• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.

aucklander

Members
  • Content count

    653
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About aucklander

  • Rank
    Anarchist

Profile Information

  • Location
    Auckland

Recent Profile Visitors

1,537 profile views
  1. Go ETNZ. Time to bring it home!
  2. Beautifully explained. And agreed, on rare occasions it might go wrong, but in most, the jobs are separated so the task is more manageable, plus you have two people who have worked together as a team for many years at the highest level of high performance yachting. Really... it's so obvious... if only we'd all have thought about it
  3. yep, and I'm not absolving him from a level of blame - but the sources of that loss can be traced not only to the helm, but to tactics, to day to day management decisions, to how ETNZ showed their cards early. By your reasoning Spithill won the cup solo on his own decision making, whereas we know he took orders from Ainslie on where it was heading. We know Spithill didn't win it alone - just like we know Barker didn't lose it alone.
  4. those decisions were not Barkers. That boat had a tactician on it. Barker should not be seen as the scapegoat, the 2013 loss had many sources - not just the helm.
  5. My apologies - i missed that Well, I admire that sentiment, to be honest I'd accept it, but shit it would cause some court battles and caterwauling from those who think NZ are going back to the dark ages. I fully agree that your all or nothing approach is better than a half baked sailors only solution, so I'm with you on that. I also think Nationality is THE thing that brings audiences, and therefore long term sponsorship to the table. If BAR gets success with UK sailors in the long run, perhaps then we see ongoing interest in the team. For sure I think an Aussie challenge would be well supported, as could a US team. Perhaps "passport at the time of the last cup being won" could be a mark of what nationality you are. Problems would however come with partnerships tooling (software and hardware), and consultancy - how would this be solved/policed? I think as an Aussie you'll know how much your country would get behind it, as we do here in NZ with a very kiwi team. It brings in far more interest in this respect to the total audience when there is something to pin a flag to., engineering and sailing wise
  6. So how far do you spread? Sailors only? Shore crew? Designers? Tooling? Parts? It gets really hard to make it workable, because the race is not one design it means the non sailors are just as critical
  7. You know, I know someone else who writes like this....
  8. I would once have agreed, but I don't. We are a nation of immigrants, many of us were not born here but are proud New Zealanders with New Zealand families. I used to support nationality rules, but I've yet to see anyone write down a solution which stacks up to be workable, ethical or legal. the best I can see is that you create a culture and then hire people who best fit that culture, in that way you will get your local country heavily represented. BAR and ETNZ both fulfill that extremely well.
  9. My 2c 1. We have not won it yet, so this is speculation 2. New Zealand as a country is excellent at developing new ideas to market 3. Refinement is a rich mans game. Exploring the corners even deeper of an area already well explored for the marginal gains is better achieved by big organisations, not common in New Zealand . I genuinely think it would be to new Zealand's benefit to have some significant modifications to the class, while retaining areas they believe they have unique strength in. There will be many high risk areas of innovation that have yet to make it into the boat, probably things that would have significant speed benefit.
  10. I considered that for 5 seconds. Then I decided that if you simply milled away the boards all structural integrity would be gone and the board would simply break up. The tables won't be turned by boards alone anyway. As we can all see, nz have more oil, and have designed more control systems to utilise the oil. unless it blows hard and we get lottery conditions, I believe it's over for OR
  11. Yes this has been heavily discussed and you are right. Essentially hunting after a teams power reserves. A nice trick to play if you need it.
  12. The issue of minus the human execution probably deserves to not be in brackets ... given it's that component that would have been outside the rules. BTW, I agree with agood deal of your analysis on control systems - OR have no time to duplicate that, but you seem to suggest ETNZ have something to be ashamed of by doing anything and everything within rules, What was alluded to, rightly or wrongly in AC34, was that OR was outside the rules. That discussion has been over and over though - so not going to argue it out again.
  13. Being right is a binary system though. is it legal and within rules? then nothing to see. Do you see anything wrong with it, assuming it's true?
  14. While I agree there is no evidence that OR are stronger in higher winds, I do think at the top of the wind range the level of unpredictability (capsize, gear failure, penalties) is much higher, and therefore the outcome is likely to be less predictable too.
  15. Correct. A high wind 'russian roulette day' is likely to have an unpredictable outcome. But that's the competition rules, and if ETNZ get beaten by a series of high wind days, then that's being beaten fair and square, and I'll take that on the chin.