Heh-heh. You don't have to be nice, Stink. But everything I listed in that post is fact. I don't know how else to put it.
Actually SD, maybe you should reconsider (among other things) the value in being "nice".
Facts huh . . .. Sounds more like crap to me.
The biggest problem I have is that you don't know a damn thing about what you are talking about. You have not participated in a rally and you have not undertaken an offshore passage. The stream of people who do know *a lot* about these things you simply ignore (or worse you glom onto them as "differing opinions" who you disingenuously claim to be your counterparts).
Your "statistics" are not even stated as percentages let alone baseline tested. You are just making stuff up.
Your claim that the standard to participate should be higher is "grounded" in an idiotic premise that participants a) will not go offshore without a rally and b) can be judged by some objective standard (which you haven't articulated).
You go back and forth between claiming that there is some nefarious hidden profit motive and then arguing the opposite -- claiming that the "real problem" is that the rally is free.
You have no basis to assert that the standards you claim are lacking have *anything* to do with the troubles some participants encountered -- in fact everything we know suggests otherwise.
There is no shortage of dumb sheet on the sailing forums and it is mostly irrelevant or entertaining. The only reason your posts piss me off is that there might just be someone somewhere who actually has some authority who reads you crap and acts upon it. And you have neither sailed offshore nor participated in a rally and you are making all of these assertions about rally participants -- which almost all of the rally participants (and not inconsequentially -- although you seem to miss this -- other offshore sailors)
Despite all that, you just remain belligerent. That is a shame. You lack the qualifications and the facts to advocate for restricting other people's choices regarding rallies -- particularly over their objections. You also seem to lack the judgement necessary to present the sort of nuanced overview this issue requires. Maybe if you look for something other than being "right" you'll have more value.