On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:06:50 -0000, "Martin Sykes"
wrote:


"martin" wrote in message
.. .
On 28 Jan 2004 02:52:19 -0800, (sahara)
wrote:

"Mike" wrote in message
...

allotment. And visa versa. Which is great! If you split the groups i
would have to search in two separate places. Making my life more
difficult.

exactly my thoughts on the subject.
--
Martin

But if this group whoever they are, wants to start up a new group to discuss
allotments between themselves, then who has a right to stop them doing it?

which group? and who are they?

If stuff is crossposted to URG then everyone using URG will still see
exactly the same stuff as if it was posted direct.

What advantage will be gained?

It just allows the allotment group
to not see a load of stuff about houseplants, ornamentals
and public gardens for example.

They also won't see anything about vegetable gardening, which is what
allotment gardening is all about, unless they subscribe to urg too, in
which case they are back to square one. Perhaps they might escape pro
and anti blood sport rants but I doubt it.

Unless of course everyone made a habit of
crossposting back to them ;-)

So how many groups do you think urg should be subdivided into?

--
Martin