that's interesting, rhetorically, because...
...usually when Don takes the lead in the campaign against in-mast furling, he at least begins with a disclaimer that he has never owned one. I note further that it's probably a good sign, from the perspective of rhetorical analysis, when the opposition is left with little more argument than to point out spelling errors.I'm still not convinced that jamming is a problem. Having been sailing actively (at least 50 sailing days per year) with Seldon in-mast furlers for a decade now, first on an H410 and then on an H46LE, I've never yet experienced a jam. Indeed, it's one of the few pieces of sailing gear that hasn't let me down. Regardless, I think it's disingenuous to label Scott's solution "delusional." It would be a fairly simple matter to take a topping lift or a spare halyard and wrap it around the mast/main a few times, thus lashing the main to the mast the way other folks tend to wrap it to their boom. Five or six wraps ought to do it on even the largest of boats, which means that you could accomplish this with several extra yards of halyard. Sure, it would be more difficult to do this in a gale, just as it's more difficult to flake the main to the boom in a gale, but it would be doable and I doubt it would take more than a couple of minutes. On my boat, I'd quickly run the topping lift three or four times clockwise around the mast to tame the main, and then run a spinnaker halyard half a dozen times counter-clockwise to make certain it stays is place. Not a big deal, especially given the lack of horizontal battens. It would be especially easy if the main jammed half in/half out, which as I understand it is how the naysayers tend to fantasize that this would happen.A better plan is just to learn how to furl the main properly, because it won't jam if it was put away correctly. It really won't, no matter how many times Don tells us otherwise.