Show Pony Alert @ Brighton WA

seriously dude get a life, u say u got one but its pretty hard to believe, kitesurfing is about switching off, enjoying the thrill of waves or landing a new trick, yahoo-ing with ur mates on the water, enjoying beers and bbqs/get togethers after, enjoying sand sun and water or how bout even just the stoke of attaching yourself to a massive kite and being able to use it to drag u round in the water... its not about writing six page essays of bullsh1t... get ur hand off it

I'm confused. Is this about suing waksa or whacking Sue because I tried the latter and now I have an assault court case next monday. I'm holding you 40% to blame for this.

RSC ,

im confused now, were you launching a kite down wind or did some one launch a kite and it hit you or your family ?

Damn boot greenfinger! I've always thought that boot was a turkey and posted complete cr@p on this forum.

What were we talkin about?




8 is a nice even number don't you think?

It gets even worse than that young lady. This is just a very small section of a larger peer reviewed paper being put together on 'the cybernetics of kitesurfing and the cultural infeasibility of desirable change'. Some of this free data here can be of use, but in general I'm a bit disappointed with lack of variety and diversity.

You make a lot of assumptions. Study how Troy was breached. This was a case study for private research and testing purposes. It is based on a real event although some aspects may have been exaggerated to solicite effects. For example, I'm really not that shy at all, but someone in a similar position might be. They can read this and make their own conclusions. They might even comment (but I doubt it, sensing the danger).

My life and my demographic is so far removed from what you have described that I would have to refer to the 1970s to remember. I have kids who are older than you and grandkids who are probably more emotionally developed. I'd suggest you think about this exercise as an early sign of a new demographic with a focus on more mature pleasures. Perhaps the cost of entry to the activity (thanks to the Show Pony effects) and the more pedestrian rules enforced in the future will be to our liking and help clear to waters for the more mature, gentle and considerate participants.

But keep going, I'm reading and collecting although I won't comment unless it suits me. And if you think business is not listening -- they know where the money is going to come from in the future!

Oh, and btw: I already have a technical innovation designed in concept that will I think solve a lot of the physical risk described here. It'll take a bit of time to get the patent set up but I can see it getting there for 2012/13. And I'm prepared to share it with the thoughtful emailer who prompted the idea AND the young lady/man who actually precipitated the opportunity in the first place. Let me see: 70% - 20% - 10% perhaps? As mandatory standard safety equipment on all kite rigs it might fetch a few royalties. That is what this is about dear, learning ... oh, and getting the Show Ponies off the beach. Believe it or not!

So, what are your great suggestions for 'Briton Beach' dear?

Well let's fill the server up then ... here is some more crap for homework. Just some notes I've taken on the issue I'm interested in. Chew on that and see if you can work it out. You'll have to excuse the formatting -- but you're just not worth it!

---

Nuisance
Nuisance … "to hurt") is a common law tort. It means that which causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public (also "common") or private. A public nuisance was defined by English scholar Sir J. F. Stephen as,
"an act not warranted by law, or an omission to discharge a legal duty, which act or omission obstructs or causes inconvenience or damage to the public in the exercise of rights common to all His Majesty's subjects".[1]
Private nuisance is the interference with the right of specific people. Nuisance is one of the oldest causes of action known to the common law, with cases framed in nuisance going back almost to the beginning of recorded case law. Nuisance signifies that the "right of quiet enjoyment" is being disrupted to such a degree that a tort is being committed. … en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuisance

And in the broader scheme of things which relate more proper to the interaction of kieboarding (and Show ponies) and the general public (of joe publics) –

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_nuisance

Tort
A tort, in common law jurisdictions, is a wrong that involves a breach of a civil duty owed to someone else. It is differentiated from criminal wrongdoing, which involves a breach of a duty owed to society. Though many acts are both torts and crimes, only the state may prosecute a crime, whereas any party who has been injured may bring a lawsuit for tort. One who commits a tortious act is called a tortfeasor. The equivalent of tort in civil law jurisdictions is delict.
A person who suffers a tortious injury is entitled to receive "damages", usually monetary compensation, from the person or people responsible--or liable--for those injuries. Tort law defines what is a legal injury and, therefore, whether a person may be held liable for an injury they have caused. Legal injuries are not limited to physical injuries but may also include emotional, economic, or reputational injuries as well as violations of privacy, property, or constitutional rights. Tort cases therefore comprise such varied topics as auto accidents, false imprisonment, defamation, product liability (for defective consumer products), copyright infringement, and environmental pollution (toxic torts), among many others.
In much of the common law world, the most prominent tort liability is negligence. If the injured party can prove that the person believed to have caused the injury acted negligently (or without taking reasonable care to avoid injuring others), tort law will allow compensation. However, tort law also recognizes intentional torts, where a person has intentionally acted in a way that harms another, and "strict liability," which allows recovery under certain circumstances without negligence. …
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort
Proximate cause
In the law, a proximate cause is an event sufficiently related to a legally recognizable injury to be held the cause of that injury. There are two types of causation in the law, cause-in-fact and proximate (or legal) cause. Cause-in-fact is determined by the "but-for" test: but for the action, the result would not have happened. For example, but for running the red light, the collision would not have occurred. For an act to cause a harm, both tests must be met; proximate cause is a legal limitation on cause-in-fact.
Direct Causation
Direct causation is a minority test, which addresses only the metaphysical concept of causation. The main thrust of direct causation is that there are no intervening causes between an act and the resulting harm. An intervening cause has several requirements: it must 1) be independent of the original act, 2) be a voluntary human act or an abnormal natural event, and 3) occur in time between the original act and the harm.
Direct causation is the only theory that addresses only causation, and does not take into account the culpability of the original actor.
Risk enhancement/causal link
The plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant's action increased the risk that the particular harm suffered by the plaintiff would occur. If the action were repeated, the likelihood of the harm would correspondingly increase. This is also called foreseeable risk
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proximate_cause

In law, damages is an award of money to be paid to a person as compensation for loss or injury;[1] grammatically, it is a singular noun, not plural.

General damages
General damages, sometimes styled hedonic damages, compensate the claimant for the non-monetary aspects of the specific harm suffered. This is usually termed 'pain, suffering and loss of amenity'. Examples of this include physical or emotional pain and suffering, loss of companionship, loss of consortium, disfigurement, loss of reputation, loss or impairment of mental or physical capacity, loss of enjoyment of life, etc.[3] This is not easily quantifiable, and depends on the individual circumstances of the claimant. Judges in the United Kingdom base the award on damages awarded in similar previous cases.
General damages are generally awarded only in claims brought by individuals, when they have suffered personal harm. Examples would be personal injury (following the tort of negligence by the defendant), or the tort of defamation.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damages

Beach Bye Laws
The Council of the County of Clare in pursuance of the powers conferred on it under the Local Government Act, 2001 (Bye-Laws) Regulations, 2006, the Maritime Safety Act 2005, the Control of Dogs Act 1986, the Casual Trading Act 1995, the Control of Horses Act 1996, the Litter Act 1997-2003, Local Government (Sanitary Services) Acts 1878-1964 and in the interests of the common good hereby makes the following bye-laws for the beaches set out in the schedule hereto in the County of Clare:-
Surfboards/Sailboards/Kiteboards/Canoes/Kayaks
25. No person shall wind surf on sailboards or kite surf on kiteboards or surf on a surfboard or use a canoe or kayak in close proximity to swimmers.
26. The Council may designate areas of the beach that will be clearly defined and to which the use of surf/kite/sail boards, canoes and kayaks is restricted.
27. No person shall offer tuition in surfing or any other water sport/activity from the beach or in the sea unless done in accordance with the standards issued from time to time by the Irish Water Safety and/or other body recognised to issue such standards by Clare County Council and unless done in accordance with the conditions of a license.
VIII. General
Nothing contained in or done under any of the provisions of the foregoing bye-laws shall in any respect prejudice or injuriously affect the rights and interests of the state in the foreshore, or prevent the exercise thereon of any public rights, or prejudice or injuriously affect any right, power or privilege legally exercisable by any person in, over or in respect of the foreshore.
www.clarecoco.ie/Accessible_HTML/waste_water_environment/Beach_Bye_laws/Clare_Beach_Bye_Laws.html

The Good Samaritan that provided this account said that he can't find words to explain this accident. He felt that an accident was inevidable under the severe conditions. He further said that we need to learn how to effectively communicate to people that we are on their side when giving advice and that we need to stay together particularly on such critical issues. ** We should discuss this question among ourselves and try to come up with some effective answers. When it comes to Safety & Sustainability of this sport, we are all in this together. If other information is available please send it to me via PM or email to <flkitesurfer@hotmail.com>. Comments and content may be added to this account over the next day or so. (Mar 24, 2004)
www.kiteforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=2301017

The Risk in Giving Advice - Professional Indemnity Insurance and the Electricity Industry
________________________________________________________________________
In our increasingly litigious environment as “professionals” in our various fields of expertise we will be held accountable, by others, for the mistakes resulting from our advice and services.
Traditionally a “Professional” was perceived to encompass such occupations as doctors, lawyers and accountants. However with the evolution of technology and the expectations of consumers to be provided with “expert” advice from all facets of industry, this has expanded into traditional “trade” sectors, such as electrical industry practitioners.
An electrical industry practitioner utilizes their special skills (“expertise”) when providing advice to their customers. As an expert (“Professional”) in their field their advice is relied upon by others and…

eservices.esv.vic.gov.au/esvext/hsi/ElectronicDocument/Risk%20in%20Giving%20Advice.pdf

ebook – ebookbrowse.com/risk-in-giving-advice-pdf-d39483123

Worrells Solvency & Fraud Conference
1 November 2003
THE RISKS OF GIVING ADVICE
Paul McQuade
Barrister-at-Law

Introduction
There is always a risk of giving advice, but that risk may be managed. The first important
factor in managing risk is to have an understanding of the types of risks confronting an
accountant when giving advice. In this paper I wish to address in a general way the duty of
care of accountants arising by contract, and the common law duty of care. However, I wish to
concentrate on three emerging areas:
1. The Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth);
2. The concept of knowingly concerned in a contravention both in respect of the Trade
Practices Act and the Corporations Act;
3. The potential for being brought to account for a breach of fiduciary duty of a client.

Trade Practices Act
The Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) (“the Act”) is playing an emerging role in relation to
professionals generally. Recent decisions of the High Court have clarified the damages, which
may be claimed under s 82.
I will deal with the issue of misleading and deceptive conduct in s 52. That provision
provides:
“A Corporation shall not in trade or commerce engage in conduct that is misleading
or deceptive or is likely to mislead or deceive.”
To whom does the Act apply?
As referred to in s 52 the Act primarily regulates the conduct of corporations. The term
“Corporation” is defined (in terms of the Commonwealth’s Legislative Power in relation to
Corporate entities) to mean a foreign corporation, a trading or financial corporation formed
within Australia or the holding company or any such corporation.

Importantly, the Act also extends to the conduct of individuals:
1. The Act applies to the conduct of “persons” in trade or commerce between either of the
states or territories and between Australia and places outside Australia or by way of
supply of goods or services;
2. Where the conduct of a person involves the use of post or telephonic services and things
done in the course of the promotional activities of a professional person in a territory: s
6(2) & (4).
That extended definition includes conduct utilising the telephone (oral communication or
facsimile transmissions) and the sending of an e-mail8:
Therefore the Act may apply to the accountant by reason of:
1. The practice being incorporated;
2. The extended definition, in that the advice was given over the telephone, by facsimile
transmission or by e-mail.

[substitute KS Trainer for accountant].

www.worrells.net.au/library/insolvency/Risk%20of%20Giving%20Advice.pdf


How to give advice successfully
Giving advice is a delicate matter. Helpful as you might wish to be, sometimes your good intentions might be interpreted as interference, criticism or being judgmental.
Giving advice successfully does not mean that the person you are advising will take your advice to heart. Being successful merely means that you potentially exit from the advisory conversation with your relationship still intact
Tips for giving advice successfully:
* Avoid giving unsolicited advice
No matter how tempted you may be, do not offer advice unless asked. The target of your well-intentioned advice might take offense, becoming hurt or angry. Better to bite your tongue and salvage the relationship than to give uninvited advice.
* Listen carefully
When someone does ask for your opinion and advice, listen carefully first in order to determine what advice or reassurance the person is actually seeking. Sometimes what initially sounds like a plea for help might simply be that person’s way of opening up the opportunity to vent his frustrations. He might be looking for a good listener, as opposed to actual advice about his problem.
* Think before you speak
Consider the subject and ponder your knowledge and experience in that area. If a friend is seeking marital advice and you have never been married, you might want to be sympathetic while refraining from offering advice. If a relative is seeking advice about job opportunities and you work in human resources, then your advice might be useful.
Be wary not to be caught between two disagreeing factions. If your friend is seeking advice regarding a confrontation with his spouse, coworker, another friend or his parent, you might not want to be caught in the middle; your well-intentioned advice might come back to bite you. You may not want to get involved, but you might advise your friend to seek the help of a counselor, his church advisor or some other objective party who can adequately help him.
* Be positive
Avoid having a critical, judgmental or reprimanding tone. The person wanting your advice is potentially already stressed and will not benefit from further disapproval from you. Stay upbeat and positive, letting your friend know that you are there for him without passing judgment on his situation. Often compassion serves to help the situation even better than advice.
* Empathize
Share your own stories of how you handled a similar situation. This puts the person needing advice at ease and comfortable with the conversation. It is comforting to know that someone else has experienced the same issue and survived. Empathy makes advice easier to accept.
* Offer your advice in the form of a question
Sometimes the most successful way to give advice is to put your ideas in the form of a question. For example, you might ask, “Have you thought of doing this, or saying such and such?” By the time your conversation ends, the person needing advice might draw his own conclusions based on your thoughtful questions.
* Know when to give up
If you are offering advice or solutions and the recipient of your remarks displays negative body language, such as frowning, folding his arms across his chest, as if closing you out, be aware that your advice is not being well-received and change the subject. To continue would be to cross the line from giving friendly advice to preaching.
Knowing when to give advice, and when to keep your thoughts to yourself, is all part of being a skillful communicator. Skillful communicaton is a necessary tool for maintaining good relationships.
“The true secret of giving advice is, after you have honestly given it, to be perfectly indifferent about whether it is taken or not, and never persist in trying to set people right.” (anonymous)
www.helium.com/items/1908074-how-to-give-advice-successfully

It is art@work. It takes effort! But seriously, this link is a good find. Thanks.

Hey rsc,

As a sport goes, it is one of the most friendly and comraderic sports as can be, guys are always willing to help, loan, launch or land. You must be doing something wrong.

Just read some of your other posts in other topics and what I can see is that you are very very new to the sport, so why are you trying to self launch when you are barely up and riding?? You've got to learn kite skills before attempting self launching.

Chill out

Rsc,

I am glad that the Seabreeze Forum community is assisting you in whatever task you are doing. Do not assume that the comments here are representative of the kitesurfing community.

Playing with people is not ethical.

Regards,

Fred

Fred,

1. I'm not playing with people. I declared my context. I contributed my views to help people see the dangers and risks of working and playing on the public beach. And I took some notes for another purpose. Everything on the public Internet is data for research if you know how to do it. I am not associated formally with any research organisation. I write my papers for fun and to progress knowledge.

2. I have learnt a lot and I will submit my considered views and recommendations to the WAKSA as discussed earlier. Free of charge. I think it will help them. But it will take about a week. I'm busy.

3. With the exception of 3 or 4 mature people here (and a vast number who are smart enough to just read and watch) the general tone is a worry.

4. Lucky for you I'm not working for anyone in this regard. But anyone foolish enough to make public comments in a public forum like this on a serious and contentious OH&S topic like this, needs to be observed and studied. But he has just written what many others think and feel. How representative? That is the question! As I indicated earlier: a case-study to study culture. It is open forum. I have what I want already. More is a bonus. You can also analyse it if you wish.

5. Message: Be careful, you do not know who you are dealing with when engaging the public. This time you are lucky. But unless you erase it all, it is now on the public record for all to see.

7. Someone just went over the line didn't they! We all make mistakes. Bit like launching. People like me know IT like you know kiting. We built it. He must be an internet noob! Lucky he has a buddy in the control room eh?

But that is not the real problem. The real problem is, without the official guidelines and statements to the contrary, I and others reading this have no other choice but to assume it is representative of kitesurfer community.

This IS a microcosm of the Briton Beach scenario. Someone should be guiding members here in the same way they should be guiding members on public beaches. You've just nabbed the idiot in a virtual space -- now you need to work out how to nabb the same type of idiot on the real beach BEFORE real OH&S people turn up to close it down.

This is quite stunning read and hey I will add my two bobs worth.

Select to expand quote

rsc said...
[... I turned my head and this split my attention and caused some confusion for a moment.

In the 2-3 nano-seconds I looked down at the bar and it was the right way round (red to the left) and I said "I know what I'm doing" (or words to that effect, meaning what the "f..." are you talking about?) and in the process turned back to the kite and continued with the delicate balancing act, and bingo, before I had time to think, up it went. I was a little off balance due to the intervention (both mentally and physically) and was lifted up and dumped on a small sand lump about 10m away.

It took six or so pages or fluffing around with fancy legal speak without you actually quoting a single act, regulation, section or piece of tested case law to support your arguement, then when you do start quoting stuff, the best you have is wikipedia, google, and council by-laws from some county in the UK somewhere. With a bit of proper research through say the State Law Publisher website or something likea Butterworths you might come up with something local to support your arguement.

Quoting the Trade Practices Act is useless, I'd imagine there is a close zero chance or proving the 'advice given' was either misleading or deceptive, especially as there was no commercial arrangement between you and the person that offered the advice.

In your 'case study' the advice was given, received, verified by you as incorrect, and you continued with the delicate balancing act and bingo before you had time to think up it went. Me thinks you suffered from the classic case of things going pear shaped and you hung onto the bar bar for dear life. It is an instinctive reaction that you can only overcome through experience and re-training mucsle memory. As a result that baby was powered up with the inevitable result.

Blaming the girl that said something is selfish, you might not accept 100% of the blame but you can't apportion any to her.

By your own admissions the kite was around the wrong way, so my guess is you were going to fluff the launch regardless, either way you were probably going to get served a crumbed sausage. Bugger you got hurt and snapped a line but it happens.

I don't like how you have deliberately exaggerated parts of the story to provoke a response from SB members, and worse with the sole intent to quote and reference in a paper you are writing, I think that is bordering on trolling and inflammatory??? The paper you are now writing is worthless unless you declare to WAKSA and anyone else that you give it to that it is based on an exaggerated scenario that resulted in the responses you received.

By and large kiters are a great crew that don't deserve this attitude from another kiter.

Just reporting that "RSC" is definitely taking off as a new catchphrase for gratuitous, ill-informed, internally inconsistent and tediously written pedantry, even here in Melbourne, and even in non-kiting circles. I was on the tram yesterday and one teenage girl said to her friend, "Oh no wayyy!!That is, like, so RSC!!"

RSC, if you put the same effort into learning to kite as you do into pushing sh!t uphill around here, you'd already be whooping Hadlow.

If you're going to bandy the word "cybernetics" about, then be reminded that, in the words of Gregory Bateson, "No part of a complex interactive system can control the whole system." If you want to influence this culture, you'll need to take a subtler approach. As Milton Erickson put it, "There are no resistant patients, only inflexible therapists."

Or, as the Beatles suggested, "Let it be."

Good to have you back rsc ol’ mate…. your fire burns strong. I was missing you.

Re risk and risk management. If you look through the SB forum topics, you’ll see many of the posts discuss safe techniques or minimizing dangerous activity. It’s an ongoing concern taken seriously, which is why the mind set you’re presenting is a worry

Whether self launching or show pony-ing, duty of care lies with the kiter- 100%. If you’re self launching with no-one around, you have 100% duty of care for yourself (i always self launch and self land) If someone is going show pony that 100% extends to the crowd of people that come within their kite range.

re your scenario, you had 100% duty of care for your safety. You weren’t operating under the advice of an instructor. You allowed yourself to get distracted.

The danger with your mind set is that you attempt to immediately mitigate your duty of care to 60% because of a passing comment. The feedback you’re getting here is that you can’t allow yourself to get distracted- and you won’t listen to that voice of experience from people way more experienced that you or me

Show ponys with your mind set raise the same concern- in their mind they can immediately mitigate their duty of care to 60% because someone distracts them.

Mitigation would come in if someone grabbed hold of your bar on launch or crashed their kite into yours when in show pony mode

You’re a risk and you’re not managing it.

You say your self launch skill has improved 101%. I’d estimate you had about 20% competency at self launching at the time of your scenario, so a 101% improvement takes you to a fraction over 40% competency and you still ain’t listening.

and relying on wikipedia legal comment and a barrister’s advice to accountants…seriously???

Peer reviewed?

What a wank.

How can you use anything said on seabreeze in an academic paper?

Especially when every response was contributed by the same author using different usernames!!

Imagine how many constructive things could be done instead of writing 14,000 words on what a wanker he is?

Might even have time to practise some kiting skills.

Where will he be when WAKSA membership is compulsory to kite on local beaches. Humble pie tastes a little salty!!

Have been reading this over the last few days! RSC if you would of done as much research and planning into your kitesurfing as you have trying to comment on a sport and legal issues you clearly are not well versed on! You might of avoided a failed "self" launch or realised that kitesurfing is generally a pretty tight community and asking for a hand to launch would of been a good way to minimise risk and make some friends learn conditions etc! Its called a "self" launch because thats what it is 100% reliant on your skills as a kiteboarder! Man up realise you stuffed up and learnt from it, as an observation from threads this might not be the sport for you!! Looks like you would rather shift though the internet and challenge people on something they have been doing for years rather than listen to experienced advice! Kitesurfing is about the relaxation and stoke of being out on the water with a few mates and switching off from the grind of work. Not writing a novel!!