Public service announcement

[alsadad]

I “discovered” the forum 2 years ago and have found it a very useful source of information about the lake and the issues and events affecting it. This spring I began perusing the forum to prepare for the boating season and I was struck by the passion brought by the forum contributors to the speed limit issue. I spent several evenings trying to get up to speed (no pun intended) on the various positions. In the end I could only conclude that I’d lost several hours of my life that I will never get back. As a public service to others who, like me, may be trying to assimilate all of these arguments all at once, I decided I would summarize the arguments presented:

Argument #1:
Proponents: Speed limits will make the lake safer.
Opponents: no they won’t.
P: yes they will
O: no they won’t.
P: yes they will
O: no they won’t
…

#2. O: Speed limits are a thinly veiled attempt to target a particular type of boat that some people find objectionable.
P: no they aren’t.
O: yes they are.
P: no they aren’t.
O: yes they are.
BI: no they aren’t.
BI: yes they are.

#3. Which of the following doesn’t belong: granola, democrats, commercial drivers licenses?
P: Huh?
O: Huh?

#4. The MP speed study was structurally flawed and its results are invalid, but Evenstar’s personal observations and “off the chart” spatial relations skills prove that speeding boats cause discomfort to kayakers every day.
Some Ps: right on!
Other Ps: yes to the first part, but I want nothing to do with Evenstar.
O: not only was the study perfect in every respect, but kayakers kill loons!

#5. P: Speed limits will reduce shore erosion.
O: Speed limits will increase shore erosion.
P: you’re wrong.
O: no, you’re wrong.
P: no, you’re wrong
(well, you get the idea)

#6. I have these incredible photos that will clear everything up.
P: what is he talking about?
O: I have no idea.

#7. Speed limits are nothing more than a blatant attempt by those nanny state liberals to interfere with my inalienable rights, even when exercising those rights is dangerous, reckless and inconsiderate. Live free or die!
P: oh brother.
Some Os: oh brother.

#8. BI: “The few that own these expensive, highly polluting, global warming, gas hogs, fly around the lake at speeds up to 130 mph scaring the living hell out of family boaters. They have no concept of how many small boaters, including children's campers, they are keeping off of the water.”
O: There are boats going 130 mph on the lake?
BI: I never said that.

#9. The Yankees suck.
P: yes.
O: yes.

#10. pm203: “As the owner of a boat that will do well over 90 mph, this proposed law will do nothing to change the way I boat one bit. The majority of the time, I cruise around 45 mph . Other times, when conditions permit, I might go for a short, high speed run, whether it's 60,70 or more. Law or no law, you cannot stop the speeding and noise any more than you can on route 93. I will continue to boat as I always have. And, from what I have been told, even if I get issued a ticket, which is VERY unlikely, it can be fought and won. I have muffled my boat to comply to noise regulations and do observe all current boating laws. Unfortunately, I will not respect or comply with a speed limit on this lake. Good luck trying to enforce it.”

P: this is precisely the type of attitude we believe that speed limits will eradicate from the lake.
Some Os: right on, brother.
Other Os: this is precisely the type of attitude that created this mess in the first place. Knock if off!

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by alsadad

I “discovered” the forum 2 years ago .... As a public service to others who, like me, may be trying to assimilate all of these arguments all at once, I decided I would summarize the arguments presented:
Argument #1:
Proponents: Speed limits will make the lake safer.
Opponents: no they won’t.
P: yes they will
O: no they won’t.
P: yes they will
O: no they won’t
#2. O: Speed limits are a thinly veiled attempt to target a particular type of boat that some people find objectionable.
P: no they aren’t.
O: yes they are.
P: no they aren’t.
O: yes they are.
BI: no they aren’t.
BI: yes they are.
#3. Which of the following doesn’t belong: granola, democrats, commercial drivers licenses?
P: Huh?
O: Huh?
#4. The MP speed study was structurally flawed and its results are invalid, but Evenstar’s personal observations and “off the chart” spatial relations skills prove that speeding boats cause discomfort to kayakers every day.
Some Ps: right on!
Other Ps: yes to the first part, but I want nothing to do with Evenstar.
O: not only was the study perfect in every respect, but kayakers kill loons!
#5. P: Speed limits will reduce shore erosion.
O: Speed limits will increase shore erosion.
P: you’re wrong.
O: no, you’re wrong.
P: no, you’re wrong
(well, you get the idea)
#6. I have these incredible photos that will clear everything up.
P: what is he talking about?
O: I have no idea.
#7. Speed limits are nothing more than a blatant attempt by those nanny state liberals to interfere with my inalienable rights, even when exercising those rights is dangerous, reckless and inconsiderate. Live free or die!
P: oh brother.
Some Os: oh brother.
#8. BI: “The few that own these expensive, highly polluting, global warming, gas hogs, fly around the lake at speeds up to 130 mph scaring the living hell out of family boaters. They have no concept of how many small boaters, including children's campers, they are keeping off of the water.”
O: There are boats going 130 mph on the lake?
BI: I never said that.
#9. The Yankees suck.
P: yes.
O: yes.
#10. pm203: “As the owner of a boat that will do well over 90 mph, this proposed law will do nothing to change the way I boat one bit. The majority of the time, I cruise around 45 mph . Other times, when conditions permit, I might go for a short, high speed run, whether it's 60,70 or more. Law or no law, you cannot stop the speeding and noise any more than you can on route 93. I will continue to boat as I always have. And, from what I have been told, even if I get issued a ticket, which is VERY unlikely, it can be fought and won. I have muffled my boat to comply to noise regulations and do observe all current boating laws. Unfortunately, I will not respect or comply with a speed limit on this lake. Good luck trying to enforce it.”
P: this is precisely the type of attitude we believe that speed limits will eradicate from the lake.
Some Os: right on, brother.
Other Os: this is precisely the type of attitude that created this mess in the first place. Knock if off!

A bit of levity in this otherwise intense debate. BRAVO! I can even see myself there in a few posts. I think that about sums it all up.

[Gilligan]

Originally Posted by alsadad

{snip} I was struck by the passion brought by the forum contributors to the speed limit issue. I spent several evenings trying to get up to speed (no pun intended) on the various positions. In the end I could only conclude that I’d lost several hours of my life that I will never get back. As a public service to others who, like me, may be trying to assimilate all of these arguments all at once, I decided I would summarize the arguments presented:

Thank you thank you thank you. Not easy to wade through all this. It's almost unBEARrable. I see almost 400 messages from just one person in the Speed limit section. He must get the last word.

Sorry you spent so much time to get down to the basics. You did forget the part about those opposed to 45/25 limits must be in favor of unlimited speeds. No they are against this proposed limit. Then they want unlimited speed. No they don't. So 300 mph is reasonable. and on and on.

And the debate that laws about reasonable speeds exist. Oh no they don't. Oh yes they do, here they are. OK then show me a law called "Reasonable Speed Law".

alsadad - your message was absolutely fantastic. Welcome to posting on the forum. You did well for your first post. I look forward to more.



See you on the lake.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by alsadad

I “discovered” the forum 2 years ago and have found it a very useful source of information about the lake and the issues and events affecting it. This spring I began perusing the forum to prepare for the boating season and I was struck by the passion brought by the forum contributors to the speed limit issue. I spent several evenings trying to get up to speed (no pun intended) on the various positions. In the end I could only conclude that I’d lost several hours of my life that I will never get back. As a public service to others who, like me, may be trying to assimilate all of these arguments all at once, I decided I would summarize the arguments presented:

Argument #1:
Proponents: Speed limits will make the lake safer.
Opponents: no they won’t.
P: yes they will
O: no they won’t.
P: yes they will
O: no they won’t
…

#2. O: Speed limits are a thinly veiled attempt to target a particular type of boat that some people find objectionable.
P: no they aren’t.
O: yes they are.
P: no they aren’t.
O: yes they are.
BI: no they aren’t.
BI: yes they are.

#3. Which of the following doesn’t belong: granola, democrats, commercial drivers licenses?
P: Huh?
O: Huh?

#4. The MP speed study was structurally flawed and its results are invalid, but Evenstar’s personal observations and “off the chart” spatial relations skills prove that speeding boats cause discomfort to kayakers every day.
Some Ps: right on!
Other Ps: yes to the first part, but I want nothing to do with Evenstar.
O: not only was the study perfect in every respect, but kayakers kill loons!

#5. P: Speed limits will reduce shore erosion.
O: Speed limits will increase shore erosion.
P: you’re wrong.
O: no, you’re wrong.
P: no, you’re wrong
(well, you get the idea)

#6. I have these incredible photos that will clear everything up.
P: what is he talking about?
O: I have no idea.

#7. Speed limits are nothing more than a blatant attempt by those nanny state liberals to interfere with my inalienable rights, even when exercising those rights is dangerous, reckless and inconsiderate. Live free or die!
P: oh brother.
Some Os: oh brother.

#8. BI: “The few that own these expensive, highly polluting, global warming, gas hogs, fly around the lake at speeds up to 130 mph scaring the living hell out of family boaters. They have no concept of how many small boaters, including children's campers, they are keeping off of the water.”
O: There are boats going 130 mph on the lake?
BI: I never said that.

#9. The Yankees suck.
P: yes.
O: yes.

#10. pm203: “As the owner of a boat that will do well over 90 mph, this proposed law will do nothing to change the way I boat one bit. The majority of the time, I cruise around 45 mph . Other times, when conditions permit, I might go for a short, high speed run, whether it's 60,70 or more. Law or no law, you cannot stop the speeding and noise any more than you can on route 93. I will continue to boat as I always have. And, from what I have been told, even if I get issued a ticket, which is VERY unlikely, it can be fought and won. I have muffled my boat to comply to noise regulations and do observe all current boating laws. Unfortunately, I will not respect or comply with a speed limit on this lake. Good luck trying to enforce it.”

P: this is precisely the type of attitude we believe that speed limits will eradicate from the lake.
Some Os: right on, brother.
Other Os: this is precisely the type of attitude that created this mess in the first place. Knock if off!

Sorry, you are wrong about one thing.

Saying up to 130 mph is not the same thing as saying 130 mph. I did say "up to 130 mph" but I never said "going 130 mph". There IS a boat on the lake that can go 130 mph, but that is NOT the same thing as saying said boat ever went or even attempted to went 130 mph. Just because a boat can go 130 mph doesn't necessarily mean it "went 130 mph". When you claimed I made that accusation you were linking things that are from two very different threads. How many camp directors have ever gone 130 mph?

I NEVER said 130 mph!

[Airwaves]

HA HA HA HA HA HA

alsdad that was a great post!

I got the best laugh in a long time, and like hazelnut (and apparently Bear Islander) I recognized some of my own "contributions" LOL LOL LOL LOL

GREAT post!

[parrothead]

Thank you I needed a good laugh!!!

[ITD]

Alsadad, I think you nailed it, good job.

[GusMan]

Am I the only one who fails to see the humor in this post?

Perhaps it's just me... because it reminds me of one of the "happiest" days of my life... the day I sold my vacation lake house.

No, it wasn't on Winnie, but certainly within a stone's throw. And it wasn't about speed limits... or go fast boats... or kayaks... or jetskiers.... or fishermen... or landowners ... or environmentalists... it was about the common flaw that *CAN* show up in all of those groups...

Intolerance.

When I owned my lake house.... I was actually approached (and borderline harassed) by a neighbor who abutted my lake front property. Their complaint? They could see my 21 foot bowrider... legally moored in front of my property... from their deck.... and it was blocking their views. That was one of many issues I had to deal with lakeside "neighbors".

I really believe that Winnipesaukee is unique in New Hampshire.. and in the company of only a few other lakes in New England... that can support all of these types of boats and activities.... SAFELY.

We don't need lake-wide speed limits, horsepower limits, construction bans, more rules... etc.... etc...

We need common sense and tolerance...... unfortunately they're all too rare in this day and age.

Sorry to ramble on....

Gusman

[Cal]

Your right!!! It has become the "About Me" world.
My Dad live in a retirement community in Fl and it was the same way.People had nothing to do but complain and about the STUPIDEST stuff.
Such ashame some people have nothing better to do but make people around the miserable too

[Gatto Nero]

Originally Posted by GusMan

When I owned my lake house.... I was actually approached (and borderline harassed) by a neighbor who abutted my lake front property. Their complaint? They could see my 21 foot bowrider... legally moored in front of my property... from their deck.... and it was blocking their views. That was one of many issues I had to deal with lakeside "neighbors".

Are you sure it wasn't on Winni, cause otherwise it sounds like I might have bought your house.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Sorry, you are wrong about one thing.

Saying up to 130 mph is not the same thing as saying 130 mph. I did say "up to 130 mph" but I never said "going 130 mph". There IS a boat on the lake that can go 130 mph, but that is NOT the same thing as saying said boat ever went or even attempted to went 130 mph. Just because a boat can go 130 mph doesn't necessarily mean it "went 130 mph". When you claimed I made that accusation you were linking things that are from two very different threads. How many camp directors have ever gone 130 mph?

I NEVER said 130 mph!

The quote was " Originally Posted by Bear Islander View Post
The few that own these expensive, highly polluting, global warming, gas hogs, fly around the lake at speeds up to 130 mph scaring the living hell out of family boaters. They have no concept of how many small boaters, including children's campers, they are keeping off of the water."

You've highlighted the problems.

Speed Erosion Wakes Noise

You've also commented after all of that, the it isn't speed, erosion, wakes or noise.

Gets pretty confusing Bear Islander, even to the casual reader.

As for enforcement. I've been told that the MP is part time. Perhaps they don't have enough funds to do the job properly, that's probably true. How is a speed limit going to change all of that? How would the speed limit cut down on lake accidents, when the vast majority occur under those speeds?

It seems to me that enforcement remains the number one issue, as proponents have pointed out many times. Adding another law will only lead to the very same people having to spend more time coming up with excuses as to why the new law is not working. My guess is the answer, will still be enforcement.

If the State cannot provide the funds to enforce the existing laws, then the beef is with that, not anything else. This is like telling banks to remove their money from the building, and then they wouldn't be robbed so much.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

You've also commented after all of that, the it isn't speed, erosion, wakes or noise.

I never said that.

I never said anything like it

I never said anything that implied that

If you think I did, then you misread

Please don't put words in my mouth.

[mcdude]

Originally Posted by alsadad

I spent several evenings trying to get up to speed (no pun intended) on the various positions. In the end I could only conclude that I’d lost several hours of my life that I will never get back.

thanks alsadad. I'm glad I didn't waste my time reading any of it.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I never said that.

I never said anything like it

I never said anything that implied that

If you think I did, then you misread

Please don't put words in my mouth.

No he probably misremembered that. Bear Islander I think the general point is that you double and triple speak and post SO much that it is often difficult to understand where you are coming from. I'm sure you believe in your motives and that is fine. I just can't appreciate the "It's all we have on the table so lets support it" attitude. This lake deserves better. Efforts for real safety measures should be the focus. An arbitrary speed limit is not going to work.

[SIKSUKR]

Funny post alsadad and I'm included in this back and forth bickering.I knew it wouldn't take long for this thread to go the route of the others.

[chmeeee]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I never said that.

I never said anything like it

I never said anything that implied that

If you think I did, then you misread

Please don't put words in my mouth.

Two of the four:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Except that those are not the important issues.

Noise is not a prime concern, I would list it around number 8 or lower. Speeding through congested areas is not the issue. The Bear Island NWZ has been in place for about 15 years, with reasonable compliance.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by chmeeee

Two of the four:

0 out of 4

I didn't say it wasn't about noise, I said noise was number 8.

I posted that speeding through the Bear Island NWZ was not the problem. In what kind of mind is that the same as "speed" is not the problem?


You guys can't come up with valid arguments to counter mine so you make stuff up.

VtSteve thinks he knows all about the current situation of the lake. However he has not boated on Winnipesaukee in over ten years.

[chmeeee]

You said that speeding in congested areas was not the issue, not the Bear Island NWZ specifically. I would say that if you're going to worry about speed, congested areas are the only places that matter. Places like Paugus Bay, Meredith Bay, Eagle Island, the area between Meredith Neck and Bear Island.

You contradict yourself fairly frequently, but when called out on it, you always claim to have meant something more specific than what you actually said.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by chmeeee

You said that speeding in congested areas was not the issue, not the Bear Island NWZ specifically. I would say that if you're going to worry about speed, congested areas are the only places that matter. Places like Paugus Bay, Meredith Bay, Eagle Island, the area between Meredith Neck and Bear Island.

You contradict yourself fairly frequently, but when called out on it, you always claim to have meant something more specific than what you actually said.

That is a lie!

I clearly and specifically said the "Bear Island NWZ".

Instead of saying that I contradict myself, you should go back and read what I actually said and the context it was said in. Not what other people CLAIM I said. Once again this is an idiotic argument that has no possible purpose except to throw mud on my opinions.

What kind of an idiot would think that speeding in a congested areas is not a problem! Clearly the only way it makes any kind of sense at all is if I am talking about IN a NWZ.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I never said that.

I never said anything like it

I never said anything that implied that

If you think I did, then you misread

Please don't put words in my mouth.

____________________________________


I try hard not to.

I'll just leave it at this. I agree, and understand fully, the many things going on over there now. Boating, and lake living, is certainly quite a bit different now than it was years ago.

I also agree with many of your points and issues, once you've finally made them. Some are very broad and relate to the overall atmosphere, others are to the point and relate to specific concerns.

I respect your rights to live free and safe on the lake, as I think the vast majority of boaters would agree. There are, as I've experienced first hand, enough a-holes on the water now that enforcement has to step up to the plate. Just as is the case with police on the roads, resources must be allocated to the water.

Screw the speed limits. You've mentioned in the past a HP limit would be far more to your liking, 300HP I think? Probably have to be modified upwards today, but whatever. I understand both your point and your targets and goals.

For me, the most dangerous people I've ever encountered on the lakes are

1) PWC's Need I say more about such a high percentage of a-holes in one segment.

2) The newbie (younger) totally inexperienced Yahoo types. They speed, they drink, they perform dangerous maneuvers for thrills.

3) Just plain drunks.

4) A-holes that don't care. They flaunt their boats and stomp on everyone's rights. Selfish, obnoxious, uncaring.

5) I have a quick temper with the typical NWZ violator. I don't like to putt along at 6mph anymore than anyone else does. They are there for a reason.

6) Multiple violations of the safe passage rule, 150' rule, should be treated harshly and severely. This is the MUST DO part of boating, anywhere. If you cannot prove yourself to be a safe and courteous boater, you should be banned from owning one. Yes, I am serious about that one.

_________________________________________

Let's not confine this to powercrafts.

1) I knew over 40 years ago that it was a stupid thing to cross the main lake in a canoe, row boat, or even a kayak.

2) Swimmers. We used to have a guy that would swim across the lake to Stonedam island, many times at dusk. We called him STUUUUUPID. A MP boat once stopped and had a fairly long conversation with him.

3) All people in small, unpowered boats should have a degree of common sense that I Assumed most had. As I see them at twilight in a main channel in the big lake, I've learned this is not the case.

[Bear Islander]

I agree

We can all agree that swimming to Stonedam is stupid. Unfortunately some people think that if he gets run over it's his own fault. He has every right to swim across the lake. A boater has an absolute responsibility to keep a look out. That includes looking out for swimmers, even in the middle of the broads.

There could be a perfectly innocent reason for a swimmer being in the water anywhere at anytime. It's the "get out of my way" attitude of some boaters that is the underlying problem.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

I agree

We can all agree that swimming to Stonedam is stupid. Unfortunately some people think that if he gets run over it's his own fault. He has every right to swim across the lake. A boater has an absolute responsibility to keep a look out. That includes looking out for swimmers, even in the middle of the broads.

There could be a perfectly innocent reason for a swimmer being in the water anywhere at anytime. It's the "get out of my way" attitude of some boaters that is the underlying problem.

AGREE! 100% It may be stupid to be out in the Broads swimming but as an operator of a vessel one needs to be aware of any and all objects live or inanimate in the water, for everyone's safety including those on board.

[VtSteve]

Originally Posted by hazelnut

AGREE! 100% It may be stupid to be out in the Broads swimming but as an operator of a vessel one needs to be aware of any and all objects live or inanimate in the water, for everyone's safety including those on board.

I'll agree 100%. Although it's certainly not my first choice for comment. It's even more important to pay attention nowadays, there are all kinds of stupid people out there, and not just on the lake either.


BTW, do the Burnhams and Hills still have camps over on Bear? Been many moons since I was over that a way

[Mashugana]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

You guys can't come up with valid arguments to counter mine so you make stuff up.

VtSteve thinks he knows all about the current situation of the lake. However he has not boated on Winnipesaukee in over ten years.

All those that do not swallow every word you say are making stuff up? Oy Vey. I don't think so.

You do not have to boat on Winnipesaukee to recognize contradictions, faulty logic, spinning, irrational statements and diversions in printed debate. On many issues you can base your decision on what has been written by supporters from all parties. More impartial in some cases.

It is peculiar that we have laws about boating responsibly but I don't see any for swimming responsibly.

Let us not ruin yet another thread by rehashing the same debates from other speed limit threads.

Way to go alsadad. I laughed heartily at your post and those that followed until I got to an, "I didn't say that" post.

[Wolfeboro_Baja]

alsadad, very amusing post!! A great read; I enjoyed it immensely!!

[kjbathe]

Originally Posted by SIKSUKR

Funny post alsadad and I'm included in this back and forth bickering.I knew it wouldn't take long for this thread to go the route of the others.

Amen. I just wish alsadad had posted this last week. I went through a similar multi-hour exercise of trying to really understand each side of the debate last week and also came up empty. Although this thread is starting to clear up why so many arrows are aimed at BI

Well done, alsadad. Perhaps this can be posted as a FAQ for newcomers to the speed limit debate?

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by VtSteve

I'll agree 100%. Although it's certainly not my first choice for comment. It's even more important to pay attention nowadays, there are all kinds of stupid people out there, and not just on the lake either.


BTW, do the Burnhams and Hills still have camps over on Bear? Been many moons since I was over that a way

Sure, behind Penny Island.

[EricP]

Great post thank you for the humurous perspective.

[alsadad]

Thanks to all who offered kind words about my first post. I must say I’m surprised at how quickly the thread degenerated into name calling, backpedaling, he said/she said, etc. Perhaps I shouldn’t have been surprised, but I was. Oh, the irony!

And can BI, or someone else for that matter, explain how I can be wrong (according to BI) when I copied and pasted his own words, including the “up to 130 mph” language, and then quoted him, correctly I thought, as denying he ever said that there were boats actually going 130 mph? And who said anything about camp directors going 130? Where did that come from?

[Gilligan]

Originally Posted by alsadad

Thanks to all who offered kind words about my first post. I must say I’m surprised at how quickly the thread degenerated into name calling, backpedaling, he said/she said, etc. Perhaps I shouldn’t have been surprised, but I was. Oh, the irony!

And can BI, or someone else for that matter, explain how I can be wrong (according to BI) when I copied and pasted his own words, including the “up to 130 mph” language, and then quoted him, correctly I thought, as denying he ever said that there were boats actually going 130 mph? And who said anything about camp directors going 130? Where did that come from?

It didn't take you long to fall victim to Bear Speak "reality" spin. Must be a communications malfunction . I'm surprised you didn't pick up on that tactic during your laborious hours of reading his flood of posts. Let us know if you get private mail from him calling you names or begging you to stop putting words in his mouth or some other sob story.

Thanks again alsadad. Post again.

[Rattlesnake Guy]

Tremendously funny.

It is really too bad that even a fun thread can't just be fun but has to turn into the exact thing you so brilliantly did a parody of in the first place. At first I thought he was kidding, then realized the sad reality.

I look forward to your next round of observations.
No we don't
Yes we do.....

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by alsadad

Thanks to all who offered kind words about my first post. I must say I’m surprised at how quickly the thread degenerated into name calling, backpedaling, he said/she said, etc. Perhaps I shouldn’t have been surprised, but I was. Oh, the irony!

And can BI, or someone else for that matter, explain how I can be wrong (according to BI) when I copied and pasted his own words, including the “up to 130 mph” language, and then quoted him, correctly I thought, as denying he ever said that there were boats actually going 130 mph? And who said anything about camp directors going 130? Where did that come from?

That was MY attempt at humor. I guess mine was to subtle however. because not everybody got it.

The thing behind it is there has been a boat on the lake that is capable of 130 mph. However, as people have pointed out, I have no way of knowing if it ever HAS gone 130 mph. That may seem like a fine point but we like to pick nits around here.

Anybody out there ever picked a nit? I have.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by Gilligan

It didn't take you long to fall victim to Bear Speak "reality" spin. Must be a communications malfunction . I'm surprised you didn't pick up on that tactic during your laborious hours of reading his flood of posts. Let us know if you get private mail from him calling you names or begging you to stop putting words in his mouth or some other sob story.

Thanks again alsadad. Post again.

Ok, That is way over the line.

I think you are gutless. You make snide comments and semi accusations. When I call you on it you send me PMs that say something else. Then you post that I am doing the very things you are doing.

Don't send any more PMs

[SteveA]

I have no dog in this fight.. I REALLY don't care which side wins the battle over speed limits. We pick and choose our times on the lake based on weather and general boat traffic. Speed limits, yes or no, won't change the way we use the lake.

but curious minds just had to know..

What exactly is "nit picking..." ?

http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-nit1.htm

abstract from the above web page:

"But what seems a little odd is that the figurative sense of nit-picking, of petty criticism or fault finding, is modern. The Oxford English Dictionary records it first only in 1951, in the form nit-picker, in this helpful explanation from Collier’s: “Two long-time Pentagon stand-bys are fly-speckers and nit-pickers. The first of these nouns refers to people whose sole occupation seems to be studying papers in the hope of finding flaws in the writing, rather than making any effort to improve the thought or meaning; nit-pickers are those who quarrel with trivialities of expression and meaning, but who usually end up without making concrete or justified suggestions for improvement”. The first of these two slang terms has died out, with the second taking on much of its meaning."

Disclaimer..
This post is meant to inform and amuse, any nasty replies will be ignored and laughed at.. I'm not trying to be a "fly-specker"

[ITD]

Wow, that's all I can say after reading some of these comments, wow.

Once again alsadad, you nailed it, unfortunately some don't seem to have a sense of humor. Sadly, I think this thread should be locked before it deteriorates any further. IMHO.....

[Gilligan]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

That was MY attempt at humor. I guess mine was to subtle however. because not everybody got it.

The thing behind it is there has been a boat on the lake that is capable of 130 mph. However, as people have pointed out, I have no way of knowing if it ever HAS gone 130 mph. That may seem like a fine point but we like to pick nits around here.

Anybody out there ever picked a nit? I have.

Your "attempt at humor"? I think the 130 mph statement has been mentioned and debated before but not as humor.

If it was a joke, I didn't get it. If you really were joking then thanks for trying to lighten it up around here.

Who here got BI's 130 mph joke?

[Gilligan]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

Ok, That is way over the line.

I think you are gutless. You make snide comments and semi accusations. When I call you on it you send me PMs that say something else. Then you post that I am doing the very things you are doing.

Don't send any more PMs

What incredible spin. If this is a joke no one else would get it unless they read your PMs to me.

You called me on "it" in a Private Message. You initiated the Private Message exchange. That consisted of 2 PMs by each of us. Yours first and mine last.

My 2nd and last PM to you May 6 at 6:16 AM: and the PM ended with my statement:

Originally Posted by Gilligan PM to Bear Islander - Subject = DONE

{snip} Should you wish to continue please take this to the public forum. Call me a liar in public if that is your belief. Let the readers or Webmaster decide for themselves if I have violated the rules or if I am a liar. I will not defend myself to you in private messages. I find your private message to be rude. I have not been called a liar since grade school.

yours truly,
Gilligan

I do not want to hijack this thread but I'll gladly post your original PM to me, my reply, your response and then my final PM to you in a different thread. Let the readers decide who is....uh, whatever you called me.

[alsadad]

Sorry about that, BI. Of all the people, I guess I should have picked up on that. Looking back, it appears that Airwaves, and perhaps others, did.

By the way, is there any truth to the rumor that the camp director's 130 mph jaunt was confirmed by a naked kayaker with a radar gun? At night? Are there pictures?

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

That was MY attempt at humor. I guess mine was to subtle however. because not everybody got it.

The thing behind it is there has been a boat on the lake that is capable of 130 mph. However, as people have pointed out, I have no way of knowing if it ever HAS gone 130 mph. That may seem like a fine point but we like to pick nits around here.

Anybody out there ever picked a nit? I have.

Future tip: Next time put this face So we get it. Now that you point it out Bravo on the humor, it reads well as a joke.

[Islander]

I got the joke right away. He was making fun of himself. Most people make fun of others!

Gilligan, posting private messages is against forum rules.

[B R]

Originally Posted by Islander

I got the joke right away. He was making fun of himself. Most people make fun of others!

Gilligan, posting private messages is against forum rules.

you are a hypocrite. On this thread on post # 69 you took a Private message from me (which was a reply to yours accusing me of trying to find out who you are) and posted it's contents. I forget; you only care about the rules when they don't apply to you.

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...ead.php?t=5030

[chipj29]

Originally Posted by Islander

I got the joke right away. He was making fun of himself. Most people make fun of others!

Gilligan, posting private messages is against forum rules.

I doubt that posting a message, private or otherwise, that he himself wrote, is violating any rules.

[Bear Islander]

Originally Posted by B R

you are a hypocrite. On this thread on post # 69 you took a Private message from me (which was a reply to yours accusing me of trying to find out who you are) and posted it's contents. I forget; you only care about the rules when they don't apply to you.

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...ead.php?t=5030

You are correct about number 69. Look back a few posts and see yourself doing the same thing.

[B R]

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

You are correct about number 69. Look back a few posts and see yourself doing the same thing.

not quite. first off, i am not the one sighting rules i have already broken. secondly, she accused me of doing something i was not doing. i did not appreciate her tone in the pm. i did not want to go through a pm exchange with her, so i communicated through the forum instead of a pm. i told her that her accusation was false; i NEVER copied from her PM and posted it on the site. it is not the same thing.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by B R

you are a hypocrite. On this thread on post # 69 you took a Private message from me (which was a reply to yours accusing me of trying to find out who you are) and posted it's contents. I forget; you only care about the rules when they don't apply to you.

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...ead.php?t=5030

Personally with post #69 and the behavior I've seen on this and other threads I am AMAZED at Don's patience with Islander and baffled that Islander is not moderated. Just my humble opinion though.

The original post in this thread was hilarious and I point back to how funny it is when summarized in such a concise manner. It guess it has turned into a playground argument. It will be great when the vote is finally heard. Then we can all argue over whether or not the Governor will sign it.

[alsadad]

So, HB847 is scheduled for a vote in the NH Senate on Thursday. Since I've tried my hand at summarizing something that has already happened, I thought, what the heck, I’ll try summarizing something that hasn't happened yet. As Phoenix says, it's tough to make predictions especially about the future, so I'll hedge my bets:

If HB 847 is enacted:Celebratory meeting at an undisclosed island location.
Attendee #1. Kindly pass the cracked pepper water crackers.
#2. Would you care for some brie with that?
#3. Hey, this Cheez-Whiz'll really perk that up for ya. $2.99 a case at Wal-Mart
#4. These canapés are exquisite.
#5. I wonder if this champagne would lose its effervescence in outer space.
#6. If I use my telephoto lens and take a picture that's slightly out of focus while hanging from the chandelier, that wine bottle and shrimp cocktail will look like an ocean racer running down a naked kayaker at full throttle in the Weirs Channel.
#7. Stop it. We won. You don’t need to do that stuff anymore.

Chairman: the meeting will now come to order. First, I'd like to congratulate all of you. Thanks to your hard work, those rubes in the NH Senate fell for it! Now, for our first order of business, all in favor of the motion to petition the NH Legislature for a law banning black flies say "Aye."

Chorus of "Aye."

#8. Sorry I'm late. I had to paddle all the way over from Squam. We've got to do something to keep those big, scary, fast cars off of 25B.
__________

If HB 847 does not pass:Celebratory meeting at an unnamed beach bar.
Attendee #1: Let's get that keg tapped
#2. These Cheese Doodles rock.
#3. Did you see those wimpy kids start crying when I swamped their canoe? What are they so afraid of?
#4. Yeah, I thought the camp director was gonna wet his pants. Way cool!
#5. I heard it's supposed to rain on our poker run this Saturday.
#6. Bummer, dude. All my buddies from Lake George, Sebago and Oregon are trailering their Cigarettes here for the weekend.
#7. Some guy in a beige boat told me that 35 was inappropriate for the Channel. I said, “You're right, pal. But if you fire up those blue lights and clear some of these boneheads out of my way, I could make some real good time.”

Chairman: the meeting will now come to order. First, I'd like to congratulate all of you. Thanks to your hard work, those rubes in the NH Senate fell for it! Now, for our first order of business, all in favor of the motion to petition the NH Legislature for a law banning black flies say "Aye."

Chorus of "Aye."

#8. Sorry I'm late. My NorTech needs a full head of steam to make the jump from Squam to Center Harbor but some elderly couple in an old wooden Chris Craft kept getting in the way.
__________

Well, at least everyone agrees about the black flies.

[hazelnut]

Originally Posted by alsadad

So, HB847 is scheduled for a vote in the NH Senate on Thursday. Since I've tried my hand at summarizing something that has already happened, I thought, what the heck, I’ll try summarizing something that hasn't happened yet. As Phoenix says, it's tough to make predictions especially about the future, so I'll hedge my bets:

Well, at least everyone agrees about the black flies.

SPOT ON! Pure genius.

[Islander]

Originally Posted by B R

you are a hypocrite. On this thread on post # 69 you took a Private message from me (which was a reply to yours accusing me of trying to find out who you are) and posted it's contents. I forget; you only care about the rules when they don't apply to you.

http://www.winnipesaukee.com/forums/...ad.Phip?t=5030

You are correct, except for the hypocrite part. I posted a PM from you. A while later it was pointed out to me that it was a violation of forum rules. That is why, when Gilligan said he was going to post a PM, I gave him that reminder. I should informed him in a PM to prevent the drama.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Islander

You are correct, except for the hypocrite part. I posted a PM from you. A while later it was pointed out to me that it was a violation of forum rules. That is why, when Gilligan said he was going to post a PM, I gave him that reminder. I should informed him in a PM to prevent the drama.

Give it a rest. If our Webmaster thought that either of you was in any serious violation on this, I am sure he would have taken action.

[Merrymeeting]

alsadad,

Thank you for your comic whit and the most intelligent writing seen among all the posts. I hope you continue to post even after this debate wanes.

Perhaps then your humor won't be lost almost immediately in the, "yes you did., no I didn't. yes you did! no I didn't! You did! I didn't!" noise.

[Gilligan]

Originally Posted by Islander

Gilligan, posting private messages is against forum rules.

Another one of those things that you say because it helps you and your friend BI. Me pointing out another misleading post by BI may hurt your cause but it is not against forum rules. Show me that rule Islander, Are you a self appointed forum policeman?

You speed limit proponents seem to have your own way to read rules. The forum rules forbid posting info, "...invasive of a person's privacy,..."

I sure CAN post letters sent to me. Particularly when it contradicts what Bear Islander is publicly trying to have you believe about me or proves his attempt to discredit me.

What is against the rules is posting something like this: Joe Forum Member lives ****.... That is an invasion of privacy, even if he sends it to me in PM it is private information. You, BI and a few others seem to debate by distracting from the issues that make you look bad.

Please show me the forum rule you believe I violated and prevents me from posting forum related mail I received. Or reply with spin.

[Mashugana]

alsadad, come back. You have not posted to this thread for over 2 weeks. We need your insight.

Any new predictions over the last 2 weeks? We need more intelligent posts from you.

Thank you and thanks to Webmaster.

Safe water use for everyone