Snooks

claymore · Post by **claymore** » Fri Sep 02, 2011 1:00 pm

Just been reading about his honeymoon with Deathly Dick

Feck sake - what a thing to fill up the pages on a once good comic

Pete Cooper · Post by **Pete Cooper** » Fri Sep 02, 2011 2:27 pm

Is 'deathly dick' a way of implying that Snooks couldn't rise to the occasion?

Arghiro · Post by **Arghiro** » Sat Sep 03, 2011 12:02 pm

I'm sorry we can't translate, the cryptographer is on holiday.

claymore · Post by **claymore** » Sat Sep 03, 2011 1:05 pm

Hmm
Well Snooks wrote a several page spread in the Summer YM which I found irritating and asinine. It described the journey from Scotland to Cornwall that he made with his partner. Deathly Dick Durham joined them for some reason - judging by the text, I have assumed that this Yachting Journalist found the venture a bit beyond his capability and so got DD top come along and support. Deathly Dick only seems capable of writing about the blasted swatchways and I find him limited in terms of journalistic ability, he fails to interest or engage and seems to produce little in terms of original work - indeed if Maurice Griffiths had not existed then I think Deathly Dick would be very short of something to say.

I suppose my underlying complaint is really that the standard of journalism in YM is - in my opinion - pretty poor and reliant on contributions from readers to spark much interest. If one reads some of the blogs - not mine - in Bluemoment - I think you would agree that Silkie and DaveS have written far more entertaining and interesting pieces than ever one finds being produced by a Staffer at YM. The old journalists such as Jack Knights wrote so very well and their like seem not to be around.
Libby Purves homilies are tolerable, in my opinion, I have little time for Tom Cunliffe who seems to craft articles around quaint sayings - "taking a trick ashore" - nobody uses these almost Chaucerian expressions and I find them a complete irritant.

I am very glad that that bloody silly jellyellie business seems to have dried up.

I do feel rather ungrateful in writing this as SaltyJohn kindly passes on his YM after he has read it - I decided some time ago the rag was not worth the purchase price. Hopefully he wonjt read my comments or I shall find my source of irritation dissappearing
Apart from that - everything is simply fine

Telo · Post by **Telo** » Sat Sep 03, 2011 1:53 pm

Oh, I do do love a good, well written, rant, which I am pleased to see is still alive and well in here. However, I do wonder, sometimes, if his His Lairdship is in danger of becoming a cantankerous old git.

cpedw · Post by **cpedw** » Sat Sep 03, 2011 6:02 pm

Shard wrote: in danger of becoming

Sorry I don't recognise this one. Is it a well-known euphemism?

Derek

tcm · Post by **tcm** » Sat Sep 03, 2011 6:44 pm

Changing from VERY cantakerous old git.

Excellent rantIet.

FWIW, I tend not to read anything by Snooks (and don't bother with ybw) since I discovered him spelling anchorage as "anchoridge" on ybw, after which the entire ybw moderator team was aparently told to improve their grammar/spelling... and at least one went back ON to complain about said admonishment.

marisca · Post by **marisca** » Sat Sep 03, 2011 6:47 pm

I think you will find it is "apparently".

tcm · Post by **tcm** » Sat Sep 03, 2011 6:54 pm

You're right, and I was taking issue with someone's spelling....but mine was a slip of the keyboard. Unlike "anchoridge", i think...

marisca · Post by **marisca** » Sat Sep 03, 2011 10:37 pm

Dick Durham is an East Coast sailor of the old school, his blog is witty and wistful, full of surprises and can be as cutting as a fresh nor' easterly.

At least that's wot it says on the ybw website, so it must be right.

Alan_D · Post by **Alan_D** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 12:55 am

I nominate Claymore for the misanthrope of the week award.

claymore · Post by **claymore** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 10:45 am

Alan_D wrote:I nominate Claymore for the misanthrope of the week award.

A tad harsh - it is not humankind that I dislike - just unskilled journalists

Arghiro · Post by **Arghiro** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 8:57 pm

Oh my, Oh my.

And to think I thought Snooks was a Staff PHOTOGRAPHER on YBW. How wrong could I have been? Or does this explain his limited written abilities?

Incidentally, I too would consider an 800 mile passage beyond the ability of self & spouse & would want AT LEAST one more experienced crew member to carry a watch - possibly 2 extra hands. In fact I am damn sure that dearheart wouldn't consider such a passage anyway. She would tell me to book her flight & arrange a suitable stopover at a friend's or family member's on the way.

I am suprised at the miserable old goat being so unseamanlike as to propose short-handed long distance sailing in busy shipping waters, but each to their own.

And anyone at home in shoal waters ought to be comfortable in most of the Irish Sea & Bristol Channel.

claymore · Post by **claymore** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 8:42 am

The journey may have been 800 miles but, like Jimi, the legs were short.

Post by **Nick** » Tue Sep 06, 2011 11:32 am

Arghiro wrote: I am suprised at the miserable old goat being so unseamanlike as to propose short-handed long distance sailing in busy shipping waters, but each to their own.

Whst rubbish. Self and SWMBO have done an 850 mile oassage non-stop with no extra crew, and I can assure you that it was done in a very seamanlike manner. We've done lots of multi-day passages unassisted, although we did once have a pigeon on board for two days between the Canaries and Madeira.

Snooks' bigging up of a very ordinary trip to Scotland was a bit of journaslistic fluff, but no need to hang the man for it.

BLUEMOMENT

Snooks

Snooks

Re: Snooks

Re: Snooks

Re: Snooks

Re: Snooks

Re: Snooks

Re: Snooks

Re: Snooks

Re: Snooks

Re: Snooks

Re: Snooks

Re: Snooks

Re: Snooks

Re: Snooks

Re: Snooks