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

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

--
Martin

It's not about subdividing URG. URG is great and will stay as it is. I
just
don't understand why anyone cares if this other group wants another group
to
discuss allotment stuff in particular.

I do understand why we should try to stop this diversionary move from
succeeding. The most likely outcome is either 2 newsgroups fully
crossposted or many of us missing out on interseting discussions on
allotment gardening.

Franz

Anyone who wants to discuss
allotments on URG still can but we don't *own* the subject and trying to
stop someone discussing elsewhere just isn't fair. Newsgroups aren't
mutually exclusive. I don't see anyone in rec.gardens (which as I
understand
it is about gardening worldwide) complaining about URG discussing UK based
issues separately so why should it matter to URG if someone wants to
discuss
allotments separately?

As for the bandwidth cost of subscribing to both groups, the upside is
that
for those of us who don't care about allotments, we don't need to download
the allotment stuff at all!

--
Martin & Anna Sykes
( Remove x's when replying )
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~sykesm