3801 - management of it's return

 
  northbritish Chief Train Controller

I'm afraid I got tired of wading through all the verbiage trying to find a simple answer to a simple question. It took days ! You may care to remember that TheFish started by giving Allambee an almighty serve, and went on from there. Words by the dray load, answers very slow or non existent.
K.I.S.S . . . Keep It Simple, Son.
Valvegear

Give it up sunshine, the Fish has blown you and the other idiot out of the water with his far superior intellect and ability to put forth a reasoned and understandable post.

Sponsored advertisement

  northbritish Chief Train Controller

I'm afraid I got tired of wading through all the verbiage trying to find a simple answer to a simple question. It took days ! You may care to remember that TheFish started by giving Allambee an almighty serve, and went on from there. Words by the dray load, answers very slow or non existent.
K.I.S.S . . . Keep It Simple, Son.
Valvegear

Give it up sunshine, the Fish has blown you and the other idiot out of the water with his far superior intellect and reasoning power.
  Valvegear Dr Beeching

Location: Norda Fittazroy
Give it up sunshine, the Fish has blown you and the other idiot out of the water with his far superior intellect and reasoning power.
northbritish

Wow! How clever are you ?  We didn't want his superior intellect and reasoning power; we wanted one answer to one question. Pity you can't understand that. Never mind; better luck with your next attempt.
  northbritish Chief Train Controller

Wow! How clever are you ? We didn't want his superior intellect and reasoning power; we wanted one answer to one question. Pity you can't understand that. Never mind; better luck with your next attempt.
Valvegear

There you go stamping your foot like the petulant child you are. Now here this, the question has been answered over and over again. Go back and reread the Fishes posts and try to comprehend them. Might be better if you got a grown up to help you.
  Valvegear Dr Beeching

Location: Norda Fittazroy
There you go stamping your foot like the petulant child you are. Now here this, the question has been answered over and over again. Go back and reread the Fishes posts and try to comprehend them. Might be better if you got a grown up to help you.
northbritish

OK; let's start by correcting the spelling:- Now hear this . . . . go back and re-read TheFish's posts . . . "

I read every word of the voluminous posts made by TheFish, and I understand everything he wrote. He wrote of a multiplicity of matters dealing with the return of 3801, and the relevant authorities, and governance thereof. He stoutly defended the appointment of Mr Lowry. At no stage did I question or criticise Mr Lowry's appointment. To again make the point of all my posts - I wanted ( and still do ) to know exactly what Mr Lowry will do to speed up the return of 3801. TheFish has said what he can on that question, but it took a very long time, and used a huge amount of words ( something on which Graham4405 agreed with me ). I have never found it necessary to question or remark upon TheFish's intellectual capacity - it may be better than mine; it may not, and the question is irrelevant.
I would be interested in your explanation of how TheFish blew me and "the other idiot" (whoever that may be) out of the water. The Fish comes across as a very courteous man in his writings, and I will admit that he outdid me on that score. I was a little "less than parliamentary" on a couple of occasions, and I will happily apologise if I offended him.

Your latest contribution to the debate has been a bit of high quality, badly-spelt sniping, and I am curious to know why you bothered.
  TheFish Chief Train Controller

Location: Pyongyang
Don't worry Valvegear, you most certainly didn't offend me Smile and I highly doubt that I have a superior intellect to anyone.
To be fair to Valvegear my posts were quite long. The reason for this is that I was trying to address several points at once, not simply just answering Valvegear's question, and give them the greater context I felt they needed.

I may have been initially blunt in my answer to Valvegear because I incorrectly interpreted that he was pursuing a similar line to some of the other posters. I was robust to say the least with them because I really did not like that some of their statements had been made without being acquainted with the relevant facts, they were more emotional than logical. I have been dealing with false accusations regarding Transport Heritage NSW related issues for some time.
  TheFish Chief Train Controller

Location: Pyongyang
Now to more important matters:

I do take the point that the new model may discourage diversity.  I think however that given the small size of NSW rail heritage (relative to the British rail heritage scene for example) and the fact that there have been serious problems with rail heritage up until now it is worth trying to take a leap forward.  We won't know if we don't give it a good old crack and I believe the logic in the rail heritage review was sound as far as it can be.  

If not a lot changes in the next few years except for the structure of the organisation then we will have to rethink it.  We have the option of not continuing the arrangement when it expires in five years.

The conflict of interest thing is quite interesting.  I dare say that some groups may claim that.  Access to the LES is going to be the most heated topic.
As I understand it funding is specifically allocated for external organisations and will be awarded to organisations by their their successful application to an independent panel.  The panel will be attached to but TR NSW but is not made up of TR NSW members.

I think the other thing to note is the associate members program that will start later this year.  This is a way in which other heritage organisations will be given some assistance in dealing with safety/regulatory/compliance/management.
  northbritish Chief Train Controller

OK; let's start by correcting the spelling:- Now hear this . . . . go back and re-read TheFish's posts . . . "

I read every word of the voluminous posts made by TheFish, and I understand everything he wrote. He wrote of a multiplicity of matters dealing with the return of 3801, and the relevant authorities, and governance thereof. He stoutly defended the appointment of Mr Lowry. At no stage did I question or criticise Mr Lowry's appointment. To again make the point of all my posts - I wanted ( and still do ) to know exactly what Mr Lowry will do to speed up the return of 3801. TheFish has said what he can on that question, but it took a very long time, and used a huge amount of words ( something on which Graham4405 agreed with me ). I have never found it necessary to question or remark upon TheFish's intellectual capacity - it may be better than mine; it may not, and the question is irrelevant.
I would be interested in your explanation of how TheFish blew me and "the other idiot" (whoever that may be) out of the water. The Fish comes across as a very courteous man in his writings, and I will admit that he outdid me on that score. I was a little "less than parliamentary" on a couple of occasions, and I will happily apologise if I offended him.

Your latest contribution to the debate has been a bit of high quality, badly-spelt sniping, and I am curious to know why you bothered.
Valvegear

Yes I made some spelling mistakes. That is my bad, for not proofreading my post.

In my opinion I thought you we being very rude to TheFish, but you have acknowledged that was the case, and I admire you for having the courage in saying it.

In return I will apologise for the use of the word “idiot” and the other less than kind remarks.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: a6et, northbritish, wurx

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.