View Single Post
Old 18-07-21, 03:17
Lang Lang is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brisbane Australia
Posts: 1,557


I am not criticising your records as I know you have been around the traps and can read between the lines. I have the highest regard for your research.

The problem is you are too good and those with limited knowledge have often used you as final iron-clad authority when all you were doing was pointing out the rules in evidence at the time and the guidelines they should have been working to.

I fully understand MOST of the regulations MOST of the time are applied as written but the devil is in the detail and how much finer detail can an army have than things such as vehicle marking. The more inconvenient and time consuming a regulation is, particularly if it achieves little more than an administrative result, the less likely it is to be adhered to,

We need blokes like you. You anchor the boat in the right spot. It is just how many and what type of fish we catch that is extremely hard to predict let alone regulate. This is even harder when we try to find out how the blokes 75 years ago caught and counted their fish. You might put the anchoring point in the ships log for future reference but nobody is going to make a detailed written account of the day's fishing results and as we know fish grow with the telling.


PS Just a point on Wikipedia. I know serious researchers discredit this site but it is still the best option for the average punter. I believe it is written in the main by people with a wide range of knowledge ranging from world authorities to those with hearsay evidence. They do try to demand verification of facts but often the notation request stays for a long time but it alerts people to unverified statements. Many pages have huge bibliographies and source credits. I know they are constantly checking entries for inappropriate content and regularly people making unfounded statements are corrected quickly. Very little malicious misinformation survives long.

Just like Encyclopedia Britannica which was the unchallenged but deeply flawed authority for 100 years Wiki has its faults but if you do not bet the house on the information it certainly is the best we have for quick results.

Last edited by Lang; 18-07-21 at 03:34.
Reply With Quote