Alas, it appears that it was basically a case of unclear phrasing rather
than an intential disparaging. I apologize to galt.


'Cause...galt didn't say anything about 8' WW boats, he was giving an
eyeball estimate of a boat in a picture.

Actually, he did. The "8 feet or so" question combined with "tiny ww
boats" implies that 8' is short in the context of ww boats.


Not in my reading of Galt's initial response, John. My paraphrase of
his remark, as I understood his meaning, is this: "wow, that thing is
at least 8' long! From your subject line, I expected to see one of
those tiny whitewater boats!"

I was as surprised as Steve and Galt when I saw how both you and
"novice" (who is clearly a novice when it comes to polite discourse)
responded.


-Richard, His Kanubic Travesty
--

================================================== ====================
Richard Hopley Winston-Salem, NC, USA
rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net
Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll
rhopley[at]wfubmc[dot]edu
OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters
================================================== ====================

Die! DIE! SIr, I demand an apology!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oci-One Kanubi wrote:
John Fereira wrote:
Steve Cramer wrote in
:

John Fereira wrote:
wrote in news:1152736173.691216.253060@
75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

novice wrote:
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/3366/00009069xl.jpg
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/865/00009032yh.jpg
What is that, 8 feet or so? I figured you would have one of those
tiny ww boats.

In the context of whitewater boats, 8' is very long. If you look at
the first photo it the label on the hull reads "Pursuit 10" so it's
likely 10' long. In any case, this is rec.boats.paddle, not
rec.boats.paddle.only.boats.longer.than.16feet.all owed

John, did you have any particular motivation for that last comment?

It was in response to this statement.

I figured you would have one of those tiny ww
boats.

Putting the emphasis on "you" rather than "figured" makes it sound to me
that he was disparaging novice (whose choice of handle almost invites
elitism) for his choice of kayak, and "tiny ww boats" could have been
written without the "tiny" qualifier.

If he would have written:

"I figured that it was a www boat", I wouldn't have responed. In any case,
novice seemed have read the same thing I did in the response given his
reaction.

Alas, it appears that it was basically a case of unclear phrasing rather
than an intential disparaging. I apologize to galt.


'Cause...galt didn't say anything about 8' WW boats, he was giving an
eyeball estimate of a boat in a picture.

Actually, he did. The "8 feet or so" question combined with "tiny ww
boats" implies that 8' is short in the context of ww boats.


Not in my reading of Galt's initial response, John. My paraphrase of
his remark, as I understood his meaning, is this: "wow, that thing is
at least 8' long! From your subject line, I expected to see one of
those tiny whitewater boats!"

I was as surprised as Steve and Galt when I saw how both you and
"novice" (who is clearly a novice when it comes to polite discourse)
responded.


-Richard, His Kanubic Travesty
--

================================================== ====================
Richard Hopley Winston-Salem, NC, USA
rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net
Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll
rhopley[at]wfubmc[dot]edu
OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters
================================================== ====================