West Somerset Railway General Discussion

1. There was no company 'header' on it ?



As you said though, no signatures, just 'Plc Board'.
Odd.

 

If it was indeed a draft I am surprised that it did not say so.

I cannot imagine that Steve would have been given it, let alone published it were it not intended for public consumption

 

On a lighter note.....

It would appear from the 'detail' of the latest Gov changes to the lock-down rules that it is now permissible to drive any distance to beauty spots etc. Combined with the fact that that we can now also go out for 'exercise' as often and for as long as we like in any one day, then maybe we can now see more people heading towards West Somerset? After all, people who can not 'work' at home are now being encouraged to go back to 'work' (subject to social distancing'), so what better than (say) some weeding of the platforms at Blue Anchor or tending the flower-beds at Crowcombe etc?

 

Indeed. If I had to write anything like that, then it would be clearly watermarked and/or headed 'Draft - Not for Publication' until such time as final 'public' version was ready. At least then, if it did get into the public domain in error, it would be clear that it was not meant to be there.

 

Not quite as simple as just turning up.

The ORR has published guidance on how railways should get back to running after the long shut down, which has already been referenced elsewhere on the forum:

https://www.national-preservation.c...fter-coronavirus.1417862/page-12#post-2574649

(I know - scary. There are bits of this forum where things are discussed apart from the West Somerset Railway. Discussion of the guidance in general might be better on the thread that is there for that purpose ...)

I am sure that the WSR, in common with other heritage railways, will wish to ensure that its plans for re-opening are in accord with the ORR guidance.

Tom

 

The tone, style and grammar reminded me of one person.

The lack of a signature simply struck me as a clumsy attempt to disguise the fact that it was authored by that one person.

 

I would not disagree with the basic principle , as far as actual re-opening goes.

My point - which unfortunately I forgot to make more explicit in my original comment <oops> - is that, if one is now allowed to drive any distance to beauty spots etc, then the concept of 'non essential' journeys seems to have gone away (except in Wales or Scotland). So that would seem to remove one of the previous barriers to volunteers driving to get to heritage railways.

 

I do remember, at the time that the present lease from SCC to the WSR was drawn up, that there was a lot of discussion about the terms and cost of the lease as there were concerns that SCC might be seen to be selling something at undervalue. SCC purchasing shares in the railway was one way of getting around this. However, local authorities have been known to sell land for prices very advantageous to the buyer before.

 

May I suggest that all discussion about the WSR management, and its actions (particularly with regard to the SDRT) take place on the S&D Railway Trust and Washford Eviction Notice thread , so we can leave this one for discussion of actual WSR Operations? That will also avoid having two threads full of discussion of WSR management.

May I also further point out to people that just because you're replying to a post that's still posted here, you don't have to post your reply here. Yes, there's that nice 'Reply' button that automagically quotes the post being replied to, and provides a header which links to it - but with only a fairly minute amount of extra work, it can be used for replies posted on the other thread: i) hit 'Reply' here; ii) 'cut' the contents out; iii) 'paste' that text in the 'reply window' at the bottom of the SDRT thread page; iv) away you go. (Yes, this does properly cross-link; the forum software 'does the right thing' - previously experimentally verified.)

Thank you.

Noel

 

The problem with that suggestion IMHO is that there is much potential for discussion about "WSR management" over the railway as a whole which has got nothing to do with the S&DRT eviction at all. As a follower of the other thread as well, I would not wish to see it shut down for 'thread drift' or filled with discussions about (say) 4110, WSR financial black holes, lack of HR policies etc. I would agree that we don't want to see lots of duplicate messages/information in both threads, but I'm not sure that the suggested approach would be the best way. Others may disagree of course....

 

Perhaps the answer would be to start a new "WSR Freehold" thread, if the mods would be so kind as to shift all the relevant posts across to it.

 

It would help if some of the WSR folk actually occasionally ventured out and looked for more appropriate threads to post some stuff: for example, there's a whole thread on recommissioning after Coronavirus. Just saying

Tom

 

Or maybe a 'WSR management', or some similar more general title.

Noel

 

Not really no. It is as clear as mud and shouty moderator posts don’t help either. If you were clear about what can and can not be discussed it would be helpful. You offer no useful guidance about what is considered to be relevant information or topics that can be discussed. I get clear that the S&DRT issues need to be addressed there, but it is clear at the same time that the two issues are inextricably linked and interwoven.

I don’t see how the posted and the deleted PLC statement about the freehold yesterday is outside the limits imposed when the thread was re-opened.

If the guidelines were clearer it would help everyone. It would help posters know the limits and then there would be fewer posts that require attention and frankly no one posts looking to get their post moderated or deleted.

If the guidance said:

Please don’t comment on x, y or z. Please don’t do a,b,c. ie cast aspersions etc

This would really help. Clarity on what can and can not be said would be useful for anyone participating in this thread.

 

Are you the same @RailWest who posted on this thread at 09:14 this morning
and posted an almost identical entry on the S & D Washford thread 3 minutes later?