In the Spirit of Compromise....

OCDACTIVE · 08-10-2009, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LIforrelaxin

Now this is progress.... not that I expected less OCD has always seemed to get the idea of comprimise....

Now OCD, I am definately with you 35 at night I think is more reasonable then 25 which as some have indicated.... makes getting home slow... Hey I blast across the broads at 30 at night myself....

And yep for certain unlimited in the Broads is the only way to go.....

Now I am just curious what made 55 pop out??

As I have often said my perference is to restrict speed in specific area's so I am curious to understand the comprimise to 55, with the broads unlimited.....other then I would imagine the % of boats that can get above 55 are limited....

I brought the 55 again in "the spirit of compromise". Living in the northern coves there are only a few spots that 55 mph is even possible (safely) Suissvale bay (for a short stint), Moultonboro Bay, and Melvin Bay. However I don't want to pretend to know what everyone else is experiencing. So I am trying to think what would be reasonable for me and for the Pro-SL crowd I thought 55mph would work... Hoping to show some of us are at least willing to sit down at the table...

VtSteve · 08-10-2009, 06:20 PM

I think the best part of the new law, like many others have stated, is the language itself. If one were to look solely at the data from the last 30 years, I doubt a speed limit would pop into (most people's) minds. You have the usual group that doesn't like the sound, blah blah. If We The People in the United States made laws based on people's personal likes and dislikes, the environment we live in today would be Nirvana by comparison.

Lots of discussions between rational people need to take place to even get an accurate gauge of the state of the lake itself. I feel it's way premature to be discussing speed limits and actual numbers when people can't seem to agree on what's right, and more importantly, what's wrong. There are a few people that have speed limit on the brain, and can't seem to discuss anything else. There have been legitimate gripes on both sides that need to be addressed. These issues cannot be discussed in civil fashion if trolls are being fed daily. There's been some bait laid lately, and many have picked up on it. You'll not be able to deal with whatever emotional hangups these folks have, so why bother?

The issues underlying the original law passed were supposedly safety. Since one side has proposed making these permanent because there won't be enough data, the alternative should be pretty obvious. People need to get together on this issue and try to ascertain the real environment on the water. There are many on this very thread that have stated their willingness to discuss specific areas, which I believe would have been part of the original law several years back if compromise had been agreed to then.

What's happening here now is a few vocal, and very proactive SL supporters have decided that it would be fun to irritate the people on board. If it gets bad enough, they surmise, Don will have to shut it down and the most visible forum will be silenced while they do their deeds behind the scenes. Similar to what they did last time. I prefer to let my opponents make total fools of themselves, it's far less stressful, and humorous.

Keep up the good work here people. Just ignore the people that are less than civil, and maybe you'll gain a much larger audience of supporters.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

08-10-2009, 06:20 PM	#2
VtSteve Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 1,320 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 230 Thanked 361 Times in 169 Posts	I think the best part of the new law, like many others have stated, is the language itself. If one were to look solely at the data from the last 30 years, I doubt a speed limit would pop into (most people's) minds. You have the usual group that doesn't like the sound, blah blah. If We The People in the United States made laws based on people's personal likes and dislikes, the environment we live in today would be Nirvana by comparison. Lots of discussions between rational people need to take place to even get an accurate gauge of the state of the lake itself. I feel it's way premature to be discussing speed limits and actual numbers when people can't seem to agree on what's right, and more importantly, what's wrong. There are a few people that have speed limit on the brain, and can't seem to discuss anything else. There have been legitimate gripes on both sides that need to be addressed. These issues cannot be discussed in civil fashion if trolls are being fed daily. There's been some bait laid lately, and many have picked up on it. You'll not be able to deal with whatever emotional hangups these folks have, so why bother? The issues underlying the original law passed were supposedly safety. Since one side has proposed making these permanent because there won't be enough data, the alternative should be pretty obvious. People need to get together on this issue and try to ascertain the real environment on the water. There are many on this very thread that have stated their willingness to discuss specific areas, which I believe would have been part of the original law several years back if compromise had been agreed to then. What's happening here now is a few vocal, and very proactive SL supporters have decided that it would be fun to irritate the people on board. If it gets bad enough, they surmise, Don will have to shut it down and the most visible forum will be silenced while they do their deeds behind the scenes. Similar to what they did last time. I prefer to let my opponents make total fools of themselves, it's far less stressful, and humorous. Keep up the good work here people. Just ignore the people that are less than civil, and maybe you'll gain a much larger audience of supporters.