'Boaty McBoatface' Polar Ship Named After Attenborough Despite Less Votes (bbc.com) 232
The UK's 200 Million Euro polar research ship won't be called Boaty McBoatface. Instead, the new ship will be called RRS (Royal Research Ship) Sir David Attenborough. The Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) had originally planned to name the new ship via an online poll. In all fairness, RRS Sir David Attenborough did pick up a few votes, though in terms of popularity nothing came close to Boaty McBoatface (it earned over 124,000 votes). "We want a name that lasts longer than a social-media news cycle and reflects the serious nature of the science it will be doing," said Jo Johnson, the U.K. Science minister. BBC reports: While the polar ship itself will not be named Boaty McBoatface, one of its remotely operated sub-sea vehicles will be named Boaty in recognition of the vote. James Hand, who first suggested the flippant moniker, said he was pleased the name would "live on."
fewer (Score:5, Informative)
it's "fewer votes" not "less votes"
the same way you say "greater than" not "greater then"
punk kids
Re:fewer (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Either is acceptable to most people. There's not central English authority, and nothing is lost by "allowing" the use of the word "less" in this context.
In fact:
Less has always been used in English with counting nouns. Indeed, the application of the distinction between less and fewer as a rule is a phenomenon originating in the 18th century.
Re: (Score:3)
Less has always been used in English with counting nouns. Indeed, the application of the distinction between less and fewer as a rule is a phenomenon originating in the 18th century.
So, for over 200 years now then, I think that makes it current usage.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say "he got less votes" if I was speaking informally, but in a formal context, I'd say "he received fewer votes".
Context, absolutely. And I assume that based on your UID you are not new here, and already know you are on one of the most pedantic sites on the Internet. So, *how* is it you don't get the context?
Punctuation (Score:5, Insightful)
it's "fewer votes" not "less votes"
the same way you say "greater than" not "greater then"
It's also customary to start sentences with capital letters and end them with a full stop. When it comes to your own posts it seems that you grasp the idea that an internet post does not have to contain precisely correct English (mine certainly don't). So it is rather strange that you won't let similar lapses in other people's posts pass without criticism.
Re: (Score:2)
Grammar McGramface!
Re: (Score:2)
That's not a real rule, that's a style guide you didn't understand. :o
Welcome to English, please enjoy your stay.
Also, the best correction to offer would be to add a word such as "getting" before the word "less." That's the obvious omission due to the necessary brevity of headlines. Presuming a grammatical fake-mistake is presumptuous to start with, but absolutely needless here where even if you believed in the "rule," it wouldn't apply.
And for the record, they never offered to name the ship based on the vo
Strange irony (Score:5, Insightful)
Boaty McBoatface is actually very representative of the "democratic" process in our societies: people vote, but ultimately their voice doesn't matter one jot, and the powers that be impose whatever the hell they want.
The inevitable conclusion, in politics as in silly internet ship-naming polls, is: why vote at all then? The deciders don't really need our opinion, now, do they?
Re:Strange irony (Score:5, Insightful)
And sometimes the "deciders" need to use some common sense, because the voters vote for things that are obviously inappropriate...
Re:Strange irony (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Strange irony (Score:5, Insightful)
In what way was the name inappropriate, except insofar as it concerns the utter humourless pomposity of bureaucrats and scientists?
(1) I know quite a few scientists. While they may not have the same sense of humor as the average person, they often have a quite well-developed (if sometimes weird) sense of humor. Bureaucrats? That's a different story...
(2) While I find this whole situation funny, I do think the name is a bit inappropriate for a long-term thing in a serious scientific research ship. Maybe they could have named it that for a day or a week or something, just to honor the silliness (and get some media attention), and then renamed it something more "serious" for the rest of its lifespan.
But naming it "Boaty McBoatface" for the long term? Can you imagine a scientist who worked on that ship and putting that on your resume? I don't know what you do for a living, but supposing you're a programmer, imagine that some serious research project that you put years of your life into was given the official designation "Codey McCodeface," and when you tried to get other jobs or talk to people in other fields, you had to use that name to tell them what you had invested your work in. "What was your project?!? What, were you one of the idiots who worked on Clippy??"
Would some people find it funny? Sure. But there are way too many people in the word who make a distinction between times for humor and times to "act like a grown-up." That's the reality of the world. How would you feel if you lost a job or were denied interviews because people who didn't know about your company's "Codey McCodeface" joke thought you weren't a serious candidate when you submitted your resume or mentioned it in an interview?
And, sure -- if you're secure in your career at the moment, you might say, "Well, I wouldn't want to work for those humorless idiots anyway." That's all well and good until you really need a job. Or you're a scientist up for tenure or some significant prize, and someone who doesn't read the news sees you did research on "Boaty McBoatface."
We have social and linguistic conventions in the world. It's generally frowned upon to show up to a funeral dressed in ripped jeans and a tee-shirt, unless that's something the family is cool with. It's generally frowned upon to swear repeatedly in front of a bunch of little kids who aren't your own.
And it's generally appropriate to follow tradition in choosing names for major sea vessels from certain kinds of linguistic categories. That's just the way the world is... when you get your own ship, you can name it what you want.
Re: (Score:3)
(2) While I find this whole situation funny, I do think the name is a bit inappropriate for a long-term thing in a serious scientific research ship. Maybe they could have named it that for a day or a week or something, just to honor the silliness (and get some media attention), and then renamed it something more "serious" for the rest of its lifespan.
But naming it "Boaty McBoatface" for the long term? Can you imagine a scientist who worked on that ship and putting that on your resume? I don't know what you do for a living, but supposing you're a programmer, imagine that some serious research project that you put years of your life into was given the official designation "Codey McCodeface," and when you tried to get other jobs or talk to people in other fields, you had to use that name to tell them what you had invested your work in. "What was your project?!? What, were you one of the idiots who worked on Clippy??"
You really think there is a problem with a scientist having silly names on his/her resume?
Re: (Score:2)
While I find this whole situation funny, I do think the name is a bit inappropriate for a long-term thing in a serious scientific research ship. Maybe they could have named it that for a day or a week or something, just to honor the silliness (and get some media attention), and then renamed it something more "serious" for the rest of its lifespan.
That's why I cast my vote for RRS Serious Science Boat.
In all seriousness though, since this is very serious business, they should paint a cartoon face on the bow of the ship before they launch it. Their goal was to promote public interest in the ship and its mission, throwing away the free PR would sort of defeat that purpose. Naming the ROV "Boaty" was a nice touch though.
Re: (Score:2)
The benefit isn't open-ended; most of the benefit of the PR is in the people who actually give a shit. If the people who don't give a shit look and point, that is harmless fun but perhaps not actually useful to their mission.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
But naming it "Boaty McBoatface" for the long term? Can you imagine a scientist who worked on that ship and putting that on your resume?
Yes. If I were a scientist who worked on that ship, I'd still put boaty mcboatface at least in parenthesis.
Why? Because nobody on the planet has heard of Attenblawhrawwatever, and few ever will. I'll put that name on too of course, but if I mention Boaty McBoatface -- it maybe a "stupid" name, but its a celebrity name all the same. If I put I worked on Boaty McBoatface... everyone knows THAT boat. Its not 'just another research vessel' ... its Boaty!
Re: (Score:2)
David Attenborough remains vastly more well-known than McBoatface ever was. The entire educated English-speaking world knows who he is! A few people on the internet, news junkies, and locals in the UK know about Boatface.
Re: (Score:2)
"David Attenborough remains vastly more well-known than McBoatface ever was"
1) And its thinking like this that got me moded flamebait above.
But this really has little to do with *him* as a person; its merely a boat named after him. And nobody knows anything about the BOAT "David Attenborough".
It'd be like naming a boat Putin; everybody on the planet knows who Putin is... but they don't know anything about the boat.
*Everyone's* heard of the *boat* that might have been called "Boaty McBoatface".
2) I think you
Re: (Score:3)
Even in google,
David Attenborough: About 3,090,000 results
Boaty McBoatface: About 761,000 results
Nobody is going to actually know anything about the ship except the people who work on it. That's the reality of working on a science ship. The whole point was to decide who or what to honor. There is no TV or movie deal to hype.
Re: (Score:2)
That doesn't refute my argument at all. Just as with my Putin example... everyone in the world knows who Putin in, but if there's also boat by that name somewhere practically nobody knows anything about it.
Meanwhile there are 761,000 results in google that are about Boaty McBoatface, the boat itself, and that celebrity was generated and the boat wasn't even named yet.
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't claim to "refute" your argument. I contradicted it. I stand by what I said; it isn't the sort of disagreement that is susceptible to refutation because there is too much of a subjective element.
You're just as wrong after denying "refutation" as before. David Attenborough remains more well-known than McBoatface ever was, and the difference in their popularity will increase drastically even just in the next month as people forget about Boaty and his relatively small contribution to British culture.
Yo
Re: (Score:2)
Serious science could have made the name respectable, not the other way round.
Now you're talking about how the world should be, not how it is be.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Then Slashdotters would whine about the bloat of government, and how very much money was wasted on what was effectively a joke.
Re: (Score:2)
And sometimes the "deciders" need to use some common sense, because the voters vote for things that are obviously inappropriate...
“I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves.” -- Henry Kissinger
Re: (Score:2)
If you ask the people to make your decisions for you, you need to accept when they don't agree with your first choice. No one would have cared in the least if they had skipped the vote entirely and unilaterally named it the Attenborough; but giving the illusion of a choice and then ignoring it re
Re: (Score:3)
You continue mock, yet do not see how your mockery of his name didn't matter in the slightest.
I can't stand the man myself, but I at least understood this.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
She helped build civil rights cases in the South, which a lot of people find admirable.
She was actually re-elected to the Senate—so elected twice.
If the her appointment as SoS was to placate her, then presumably she built enough genuine support to need placating (nobody is placating Cruz or Kaisch, after all).
Very few people at that level can claim to have done it on their own. Trump is the son of a millionaire real estate
Re: (Score:2)
The middle east caught fire in 2003, when we lit the fucking match ourselves.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You're right, it perfectly illustrates *representative* democracy, whereby the people elected as the representatives take into account the public will, and make the decision they think is best for society as a whole.
It seems you're getting that confused with "direct democracy", where any old bunch of idiots can implement stupid decisions that in many cases may not be the best course of action.
Re:Strange irony (Score:5, Insightful)
Boaty McBoatface is actually very representative of the "democratic" process in our societies: people vote, but ultimately their voice doesn't matter one jot, and the powers that be impose whatever the hell they want.
The inevitable conclusion, in politics as in silly internet ship-naming polls, is: why vote at all then? The deciders don't really need our opinion, now, do they?
Actually I was thinking this is kind of like what happens when you ask a bunch of toddlers to vote on "What do you want for lunch?" The choice will almost always be 'candy' or 'cookies'.
No, you don't ask toddlers open questions like this and give them free reign to choose whatever they want; you let them choose between a restricted set of alternatives.
And this is what you get when you let the Internet community (a bunch of toddlers) invent the names to vote for. What they should have done was generate a list of potential names and let people (toddlers) vote for one of them.
And, yes, the Internet 'community' may as well be a bunch of toddlers.
Re:Strange irony (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually I was thinking this is kind of like what happens when you ask a bunch of toddlers to vote on "What do you want for lunch?" The choice will almost always be 'candy' or 'cookies'. No, you don't ask toddlers open questions like this and give them free reign to choose whatever they want; [...]
Considering our rulers do exactly the same in real life (ask the public to choose and then do something else altogether), do I deduce from your comment that they consider their constituents to be immature toddlers?
You prove my point: don't you see how incredibly patronizing that is?
Re:Strange irony (Score:5, Insightful)
Here is where the analogy halts.
Eating cookies and candy for dinner isn't good for you.
There is no harm done by naming the boat Boaty McBoatface. It is not even offensive.
In fact the name could even be more beneficial than the alternatives since it gives more publicity and might inspire younger people to be more interested in science.
In this case we get a worse alternative because of people taking themselves too seriously to go for a better option.
Re: (Score:2)
What I find sad is that they only partially named the sub after the internet vote... a ship of that size surely has a life raft or maybe a small launch that could be named straight up "Boaty McBoatface" along with a plaque describing how and when that came to be.
Not that Sir David doesn't rock, he does, and he deserves the big boat.
Re: (Score:2)
Personal preference, but I don't think you should name ships after living people, even ones who rock.
I'd have voted for "Katherine Giles" http://www.theguardian.com/uk/... [theguardian.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Attenborough is effectively immortal. He already looks to be on death's door, and he's in so many hundreds of hours of video programs that are distributed globally and widely viewed, there will be a minor splash when he does really die, but his legend will live on, virtually unchanged after he is gone.
Re: (Score:2)
Here is where the analogy halts.
Eating cookies and candy for dinner isn't good for you.
There is no harm done by naming the boat Boaty McBoatface. It is not even offensive.
In fact the name could even be more beneficial than the alternatives since it gives more publicity and might inspire younger people to be more interested in science.
In this case we get a worse alternative because of people taking themselves too seriously to go for a better option.
Actually whats surprising is that the 'winner' was as mature as 'Boaty McBoatface'.
In fact my guess is that the real top entry was more like "poopy bum" or "fuck face" and that these got censored out.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I was thinking this is kind of like what happens when you ask a bunch of toddlers to vote on "What do you want for lunch?" The choice will almost always be 'candy' or 'cookies'. No, you don't ask toddlers open questions like this and give them free reign to choose whatever they want; [...]
Considering our rulers do exactly the same in real life (ask the public to choose and then do something else altogether), do I deduce from your comment that they consider their constituents to be immature toddlers?
You prove my point: don't you see how incredibly patronizing that is?
Its in the interest of nanny state for its population to depend on nanny state. To that end it encourages people to grow up into big babies.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You prove my point: don't you see how incredibly patronizing that is?
Patronizing it may be, but if the shoe fits, wear it.
Fact #1: The Internet voters did, in fact, nominate and then vote for "Boaty McBoatFace".
Fact #2: The Republican primary voters did, in fact, vote to nominate Donald Trump, who just today has suggested he might just go ahead and default on the nation's debt in order to save us money [vox.com], because he literally thinks that is how government fiscal policy works.
Let's face it, voters are often not well-informed, competent, or thinking rationally. Direct Democra
Re: (Score:2)
No, you don't ask toddlers open questions like this and give them free reign [...] yes, the Internet 'community' may as well be a bunch of toddlers.
Yeah, you can't expect toddlers to understand horses. [wikipedia.org]
I'd have paid (Score:3)
To take a ride on, or donate money too, Boaty McBoatface. Now that it's named like all the other boats, like all the other boats I lost interest.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe we can get Sir David to change his name to Sir David McBoatface? What then?
Re: (Score:2)
The difference is that this is an online poll that anyone who knew about it could vote. There were many posts to the site encouraging people to vote for "Boaty McBoatface". It is a nonsense poll with no consequences as most of the people who voted for "Boaty MvBoatface" thought it would never get that name and voted just for the fun of it.
Votes in a real election are far more important and far better considered when cast.
Re: Strange irony (Score:3)
Votes in a real election are far more important and far better considered when cast.
Then how do you explain Trump?
Re: (Score:2)
The exception that proves the rule?
Re: (Score:3)
Elites don't believe in democracy. No surprise here.
Re: (Score:2)
why vote at all then?
Because there is a significant number of stupid people (at least half the population, quite by definition assuming a normal distribution) who think that despite all this, their "vote" is the most holy and important thing in the world and is the basis of their freedom. If you take the illusion away, why, there's nothing left at all. So occasionally things like this will happen in which case you plan another circus or toss them some bread or ideally both at the same time, and the plunder of society can contin
Re: (Score:2)
There is nothing "holy" about taking a poll for an advisory purpose, as was the case here. That you didn't understand, didn't check, and presumed something "holy" was violated says a lot about you, and nothing at all about the intended, published system they were using to name the ship.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Boaty McBoatface is actually very representative of the "democratic" process in our societies: people vote, but ultimately their voice doesn't matter one jot, and the powers that be impose whatever the hell they want.
The inevitable conclusion, in politics as in silly internet ship-naming polls, is: why vote at all then? The deciders don't really need our opinion, now, do they?
You're voted funny but really you should be voted "+5 crying for the human race". This is representative of our votes in more than one way. Not only is it representative because the majority was overruled by someone who didn't like the outcome, but the democratic process itself turned into a joke where the least serious answer gets picked for a laugh.
I predict Trump 2016 - For the Lulz.
Re: (Score:2)
My high school graduation song was voted on in a similar fashion, landslide victory to Sister Christian (1984), but the powers that be decided we wouldn't be playing that at the graduation and instead would have a song the choir could sing. So, why did they put it to a vote in the first place? Mostly to teach us this lesson in life, I suppose.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It wasn't an election, it was a tabulated public survey designed to give the selection committee better feedback to instruct the process.
That more people voted to troll them than to give serious feedback in no way interfered with the intended process. They simply ignored the trolls, and selected the most popular name that was consistent with the other elements of the selection process, such as honoring somebody British.
Similarly, in a real election if you write in the name of a cartoon character, the cartoo
Re: (Score:2)
Boaty McBoatface is actually very representative of the "democratic" process in our societies: people vote, but ultimately their voice doesn't matter one jot, and the powers that be impose whatever the hell they want.
The inevitable conclusion, in politics as in silly internet ship-naming polls, is: why vote at all then? The deciders don't really need our opinion, now, do they?
Yes, this is a complete subversion of democracy.
Signed, Votey McVoteface.
Re: (Score:2)
Boaty McBoatface is actually very representative of the "democratic" process in our societies: people vote, but ultimately their voice doesn't matter one jot, and the powers that be impose whatever the hell they want.
The inevitable conclusion, in politics as in silly internet ship-naming polls, is: why vote at all then? The deciders don't really need our opinion, now, do they?
This is distinctly different from the democratic process.
People didn't vote for Boaty McBoatface because they thought it was a better name. The voted for it because it was a good joke.
The idea that the British government would ask the Internet for a vessel's name and the Internet would tell them "Boaty McBoatface" is hilarious and it's great that people made that joke.
But now the joke was made and it's time to move on. There's a good reason you don't give things joke names, jokes get old and annoying so "Bo
Is he dead? (Score:2)
Is David Attenborough dead?
You don't normally name a ship after a live person
Re: (Score:2)
While there are certainly lots of naming honors intended solely for dead people, there are lots of others that are suitable for living people. The naming of watercraft traditionally does not require a person to be dead; historically there were many examples named after the person who paid for the ship, or somebody dear to them. There are other examples; buildings are named after dead people if the name is purely honorary, but often after living people if they were involved in the funding; or if their work i
Re: (Score:2)
I think this boat will long outlast him!
Why are you surprised? They snubbed other names! (Score:2)
They silently deleted and vetoed the name "Blas de Lezo" after it took the second place and it was on its way to dethrone BMcB, and now you're surprised they snubbed it as well?
Re: (Score:2)
That choice is at least justifiable - you don't name a government-bought ship after someone who defeated your navy. Snubbing Boaty McBoatface is just being humorless pricks.
Wonder what Sir David Attenboatface thinks about the change?
Up front about it (Score:5, Informative)
They were up front about the fact that a name would have to be approved before it was applied to the ship.
Boaty MacBoatface was obviously never going to be approved. Whatever snowball's chance in hell it might have had despite its deep irreverence toward Her Majesty's navy was eliminated by the fact that it's calling a ship a boat.
You don't call a ship a boat. A boat is little. A ship is big. See, e.g., http://www.marineinsight.com/t... [marineinsight.com]
Re:Up front about it (Score:5, Funny)
They were up front about the fact that a name would have to be approved before it was applied to the ship.
Boaty MacBoatface was obviously never going to be approved. Whatever snowball's chance in hell it might have had despite its deep irreverence toward Her Majesty's navy was eliminated by the fact that it's calling a ship a boat.
You don't call a ship a boat. A boat is little. A ship is big. See, e.g., http://www.marineinsight.com/t... [marineinsight.com]
Actually, it's just easier to call them all targets; and leave the boat moniker where it belongs, to submarines.
Re: (Score:2)
At any rate, if I invite you into my home and say you can have some food from the refrigerator, I don't expect that you will fill a couple of boxes with the entire contents and toss it all in your car to take home, even if I didn't explicitly say "unless it isn't reasonable". There's always an assumed "it isn't reasonable".
I'm not sure this goes under geek social fallacies or geek linguistic fallacies, but the idea that people communicate only by literal worlds and that there is no such thing as context, i
Re: (Score:2)
Landing craft are much more numerous than submarines, so it is disingenuous to claim that boat means submarine. Almost every ship includes a bunch of boats. And most small craft are boats, even when not assigned to a ship. Tugs are boats, and outnumber submarines even without the help of life boats.
In the age of sail, anything with less than three masts was a boat. Using that as a standard, all but the largest modern yachts are boats, not ships. Potentially including this class of science vessel. Even when
Re: (Score:2)
Landing craft are much more numerous than submarines, so it is disingenuous to claim that boat means submarine. Almost every ship includes a bunch of boats. And most small craft are boats, even when not assigned to a ship. Tugs are boats, and outnumber submarines even without the help of life boats.
In the age of sail, anything with less than three masts was a boat. Using that as a standard, all but the largest modern yachts are boats, not ships. Potentially including this class of science vessel. Even when it comes to commercial craft, there are many more fishing boats than factory fishing ships.
Even police boats outnumber submarines.
Sorry land-lubber, you didn't really know that one.
Spoken like a true skimmer who has never known the joy of a green board and a klaxon announcing your return to the deep.
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely, I only discussed information, not personal experience.
Re: (Score:3)
So it should have been called Shippy McShipface?
Re: (Score:2)
Shippity Doo-dah.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't call a ship a boat. A boat is little. A ship is big.
In what world do you think that the people who proposed Boaty McBoatface cared at all about the distinction between a boat and a ship?
Re: (Score:2)
Fine. Shippy McShipface it is.
Yes, it is a silly name (Score:2)
So what if this is a silly name, a really opportunity has been missed to engage with children about exploring the natural world through science,
This could easily have supported a range of children's books of the "Adventure of McBoat" and toy/model boats, with profits funding more scientific exploration.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Up front about it (Score:2)
Kinky (;
Re: (Score:2)
Short for "Unterseeboot", or "Undersea boat" in English.
Hindsight (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
They didn't. That's why it is named after Attenborough. The poll was to give them feedback, so they could select which of the names that met the (published) naming criteria was most popular.
The brilliancy of the whole thing is specifically in letting them have their fun, and then ignoring them, instead of filtering the names at the proposal stage.
Too late (Score:5, Insightful)
David will now be known as Boaty McBoatface. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it would be pretty awesome if he picks up the nickname Sir Boaty.
If somebody wants to see a McBoatface in the future, they should probably agitate to create the title Lord Boatface. That's the only way they're going to manage the process.
Maybe officially... (Score:4, Insightful)
...but you *know* everyone is going to call it "Boaty", regardless of what the Powers That Be want...
As far as I'm concerned (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It needs the name 'corrected' by good people with paint, at every port of call.
Think of as Rick Rolling the royal navy.
Make Boaty a Scientist (Score:4, Insightful)
The solution here is to make Boaty McBoatface a real scientist. Anytime anyone publishes a scientific paper, they should add him as a coauthor.
Re: (Score:2)
That's Doctor McBoatface, show some respect man.
Meh (Score:2)
Poohbahs and PHBs didn't know a good thing... (Score:5, Insightful)
...when they saw it. Under the name "RRS Sir David Attenborough" it will drop out of the public eye, do some good work, and be forgotten in thirty years. Under the name "RRS Boaty McBoatface" it would have been the subject of children's books, stuffed toys, animated cartoons, been remembered for a century, and inspired a generation of kids to become polar researchers.
While not intentionally funny, the HMS Beagle and the DSV Alvin don't have the most dignified names in the world, and the scientific work they did is none the worse for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Your sig is a dead link, more's the pity.
Financial mistake also (Score:2)
They will be missing out on tourism and merchandising revenue that could help fund it.
Please Mr. Attenborough (Score:2)
Please Mr. Attenborough, please change your legal name to Boaty McBoatface.
What's the big deal? (Score:3)
Re:Boaty McBoatface would have been something ... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm pretty sure he'd have voted for "RRS It's Bloody Cold Here". It certainly seems like a name a Ship would choose.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, we'll name this ship after the most popular name'
Did they really say that or something closer to "We will your your votes to help us pick the name"?
Re: (Score:3)
Having said that, allowing a completely open vote online rather than allowing people to choose from a short list was clearly a daft idea and asking for trouble. They were lucky that th
Re: (Score:2)
Shippy McShipface (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately this is very close to "Shitface" and we don't want to go there.
But taking it one step further, "getting totally Attenboroughed" on a night out would be a comical euphemism for drunk.
Re: (Score:2)
Always nice to see how "-1 Offtopic" to some is used as a form of "I disagree, but intellectually am unwilling/unable to engage to discuss it."
Re: (Score:2)
Kids are into the ship or not based on only 2 factors: Did you spend the time and money to give them a tour? If so, they're interested in ocean science. Or, did you create a popular cartoon about a science ship? If so, they're interested in ocean science.
Simply naming a ship a cartoon name isn't good enough. Kids know the difference between fun, and a ship they didn't ever get to play on.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm thankful that was removed early enough, or it would have ended up being named after Lord Nelson.