Anchor Wars - In Search of the Lost Truth.

[Minnewaska]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

It doesn't. But if Grant's comment about bribing RINA officials is accurate (e.g. - they accepted the money under the pretenses of providing certification), it certainly seems to implicate RINA.

Gotcha. When you said "no one" was clean, it seemed to implicate CMP too. Based on what I read in your link, it wasn't full clear that RINA actually accepted a bribe either. I think we should be careful fanning flames. However, the Rocna/China problem is certainly on fire.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by Minnewaska

Gotcha. When you said "no one" was clean, it seemed to implicate CMP too. Based on what I read in your link, it wasn't full clear that RINA actually accepted a bribe either. I think we should be careful fanning flames. However, the Rocna/China problem is certainly on fire.

Here's the statement:

He claimed in his evidence that this money was for me to make cash payments to Rina for expenses incurred in obtaining certification.

The facts , backed up by emails and other written informations, are that he instructed me to bribe certain officals at Rina and at another manufacturing facility with this cash amount in order to gain certification. Upon my return to NZ he praised me for a job well done and announced to the world that certification had been obtained.

Agreed that nothing is definitive - and it needs clarification (which I've asked Grant for). But if you take what he's written as it reads, along with the court finding, that $5K that was meant as bribe money for RINA officials and another manufacturing facility went somewhere - and that somewhere pleased his boss.

Hopefully Grant will clear this up.

[CapitainMike]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Is this standard practice in the industry? In other words, do other manufacturers do the same for these tests?

As maine said above, it seems to me that the testing authority is the one that needs to insist on the terms. Otherwise, what's wrong with doing what you can to make sure the results are as good as they can be? If it's not against the rules, it's not against the rules.

This by manufacturers is a lie etc by omission.

On buying an anchor you cannot specify "Tuned" or "Un-tuned" Therefore I consider that all test carried out with a tuned I.E. above standard item to be an act of Duplicity. and appropriate legal action should be taken

Definition of DUPLICITY
1 : contradictory doubleness of thought, speech, or action; especially : the belying of one's true intentions by deceptive words or action

2 : the quality or state of being double or twofold

3 : the technically incorrect use of two or more distinct items (as claims, charges, or defenses) in a single legal action

Related to DUPLICITY formal : dishonest behavior that is meant to trick someone

Synonyms: artifice, cheating, cozenage, craft, craftiness, crookedness, crookery, cunning, cunningness, deceitfulness, deception, deceptiveness, dishonesty, dissembling, dissimulation, double-dealing, dupery, deceit, fakery, foxiness, fraud, guile, guilefulness, wiliness

The Jaguar cars models XK 120. 140. and 150. were powered by standard engines built with standard parts but the parts had been "tuned" to each other. Advertising informed of this and the opportunity to purchase a "better performance model" was offered to all.

To lie by omission is to remain silent and thereby withhold from someone else a vital piece (or pieces) of information. The silence is deceptive in that it gives a false impression to the person from whom the information was withheld. It subverts the truth; it is a way to manipulate someone into altering their behavior to suit the desire of the person who intentionally withheld the vital information; and, most importantly, it's a gross violation of another person's right of self-determination.

The Biggest Lie About Lies -- A Lie of Omission Is Not a Lie!
A lie of omission is the most insidious, most pervasive, and most common lie on the entire planet. Commonly, those who use this type of lie, have conned themselves into believing that to intentionally remain silent when ethical behavior calls for one to speak up is not a lie at all. In spite of overwhelming evidence that their silence deceives, misleads, and often causes untold grief and misery, they refuse to speak the truth.

The Inevitable Consequences: There is also the common misconception that intentional deception by silence has no consequences. Lies of commission (telling a lie) and lies of omission (withholding the truth) are both acts of intention deception. Both reap the same consequences.


intentional deception to obtain a pecuniary advantage
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deception_(criminal_law)

[hmurmur]

We are newbies to anchoring, tho we have been daysailing and overnighting (on moorings/docks) for several years.
My Chartplotter has an anchor alarm, but it drains the batteries quickly. does anyone have a suggestion for an inexpensive backup, like a handheld gps with anchor alarm?
Thoughts?

[Minnewaska]

Originally Posted by hmurmur

We are newbies to anchoring, tho we have been daysailing and overnighting (on moorings/docks) for several years.
My Chartplotter has an anchor alarm, but it drains the batteries quickly. does anyone have a suggestion for an inexpensive backup, like a handheld gps with anchor alarm?
Thoughts?

Inexpensive is relative. I use Anchor Watch ($2) on my IPad. It will email me when I'm ashore! Which I can get on a smart phone, with an alarm if the anchor drags. Run in the background and shut monitor off and the battery will last all day.