|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|12-20-2007 10:07 AM|
Considering that 20/20 vision is considered perfect... complaining that you have 20/25 and 20/30 vision without glasses is kind of stupid and pointless. Most people who require glasses try to correct their vision to 20/40, which is generally considered the legal minimum required to drive. BTW, 20/30 vision would probably make you slightly near sighted.. and have vision that is almost optimized for the distance a computer screen would normally be at.
|12-20-2007 09:59 AM|
Or, and here's a good one, sure to create quite a thread: The U.S. Congress has just passed a new law, stiffening firearms purchase background checks requirements in order to try to prevent nutjobs like the guy at Virginia Tech from getting firearms. It's on President Bush's desk for his signature right now. Since my work is stressful, which could result in me seeking psychological counseling at any time, this law could potentially impact my ability to obtain firearms with which to protect out boat, my family and myself in our future cruising activities. (Dunno if there are any pirates on the Great Lakes, but you can never be too careful, I always say.)
I'm sure if I worked at it a bit, I could come up with no end of "sailing related" topics like those.
(Right now I'm trying to figure out some way of tying Stephan Grant's murder trial to sailing. With enough time, I'm sure I'll get it. [This is fun. Kind of like playing "six degrees of separation from Kevin Bacon."])
Merry Christmas, flicker.
|12-19-2007 05:42 PM|
camaraderie: Thanks for your kindly advice.
SEMIJim: Thank you but you're a bit late, another poster kindly helped me find the New Thread icon. (It was not prominent.)
And as to your remark, 'simply including the words "cruising," "liquid" and "sail" in a post doesn't magically make the subject on-topic for a sub-forum that clearly states "sailing related"', are you joking?
The subject of financing one's cruising is dealt with in chapters and whole books by such noted sailing writers as the Pardeys, the Dashews, Don Street, Annie Hill and even Claire Allcard. It is the specifics that are too individualized to put in a book and that is why I'm asking for real-time advice.
So instead of using your cruising knowledge to help me reach my cruising goal by answering my question, you chose to nit-pick and get snarky over whether my question was "sailing-related". Okay, so you're a moderator here (right?) and you are making the decisions that a moderator makes. And my question is not pertinent to General Interest. So are you telling me now that these questions are not appropriate for the Sailnet site? If they're not, why not? If they are, where would you like me to post them?
sailingdog: The format changed long before you became a member; the pages are more cluttered now, less intuitive for an old guy like me and it's harder to use this site. And I have 20/25 and 20/30 vision without glasses on a bad day.
It is just this pompousness that turns me off to this site. And I don't think the agrument that it takes longer to read the posts holds (forgive me for being unnautical) water: my little posts don't seem to have slowed down sailing dog who finds tme to write, in a less than 2 years, over sixteen thousand posts at a rate of over 25 per day; most of which contain the same drivel as his last posts: even I know that there are no "perhaps slightly different" self-steerers within a brand and they don't differentiate between specific hull forms. They go, essentially, by boat tonnage and length. I just wanted to know from personal experience which brands were better. But I sure don't want to slow you down, sailingdog.
Sheesh. I went a year without using this board; I can go another ten.
|12-19-2007 12:30 PM|
Flicker...the only rules here are the ones posted as sticky's. Nevertheless, since many of us access the forum using the "read new" function...when you post on a dead thread, we end up wasting time on old posts trying to get the context for your new post...without realizing the thread is old. If everyone did this, a lot of time would be wasted and frustration ensues...along with harsh words to the offender.
There are appropriate times to ressurect an old thread and it is helpful to the rest of us if one starts such a reply with..."I realize this is a dead thread but....". That clues us in that we don't need to read what came before.
Most often however...it is best to go back to the subforum main page and just start a new thread.
|12-19-2007 10:32 AM|
I was just trying to head this off early... BTW, it isn't my rule... it's pretty generally accepted among most internet forums. I'd also recommend you read the other "sticky" threads on what is acceptable and not acceptable, like the one on special interests.
As I said in the WindVane thread.. you will often get better results posting your own thread since the thread topic won't be misleading. The type of wind vane that works on a Bendytoy 38 isn't necessarily the best or proper type for a much heavier displacement boat like yours.
Also, if you were having trouble finding the "New Topic" button, you might want to go see an optometrist or opthamologist...since your eyesight is definitely questionable. This is especially strange since the OP of this thread is over three years old...and you didn't have trouble starting topics back then... Hmm...
Given that you've been a user of this forum for at least three years, I find your excuses fairly questionable...
|12-19-2007 09:47 AM|
prominently located at the left top and bottom of each sub-forum topic list page?
|12-19-2007 02:36 AM|
Boy, you are tough, sailingdog And you don't miss a trick. Yes, I revived two old threads; one seemed to apply directly to my question about suitable windvane self-steerers for 38-foot sailboats, and I couldn't find the "start new thread" icon, as I said in my post on the other thread just a few minutes ago; the other was my own thread from a while ago. I know of a couple of US cruisers who were hit hard by stock dips in the past and I am still looking for the safest place to put my liquid assets so that I can sail as undisturbed as possible by market and dollar fluctuations.
Frankly, since you all seem so dogmatic about old threads, what is it that bothers you about it? It seems a little bizarre to me, but maybe that's the way things are going. I'll certainly comply with your rules, etiquette and otherwise, but maybe you could tell me how you come up with your rules so I can anticipate them and avoid being offensive in the future.
|12-18-2007 09:21 PM|
I actually do some work with FX trading. It's a pretty ridiculous way to invest. It's mostly done as a hedging strategy when you're purchasing foreign stocks. Anybody willing to exchange small amounts with you is going to give you a lousy exchange rate. Unless you've got some predictive powers that actual experts in the field don't have, you're probably going to end up losing money.
Personally I'd put money into a solid shortish-term bond (short term because the interest rates are so low right now, you'll want to cash out and put money into a higher interest rate in the future - just a wild guess that interest rates will eventually increase for some reason), if you want a safer investment than stocks. Not a bond fund, an actual bond, there's a big difference.
But I'm not an investment advisor so do what you please, I'm just some shmoe on the Internet, among many.
|12-18-2007 06:17 PM|
|GulfCoastSkimmer||I am going to wait a year, then post why i think he did it|
|12-18-2007 01:16 PM|
Umm, any reason you keep reviving dead threads for no real good reason? Please check the dates of the posts before you revive a thread that's been dead for over three years.
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|