Show Pony Alert @ Brighton WA

I've thought about replying to this thread on a number of occasions but could not find the words to adequately describe my impression of RSC. However, I hope the following describes at least 10% of that impression.

RSC - you are undoubtedly the biggest dickhead to ever grace this forum.

I honestly pray that you're trolling and if so, kudos my friend - you've absolutely annihilated the regulars.

Kitesurfing is meant to be about escaping from everyday life; it's about excitement, adrenaline, some might even say purity and the experience of euphoria. It is definitely not about the obnoxious bureaucratic dribble that seems to flow effortlessly onto the screen from your fingers.

Back to topic:
Kitesurfing attracts all the show ponies. I would rather see self-policing and proper instruction including education about kiting at crowded beaches than 'fun-police'. That, and having an institution like WAKSA approaching lifesaving clubs explaining our predicament. Just like surfers surfing between the flags, lifesavers could request that they move on. It is NOT solely the responsibility of lifesavers however; they're a voluntary organisation and a limited resource - they should not be loaded with additional responsibilities.

RSC - I hope you go away. Stay on the forums by all means; but leave the oceans alone - there's enough pollution in it as it is.

RSC a whole lot of bad karma coming your way. Be careful this sport doesnt need tools like you anyway. Even if you asked me for a launch i would deny because i hate people like you. I am slightly embarressed to be sharing the same ocean with you.

I am glad that I have only actually read this 9 th page as I'm quite sure I havnt missed much.

I know you don't like to be misquoted RSC so it took a bit of time (its hot, humid and I can't sleep) and collated the following.


RSC page 4, “And the 'problem' is? ... I'm not insured! Bingo. So what? The chances of me being close to you and causing damage by intent is zero. So what is your point? I'll get insured then what will you do?”, intent is irrelevant in a criminal court, though if there is intent to wilfully damage there is scope for a higher penalty, and if someone were to sue you for damaging your kite in a civil court I'd imagine it would be pretty easy, intent or not.

You keep mentioning ‘Ignorance of the law is no excuse’ sure that’s a defence in the Criminal Code but so is ‘mistake of Fact’, if the girl thought the bar was around the wrong way, that’s a mistake of fact. If she can prove that she made a mistake and she acted reasonably under the circumstances, any action, criminal or civil on your part would be pretty hard to get over the line.


RSC page 7, “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.”

RSC page 8, “I would just like to add to my other comments – this is not an “exaggerated scenario”

Is it exaggerated or not?


RSC page 7, “The Act applies to the conduct of “persons” in trade or commerce”

RSC quoting me on page 8 then adding his reply, "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."-- the bar was not around the wrong way.”

I've covered that the bar was around the wrong way already, but there was still no trade or commercial arrangement between you or the girl on the beach, back to my original point that the Trade Practices Act has no relevance to your argument in your case study/scenario.

RSC page 2, “I was a member of the public on a public beach and not in any way contracted to, or contracting (at that time), the school or their staff.”, her you counter your own arguement?


RSC page 2, “2. Someone who was under their contract/employment intervened in my recreational activities and (in my mind) contributed (if not caused) a potentially serious accident and damage to my equipment.”,

RSC page 8, “ I'm not blaming the girl.”

We know you didn't use the word 'blame' but thats exactly how it reads. But are you blaming her or not, you contradict yourself again.


RSC page 3, “This is getting closer to the core attitudes and tone I'm seeking to study.”, page 4, “I was not going to offer analysis until the end of this case-study.”

RSC page 7, “I'm not playing with people. I declared my context.”, it took you the better part of two days to declare your agenda was to solicit responses for a research paper.

RSC page 7, “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'.”

RSC page 7, “I am not associated formally with any research organisation. I write my papers for fun and to progress knowledge.”

RSC page 8, “The case study is an intervention -- you don't know what it is designed to do. Its worth will be dependent on how I frame it in context. It is a side by-product, not my primary focus. Primary focus of paper will by Soft Systems Methodology (by Peter Checkland) and the Viable Systems Model (VSM) by Stafford Beer.” I tried to read up a little on SSM and VSM, it did my head in, if you are writing paper for fun and both know what these are and how to put them into context using kite surfing culture as your basis, I take my hat off to you, but seriously, what the heck? (rhetorical question so no need to reply to that bit, unless you want to start a new thread?).


RSC page 8, “As for declaring it. Well, if it was a real research programme then what you say is correct. But it is not. It is me, myself, working in my own backyard to fix my problems such as road and traffic noise, hoon behaviour on the roads and in some cases on the beach. It is a GLOCAL phenomena. This website which I normally use to check the weather/wind conditions simply attracted my eye with the title “Show Pony”.”

RSC elsewhere, "I live down S/Bay way and ....", and you allude to the Rockingham area in this thread… then on page 8, “I am justified and empowered in my efforts (using all my skills and resources) by the very fact that under sustainability theory I am perfectly able to start investigating the area around my house and neighborhood (say within a radius of 1 km) for various boundaries of contention (my actual research interest)”, Isn’t it about 50 clicks between Brighton and Safety Bay? definitely not in your backyard.


RSC page 8, “I am normally participating in a small forum of cybernetic experts who participate from all around the world. I am a junior in those ranks... I write a paper every odd year for a small journal on Systemic Practice and Action Research. I am not an academic and have no interest in being one.”

Hanging out with your buddies on the net in a cybernetics forum and seeking feedback from them is a fairly relaxed interpretation of peer reviewed. It kinda sounds like me getting on here and getting advice on how to stick a back roll, or crooks in prison discussing the best way to steal a car, it just doesn’t cut the mustard for ‘peer reviewed’ for me.


Sure you are empowered to investigate what ever you like, but you hijacked this thread to impose your own research agenda, and then when people respond to your posts you play sweet and innocent and try and steer it back onto the original issue, which is so far removed from you research needs its not funny. Next time it might be better to start your own topic, seeking to address your specific research needs, I'm willing to bet you would have got some great feedback. Instead you hide behind a 'case study' and effectively treat the kiting community all like neanderthals that don't care about other kiters, don't take safety, responsibility, duty of care, community concerns and perceptions seriously and don't want to progress the sport for the benefit of all. I'm fairly new to the sport but this perception you have, and are trying to impose on us is so far from the reality that I have experienced I am not surprised your posts have resulted in so many 'robust' responses.

It is looking windy next week

RSC, thanks for taking the time to have a look at the site. That you've done it and that anyone else can, points to a major difference between us: I am a real person whose website and therefore contact details and photos are accessible to anyone who cares to look, and you are an anonymous newcomer.

By existing here as a verifiably real person, I am volunteering a reasonable standard of accountability both on seabreeze forums and at the beaches where I kite; if I flout protocols then I'll cop it in real life. By contrast, anonymous posters such as yourself have nothing to lose. Any debate between us is therefore on a far from level playing field, however, that introduces some points that may be useful, dare I say, to you. (As for other anonymous posters, many of us know each other because we kite together too and are therefore still accountable.)

Before Articulating these points I'll also note that your reply alternates between challenging my practical competence "words are cheap, its what you do that matters," and then later my theoretical rigour "less handywork on your bar and more on your books."

1) For evidence of my practical skills in the professional domain, see my testimonials page. In the kiting domain, come have a session with me and ask some of the locals whose boards and kites I've rescued, or of even more interest, some of the people whose safety has been improved thanks to some always diplomatic, though sometimes stern input.

2) As for theory, I've learned - through participation - what amount and level of theory seems to be useful on seabreeze. As for the amount of theory on my website, it's also a context in which there's already more than most of my clients are interested in. I call it "knowing your readership" (diverse though they are), or "meeting people where they're at."

RSC, you are entering a community here, both as a poster and a kiter. As bigwavedave pointed out a while back, this is not an individual sport. While we can and do have solo sessions, in the big picture we depend on each other to learn, innovate, keep safe, deal with politics, and share the stoke. You have entered (though not yet achieved membership of) an online, and on-water community.

If, as a participatory researcher (formal or informal) or just a human being, you go live in an established community or move to another country, the onus is on YOU to do what you can to accept - not necessarily uncritically - the norms of that culture. Not to cease having opinions or to slavishly mimic the community/culture, but to take your time to learn the basics of how things are done in that community and develop competence at those skills and learn their merits before trying to usher in a paradigm shift. I've lived in several countries and I've had to realise that if I don't like it, I can leave.

Nobody here has asked for your help. Nobody is likely to if you keep on this way. Perhaps you have something to offer, but it will not be sought nor received until you build relationship. As an anonymous newbie in an established community there is an asymmetry such that you will have to make some concessions. That's just how it is among social mammals.

It's OK for some people to think you're a jerk and say things you disagree with and for you to just let it go. Paradoxical as it seems, you may even get a bit of respect for that! (Plenty of folk on seabreeze never tire of insulting me.) Refutation can only get you so far. At some point you just retire and let it go. If, at a later point, you feel like posting again, maybe try a different style and see how it goes.

You'll never please all the seabreezers all the time but still, I reckon through judicious posting with a trial and error attitude, you can learn a lot about this culture and even find a valid place within it. That's been my experience anyway. You don't have to become the same as us (we sure as hell ain't the same as each other) just take time to find where you may fit among us.

One last thing: "Sharing a beer," like much of what is said around here, is just a figure of speech. You can do it without drinking beer, and without being too literal about much at all. It's sort of a non-verbal act of recognising our shared humanity without wanting to sound like we like each other too much, cos that would just be gay, and if there's one thing you want to avoid around here...

oh dear I've just realised he's a student.

"No law can ever stop one from flying a kite!"

The Crimes Act was amended in NSW in about 1996 and the offence of 'flying a kite in a public place' was repealed. Carried a fine of about 2 quid.

OK, I'm speechless.

I wish you good luck RSC. I hope you'll accept it; I have nothing else to offer.