richiekelly
Well-known member
who cares anyway, records are all b!!!!!!!s anyway, as long as my scales are accurate for my fish that will do for me.
You went off on tangents again that have nothing to do with the question I asked. For example you say I
don't weigh fish correctly. Fact is I never said how I weigh fish, second that's got nothing to do with this
discussion & third I could not care less what you think about that.
So back to what exactly weights & measures do to test scales, finally
after 4 or 5 pages from you saying how difficult & complicated the process is & how I don't understand
& how you know & how you have seen it done & how I need to go & see for myself etc etc...you now
say you don't actually know what they do!!!?
So you don't know what they do but you KNOW someone else can't do it?!?
Tell you what, why don't you describe what you saw, maybe somone else will know...
There you go again, saying what isn't there.
Where have i said i wanted to, or changed History, I said I withdrew the record from the BRFC list, FACT, and from the Guiness book of record, something else you didn't know. Where have i said I had it removed from the history book's ?? Your seeing what you want, as I said before.
It makes no difference what the BRFC did or didn't do, the record is Voluntary, nothing more nothing less, and it is just a list that has no meaning in angling any longer, as others have said. The BRFC lost it's way years ago.
Do you want the dates, if so No Problem, here you go, Letter's to the BRFC and Guiness Book of records, Date 23rd November 2000.
Confirmed reply from the BRFC 24th November, I sent them the letter via Fax on the 23rd November 2000.
---------- Post added at 19:58 ---------- Previous post was at 19:54 ----------
Didn't change History, you can't change the past, it wasn't an attempted, it happened, and it was 10 years after.
Been here and done all this before, some just don't catch on do they.
Read back it been said, keep up.
I like to put my feelings foreward on this one.
The present day BRFC is in my opinion one of the best yet.....Andy Nellist is someone i look upon as a friend and i and ALL those who know him have total respect for his dedication.
We need a record fish list as a guide and to record angling history.....it needs to be retained within the angling world so that it can be monitored.....the BRFC are here for that.
If lady luck ever blessed me with the capture of a record fish i have total confidence that the BRFC would handle it in a manner that was totally fair and unbaised.
I also believe that it is THE FISH and not the captor that is the important part of the record ans should be recorded.........being the captor would be something i would be immensly proud of...........but it is the fish that is recorded for posterity.
Buzz Aldrin was the first man on the Moon. Armstrong removed his name saying NASA had lost it's way.
"You cannot withdraw a record that has been ratified and is on the list. If new facts are made known to the committee by anyone a record could be removed by the committee.
The Rainbow Trout is a good example where the captor confessed that he had not caught it.
The record is held by the claimant but they don't own it."
Sorry to bring this one up again after it had appeared to have faded into the background but I've been waiting for a reply off a BRFC Committee member so as to once and for all clarify the position regarding 'withdrawing' records.
I asked if I could quote the reply and was given permission. Here it is, in full:
"You cannot withdraw a record that has been ratified and is on the list.
If new facts are made known to the committee by anyone a record could be removed by the committee. The Rainbow Trout is a good example where the captor confessed that he had not caught it.
The record is held by the claimant but they don't own it."
God how boring this has become, as we went over this along time ago, and you were wrong then as you are now.
Well thats not how it is in Law, and thats what counts