• Crabs (unregistered) in reply to Schnapple
    Schnapple:
    Roy T.:
    The funny thing is, someone asked me todo the exact same thing for him. Why do people keep expecting that programmers can make you millionairs! We are just tools! (like any employee is to a business)

    OK, so honest discussion question:

    You're someone who is not a programmer, but you have a brilliant idea. And just for fun let's say it really is a brilliant idea. Like, it's the next Google.

    But you don't have a lick of programming chops. And you know for a fact that you can't learn how to either (and again, just for fun, let's say that this is actually true - you're the kind of person who just doesn't have the mental capacity to learn programming).

    And you don't know anyone at all in real life who can program.

    And you have no money whatsoever or hope of being able to pull down venture capital.

    But you have this idea that is going to make Google look like a cakewalk.

    Is it really that insane of an idea to try and see if you can find a programmer willing to turn your idea into gold with the premise that you won't be able to pay them until you can make money, but once the idea is making money they'll be paid very well?

    And is it really that much of a stretch to think that you couldn't find someone willing to do this? Someone who's got programming chops but is financially secure? Someone willing to do this in their spare time (see: FOSS)?

    Okay, so you have this awesome idea, can't program, and know 0 programmers, and have no money.

    I'm not sure what's to stop me, as the programmer, from just taking your idea and running with it. You have a lawyer friend to write you up a rock solid NDA?

    At this point, you might as well apply for a patent. You can get a small bank loan to do that. Once you have the patent (at least pending), you can get the VC's to throw money at it. From there you get the programmers. From there you make your millions.

  • Calli Arcale (unregistered) in reply to Calli Arcale
    Calli Arcale:
    Now I want to go look at maps and try to figure out what route he took.

    That was easy. All hail Google Maps! Looks like you'd take the Bow River down stream to the South Saskatchewan River, which would get you to the Saskatchewan River, which in turn would take you to the swampy areas around Lake Winnepeg and then into the giant lake itself. Navigating that large and sometimes treacherous lake would get you to the Red River of the North. A couple months of exhausting upriver paddling would get you to Lake Traverse. A short hop across the divide in Browns Valley and into Big Stone Lake, and then you're downriver the rest of the way. The Minnesota River takes you to the Twin Cities, where you pick up the Mississippi River and ride that right on down to the Gulf of Mexico.

    Very cool. He might've gotten stuck in the Twin Cities, but he'd already finished the worst part of his journey.

  • GrandmasterB (unregistered)

    Since my company works in the 3D graphics realm, we used to get asked quite frequently by people if we would help them create the 'next big awesome game' based on their idea. Often they'd have with them pages upon pages of handwritten notes describing the game. All work would be done for the usual percentage after release, of course. I'd always tell them that ideas are cheap, and if you have a great idea for a game, the best way to make it a reality is to learn to code.

  • (cs) in reply to Calli Arcale
    Calli Arcale:
    Okay, so there's a great WTF story in this, but am I the only one who thinks it's just totally cool that this guy was trying to canoe from Calgary to New Orleans?

    That takes GUTS. Very cool indeed.

    Actually, the way Alex & Co. usually "anonymize" these stories, Kevin Saff has probably lived in rural Texas his whole life, saw a picture of a canoe in a book once, and thinks both Calgary and Minnesota are Inuit villages above the Arctic Circle.

  • ben (unregistered)

    Jonathan Raban wrote an account -- "Old Glory: An American Voyage" of taking a small boat down the Mississippi. Anyone who thinks that any part of it is easy or that there is a point at which "the hard part is over" is seriously mistaken.

  • AuMatar (unregistered) in reply to Schnapple
    Schnapple:
    Roy T.:
    The funny thing is, someone asked me todo the exact same thing for him. Why do people keep expecting that programmers can make you millionairs! We are just tools! (like any employee is to a business)

    OK, so honest discussion question:

    You're someone who is not a programmer, but you have a brilliant idea. And just for fun let's say it really is a brilliant idea. Like, it's the next Google.

    But you don't have a lick of programming chops. And you know for a fact that you can't learn how to either (and again, just for fun, let's say that this is actually true - you're the kind of person who just doesn't have the mental capacity to learn programming).

    And you don't know anyone at all in real life who can program.

    And you have no money whatsoever or hope of being able to pull down venture capital.

    But you have this idea that is going to make Google look like a cakewalk.

    Is it really that insane of an idea to try and see if you can find a programmer willing to turn your idea into gold with the premise that you won't be able to pay them until you can make money, but once the idea is making money they'll be paid very well?

    And is it really that much of a stretch to think that you couldn't find someone willing to do this? Someone who's got programming chops but is financially secure? Someone willing to do this in their spare time (see: FOSS)?

    Ideas are a dime a dozen. There's not a programmer out there who doesn't have a half dozen ideas, some of which are even good. Most of them aren't. Having ideas isn't enough- you need to be able to implement them. Or if you're really sure about the idea, pay someone to implement them. But you aren't going to find anyone willing to do all the real work, take on all the real risk, do so for free, for an idea that has about .000001% chance of actually being anything. Oh, and give up most of the money if the odds do hit. Where's the advantage for him in that?

    Open source is something else. Its the programmer codes something he needs, then releases it in case it helps someone else, and its the high tech equivalent to charity work. Its not a programmer taking all the risks of the business on for no rewards.

  • AndyL (unregistered) in reply to Steerpike
    Steerpike:
    No one else got uncomfortable reading a story that was making fun of someone that seemed pretty clearly mentally ill?
    It does not seem that clear at all. I see no indication that this person is mentally ill. What he lacks is an understanding of how business is done. This sort of ignorance is pretty common. The main difference is that most of these stupid people aren't this ambitious.

    If not understanding the industry you're trying to extract money from is a mental illness then most of the resumes I read are from the mentally ill.

  • k1 (unregistered) in reply to Eric
    Eric:
    Step 1: Code algorithms. Step 2: ??? Step 3: PROFIT!

    Step 2: Advertise it on the 3rd or 4th result from google

    CYA

  • Buck B. (unregistered)
    Schnapple:
    Is it really that insane of an idea to try and see if you can find a programmer willing to turn your idea into gold with the premise that you won't be able to pay them until you can make money, but once the idea is making money they'll be paid very well?

    And is it really that much of a stretch to think that you couldn't find someone willing to do this? Someone who's got programming chops but is financially secure? Someone willing to do this in their spare time (see: FOSS)?

    Yes. Lots of people have ideas for websites; the hard part is identifying projects that make sense given the time and effort required to develop them.

    I see "idea posts" like these on Craiglist every day too, and many seem to have only the barest conception of the technology required. If they had any clue, they wouldn't be looking for "a few weeks work, great for students and portfolio building."

    Most people need a dose of reality from someone like Kevin, after which they'll hopefully give up the idea. (Yeah, sure.) But it's not fair to the guy who wasted an afternoon essentially giving free advice. Maybe developers should set up a low-rent venture capital firm where regular people come in with ideas for websites, then get a percentage if the firm decides to develop it. This would also act as a public service to the developer community by more efficiently telling people their ideas are stupid.

  • Forte (unregistered)

    "And just for fun let's say it really is a brilliant idea. Like, it's the next Google. "

    Google wasn't a brilliant idea. It's just a search engine. They got lucky more than anything to end up on top.

    This dude's idea for a MMO was similar to google: take something that everyone else is doing and do it better.

  • (cs)
    “Now, look. He just runs right through the tree. Right through it! You see that?” He harrumphed and turned toward Kevin with a look like someone died.

    I pictured Santa Claus looking at me with profound horror in his eyes when I read this.

  • Chris (unregistered) in reply to AuMatar
    AuMatar:
    Schnapple:
    Roy T.:
    The funny thing is, someone asked me todo the exact same thing for him. Why do people keep expecting that programmers can make you millionairs! We are just tools! (like any employee is to a business)

    OK, so honest discussion question:

    You're someone who is not a programmer, but you have a brilliant idea. And just for fun let's say it really is a brilliant idea. Like, it's the next Google.

    But you don't have a lick of programming chops. And you know for a fact that you can't learn how to either (and again, just for fun, let's say that this is actually true - you're the kind of person who just doesn't have the mental capacity to learn programming).

    And you don't know anyone at all in real life who can program.

    And you have no money whatsoever or hope of being able to pull down venture capital.

    But you have this idea that is going to make Google look like a cakewalk.

    Is it really that insane of an idea to try and see if you can find a programmer willing to turn your idea into gold with the premise that you won't be able to pay them until you can make money, but once the idea is making money they'll be paid very well?

    And is it really that much of a stretch to think that you couldn't find someone willing to do this? Someone who's got programming chops but is financially secure? Someone willing to do this in their spare time (see: FOSS)?

    Ideas are a dime a dozen. There's not a programmer out there who doesn't have a half dozen ideas, some of which are even good. Most of them aren't. Having ideas isn't enough- you need to be able to implement them. Or if you're really sure about the idea, pay someone to implement them. But you aren't going to find anyone willing to do all the real work, take on all the real risk, do so for free, for an idea that has about .000001% chance of actually being anything. Oh, and give up most of the money if the odds do hit. Where's the advantage for him in that?

    Open source is something else. Its the programmer codes something he needs, then releases it in case it helps someone else, and its the high tech equivalent to charity work. Its not a programmer taking all the risks of the business on for no rewards.

    Exactly.

    Spending 5-6 hours a week working on an open-source project in your free time is substantially different from working full-time on a project without being paid. In OSS, you are contributing to the common good and (generally) scratching a personal itch. In the mad businessman model, you are working on a losing project that will probably never work and will never benefit ANYONE. It's a futile endeavor with no hope of compensation.

    Besides, a lot of open-source developers are full-time employees of companies (or non-profits) that benefit from their contributions (IBM, Novell, OSF, FSF, etc).

  • Brian (unregistered)

    When I was little, I was the same as this guy - all sorts of ideas of games I'd like to play... I actually went so far as to look up computer companies in the phone book, and write them paper letters explaining my ideas and asking them to implement them.

    Of course, I was 8, so I had an excuse...

  • Roboteer (unregistered) in reply to Forte
    Forte:
    you don't row a canoe. you paddle it.

    ooo.... kinky...

  • Forte (unregistered) in reply to Calli Arcale

    Is there no way to reach the Missouri River from Calgary? Even if there were a lengthy portage, it would shave off hundreds of km compared to looping around way up north like that.

  • ultraswank (unregistered) in reply to Forte

    No, Google was a brilliant idea. They introduced new search algorithms that massively improved the quality of internet searches. Their idea of ranking pages based on the number of pages that link to it was brilliant at the time, and they have only improved on their methods since. When Google launched they almost immediately killed competitors like Alta Vista and HotBot because they were so vastly superior. You sir sound like a youngun who doesn't know what a crap shoot internet searches were before Google came around.

  • MArtin (unregistered) in reply to JamesQMurphy
    JamesQMurphy:
    You're back? Notice how many people are involved? Granted, that's for a polished video game, but the point is, it takes more than a single programmer with good chops, spare time, and a retirement fund. At some point you'll need more resources. What about customer support? QA? Accounting? This is why business plans exist.

    You know Chris Sawyer? He made it. All in assembler programming language! But he is a real genius!

  • Jeff has a point! (unregistered)

    Jeff definitely has a point... a Chariot should never be able to defeat a howitzer. I mean that's just ridiculous.

  • Sme (unregistered) in reply to Dave A
    Dave A:
    So thats how WOW started off? I bet Keith's kicking himself now...

    I'll bet Kevin is, too....

  • (cs) in reply to Jeff has a point!
    Jeff has a point!:
    Jeff definitely has a point... a Chariot should never be able to defeat a howitzer. I mean that's just ridiculous.
    Civilization IV actually fixes that problem. Unit strengths are exponential rather than linear. So a strength of 5 is twice as much as 4. And 6 is twice as much as 5. Then when a howitzer (18) meets a chariot (3), the odds of winning are 32768:1 (2^15:1) rather than 18:3.

    As for Jeff, it's one thing to see a problem with what somebody else has done. It's another thing to see a solution and implement it. And yet another to win fame and fortune doing it.

  • timbo (unregistered)

    the first thing i'd be thinking when i saw the blue tarp is "am I getting out of here alive?"

  • timbo (unregistered) in reply to Huhwut

    i'm not so sure... did you read the part where he admited the game only had 25 players?

  • Wyrdone (unregistered) in reply to Dave A
    Dave A:
    So thats how WOW started off? I bet Keith's kicking himself now...

    No. That's how the myriad of miniscule and crappy "web mmo" games get created and die every month.

  • housecaldwell (unregistered) in reply to AndyL
    I see no indication that this person is mentally ill.
    "I never leave the apartment."
    I think those of us who are a bit uncomfortable took this literally.
    "Not one game chit had been popped from its original cardboard."
    Which game? Some of those games from the 70s are worth good money to collectors. Seems to me the best get-rich quick idea for Jeff is to put his old wargames up on ebay.
  • (cs) in reply to Forte
    Forte:
    you don't row a canoe. you paddle it.

    Also, I've heard that you can tune a piano, but you can't tune a fish.

  • (cs) in reply to strictnein
    strictnein:
    If you look at craiglist there are always "idea" guys looking for programmers. And no, I'm not talking about the casual encounters section.

    And the "idea" is always something like "make a great game and advertise it in all the right places". The rough idea is about .0001% of the problem.

  • anon (unregistered) in reply to cconroy
    cconroy:
    Also, I've heard that you can tune a piano, but you can't tune a fish.
    Of course you can tunafish. Usually in a canning factory.
  • Sanity (unregistered) in reply to JamesQMurphy
    Schnapple:
    Is it really that insane of an idea to try and see if you can find a programmer willing to turn your idea into gold with the premise that you won't be able to pay them until you can make money, but once the idea is making money they'll be paid very well?

    And is it really that much of a stretch to think that you couldn't find someone willing to do this? Someone who's got programming chops but is financially secure? Someone willing to do this in their spare time (see: FOSS)?

    I think both counts are a bit of a stretch.

    Oh, it's not insane to try, but you have to realize that most startups fail. This includes well-organized, well-funded startups, with proper management, QA, customer support, accounting, even something resembling a solid business plan.

    So if you've got no money, and you're just looking for programmers, what makes you think you have a chance?

    And why won't programmers do this for fun? Because if they're at all intelligent, they'll put their money to better use and buy a lottery ticket.

    If you pay me up front, I have no problem working on your hairbrained idea. If you want me to give you my free time, well, for free, I'd much rather work on FOSS, where at least if one project fails, the source is open for me to borrow on my next project.

    JamesQMurphy:
    Notice how many people are involved? Granted, that's for a polished video game, but the point is, it takes more than a single programmer with good chops, spare time, and a retirement fund. At some point you'll need more resources. What about customer support? QA? Accounting? This is why business plans exist.
    I wouldn't expect this to be a huge problem.

    For example: World of Goo is an indie game built by two guys out of their own pocket. It is possible that it's made enough by now for them to hire customer support, QA, etc. I wouldn't imagine accounting would be a huge problem; after all, freelancers exist.

    The biggest problem is getting there.

    It's like the scaling problem. People talk about how slow Ruby is, but a decent Rails app, on modest hardware, can serve 50 or 100 requests per second, and it's possible to go bare-metal Rack or a Merb router for thousands of requests per second.

    Once you're getting more than a thousand requests per second -- or once your game is so popular that you need a separate customer support department -- you have what we like to call "A nice problem to have."

    Because at that point, you've either turned all that popularity into money, or you can take those numbers to an investor and get money. Then, you can afford to hire those departments you need, or throw hardware (or performance experts) at the scaling problem.

  • Ted (unregistered) in reply to Forte

    Yeah too bad the first step of his business model was "Make WoW". That's not how real innovation works. And if you think Google was/is "just a search engine" you should read up on pagerank, its pretty interesting. If Google's first step was just "Make AltaVista" they would be nowhere near the top today.

  • asdf (unregistered) in reply to AlpineR
    AlpineR:
    As for Jeff, it's one thing to see a problem with what somebody else has done. It's another thing to see a solution and implement it. And yet another to win fame and fortune doing it.
    It's also one thing to see an app and find 90 things you'd like different and another thing to solve all the design problems needed to build the app in the first place.

    The problem with these "idea guys" is that they don't add anything useful to a field because they don't understand it.

    John Carmack wasn't a game genius for just coming up with games like Doom. It was because he knew that there were algorithms (like BSP trees) that made them possible.

  • chariots of firepower (unregistered)

    @ben: Yes, an excellent book. To be sure, the paddling would be all downstream, but a frequently hazardous trip.

  • Progeek (unregistered) in reply to ultraswank

    And there's a subtle point in your rebuttal...

    You cannot come up with an idea as "cool" as google without thoroughly understanding your subject. So the original principle is flawed from the outset.

    I believe that it is impossible to come up with a "new google" type of idea without having the technical foundation to at least plan its execution. It would be similar to coming up with new ways to cure genetic diseases without any background in genetics, biochemistry, medicine, etc..

    The coolest "light bulb" type ideas tend to come from people with deep knowledge in more than one area that happen to draw a novel connection between them.

  • Eyrieowl (unregistered) in reply to Schnapple
    Schnapple:
    Is it really that insane of an idea to try and see if you can find a programmer willing to turn your idea into gold with the premise that you won't be able to pay them until you can make money, but once the idea is making money they'll be paid very well?

    And is it really that much of a stretch to think that you couldn't find someone willing to do this? Someone who's got programming chops but is financially secure? Someone willing to do this in their spare time (see: FOSS)?

    Not inherently insane. It is Very Foolish to not realistically assess your chances of success, however. Starting with: as someone with no idea how to do what really needs to be done, how are you going to qualify whether the guy you're talking to knows how to do what you need? I think many potentially decent (maybe not genius, but decent) projects founder on that HUGE obstacle. And I could go on about the other reasons why you need to recognize the real risk of failure, but...in the end, it might be worth the risk, but you shouldn't be self-deluded about it being "just so easy". If you lack any realistic assessment of the problem, it's highly unlikely you're going to make the pragmatic decisions you need to actually succeed in the end.

  • Progeek (unregistered) in reply to ultraswank
    ultraswank:
    No, Google was a brilliant idea. They introduced new search algorithms that massively improved the quality of internet searches. Their idea of ranking pages based on the number of pages that link to it was brilliant at the time, and they have only improved on their methods since. When Google launched they almost immediately killed competitors like Alta Vista and HotBot because they were so vastly superior. You sir sound like a youngun who doesn't know what a crap shoot internet searches were before Google came around.

    Cannot believe that I forgot to quote the message to which I was replying. Stupid stupid stupid.

  • Eyrieowl (unregistered) in reply to ultraswank
    ultraswank:
    No, Google was a brilliant idea. They introduced new search algorithms that massively improved the quality of internet searches.

    You, sir, sound like someone who didn't actually know that there was a better search engine available for YEARS called alltheweb. It had a far superior engine and a much larger index. The company that ran it, Fast, from Norway, put it up as a demo of their search tech. They didn't view it as the business model, but as a site to showcase the search technology that they wanted to license to companies. The brilliant ideas Google had were a) a catchy, oddball name and, more importantly, b) viewing their web search as the foundation of the business model. Yes, Google eventually developed better search technology, but it took several years. Don't EVER confuse a good business model with a good technology.

  • Machtyn (unregistered) in reply to WhiskeyJack
    WhiskeyJack:
    If it were me, the interview would have ended before it began, once I found myself looking up at a residential apartment building.

    That's exactly what I thought when I read the line about a covering for the window. But... you can never be too sure. Apple started in a garage with 3 or 4 guys. There have been a few (stressing a few) companies that make it big from very humble beginnings.

    Then again, the magical formula usually includes those few guys knowing each other well before-hand and not one guy trying to put a group together.

  • al (unregistered)

    Everyone knows the game itself never has a profit. Merchandising is where the real money is made.

  • Davo (unregistered) in reply to Roy T.
    Roy T.:
    The funny thing is, someone asked me todo the exact same thing for him. Why do people keep expecting that programmers can make you millionairs! We are just tools! (like any employee is to a business)

    LOL, in Australia tool is slang for idiot :)

  • (cs)

    "Venture of the Void" describes my last date...

  • Huai (unregistered) in reply to Eyrieowl
    Eyrieowl:
    ultraswank:
    No, Google was a brilliant idea. They introduced new search algorithms that massively improved the quality of internet searches.

    You, sir, sound like someone who didn't actually know that there was a better search engine available for YEARS called alltheweb. It had a far superior engine and a much larger index. The company that ran it, Fast, from Norway, put it up as a demo of their search tech. They didn't view it as the business model, but as a site to showcase the search technology that they wanted to license to companies. The brilliant ideas Google had were a) a catchy, oddball name and, more importantly, b) viewing their web search as the foundation of the business model. Yes, Google eventually developed better search technology, but it took several years. Don't EVER confuse a good business model with a good technology.

    Google started out as a technology research project for founders Larry Page and Sergei Brin at Stanford as a PHD dissertation. They had technology developed long before a business model arose.

  • Jaffa McNeill (unregistered) in reply to housecaldwell

    Aye, that's the giveaway right there.

    People, I know it's the internet and all that, but it is acutely apparent from the story that we're making fun of someone with a real problem. Let's weed this sort of stuff out - there's plenty of fun to be had without picking on the defenceless.

  • Bill Waite (unregistered) in reply to Davo
    Davo:
    Roy T.:
    The funny thing is, someone asked me todo the exact same thing for him. Why do people keep expecting that programmers can make you millionairs! We are just tools! (like any employee is to a business)

    LOL, in Australia tool is slang for idiot :)

    Yeah, it's the same here in America, and another guy already made a joke about it.

  • Chris (unregistered)

    Having just looked at Venture the Void (which is indeed run by a bloke called Calvin) I'd say his main problem was a rotten Web site. No wonder he only has 25 users.

  • Steve Taylor (unregistered)

    back when I was doing multimedia I talked to this guy's cousin I think. I pitched an extremely lowball bid for an educational simulation game, drastically undercharging because I really wanted to do some game work.

    He turned me down - which was probably my lucky break. I later heard he'd hired some schoolkids to write it, complaining about some guy who'd wanted "literally thousands of dollars to write a game".

    Well, yes.

  • Capt. Obvious (unregistered) in reply to AuMatar
    AuMatar:
    Ideas are a dime a dozen. There's not a programmer out there who doesn't have a half dozen ideas, some of which are even good. Most of them aren't. Having ideas isn't enough- you need to be able to implement them. Or if you're really sure about the idea, pay someone to implement them. But you aren't going to find anyone willing to do all the real work, take on all the real risk, do so for free, for an idea that has about .000001% chance of actually being anything. Oh, and give up most of the money if the odds do hit. Where's the advantage for him in that
    Hear hear. I've known people to learn to program because of their ideas. I've known people to hire experts (actually, statisticans) to help them persue their ideas. Some made money; some didn't. But they all invested time and money far beyond the idea stage to get a break.
  • Kevin Saff (unregistered) in reply to edgeCase

    To reply to comments:

    I did expect Alex to anonymize this much more than he did, but of course I have to be pleased that this has given my friend's game some extra visibility. I in fact did ask Calvin for 2% of the proceeds, so I expect to be rolling in money any time now.

    If I'd known Alex was going to leave so much intact I might have mentioned my canoeing blog as well:

    http://kevinfloat.blogspot.com/

    Someone speculated about the route I took from Calgary to Minneapolis. I did not take the long route through Lake Winnipeg, instead there is a tiny river called the Qu'Appelle, sometimes little more than a creek, that winds from Lake Diefenbaker to the Assiniboine River.

    I paddled up the Red River for a week but I was running out of daylight hours and the water was starting to get too cold for dragging the boat over obstructions. So in Morris, Manitoba I assembled a bike trailer I had brought, and pulled the canoe behind my folding bicycle to Lake Itasca, which is the headwaters of the Mississippi.

  • dsh (unregistered) in reply to Forte
    Forte:
    you don't row a canoe. you paddle it.

    Thank you! As a paddler and rower I wish more people knew their vocabulary when it comes to paddles, paddling, oars, and rowing.

  • PsySal (unregistered)

    Oh dear, this is my game and this AM I had to unplug the server because I was worried my landlord was going to steal it. True story, but I was probably just paranoid.

    Anyhow I plugged it back in, I think it's up now. BUY MY GAME! Or at least play it, hemmm...

  • (cs) in reply to Chris
    Chris:
    Having just looked at Venture the Void (which is indeed run by a bloke called Calvin) I'd say his main problem was a rotten Web site. No wonder he only has 25 users.
    QFT.

    Going to that web site tells you nothing about the game, and that youtube video doesn't do anything to make me want to play it.

    Fortunately, I hit "Signin", and there it gave me a page where I could click links and actually find out something about the game.

    It might be interesting. Can't play it (no Microsoft Windows system here). But I do wonder whether slashdotting or WTF'ing will be the bigger site slammer.

  • (cs) in reply to dsh
    dsh:
    Forte:
    you don't row a canoe. you paddle it.
    Thank you! As a paddler and rower I wish more people knew their vocabulary when it comes to paddles, paddling, oars, and rowing.
    Does whether you row or paddle dictate the name of the vessel in which you are doing it? I am familiar with the difference in rowing and paddling, and I would typically say that paddling occurs in a canoe, but I cannot think of an appropriate term for the type of boat that you row (which may be the exact same shape and size as the canoe being rowed)

Leave a comment on “Rolling in the Money”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article