"Anthony" wrote in message
...

"Franz Heymann" wrote in message
...

I think it is a pile of codswallop. Just say to yourself:
uk.reg.gardening Exists
uk.rec.gardening.allottments Proposed

In that case why stop there, think of
uk.rec gardening.flowers
uk.rec.gardening.flowers.roses
uk.rec.gardening.shrubs
uk.rec.gardening.shrubs.deciduous
uk.rec.gardening.shrubs.evergreen
uk.rec.gardening.shrubs.evergreen.hardy

Uk.rec.gardening is already a very active and interesting gardening
newsgroup. It has a considerable number of participants who are de
facto
allotment gardeners, and there are many interesting posts on that topic.
What on earth stops other allotment gardeners from joining the gang and
thereby helping to make an even more interesing newsgroup of URG?

I will bet a penny to the usual pile of dung that every post to the
proposed
new group will in any case be crossposted to URG.

If so, why?

There have been numerous posters on this newsgroup who have asked
advice
because they are new allotment holders. urg has a very knowledgeable
subscriber base

Yes. Their questions and the ensuing discussions have been most
interesting.

and I feel that some of the newbie allotment holders may
feel a little intimidated by the skills shown here and might not wish
to
ask
what might be a serious question to them,

You have just admitted that "There have been numerous posters on this
newsgroup who have asked advice because they are new allotment holders.
urg
has a very knowledgeable subscriber base", so what stops these newbies
of
which you speak from asking their questions, like I do when I feel
ignorant
about something?

but feel it is trivial to the more
skilled subscriber and fail to ask.

That is a totally unwarranted feeling.

I feel that this newsgroup should encourage an allotment newsgroup and
make
sure that any new allotment holder is made aware of it in a very
helpful
way
and not a case of 'There's a newsgroup for you lot, ask your question
there,
newbie' Who knows, someone here might just even be an advisor for
that
newsgroup as well, is there any harm in that?

On the contrary, I would urge urglers to write in pointing out the
essential
crassness of splitting off gardening interests into a multitude of
separate
groups.

And I would urge all urglers that, if this new group comes into
existence,
they should avoid having anything to do with it, in order to hasten its
demise.

Franz

Are you so worried that URG is so weak not to be able to stand some people
moving to another group?
I just CANNOT understand why you should feel so upset about this proposed
group.
To encourage others to 'hasten its demise'?
What are you on Franz? Double the dose, quickly!!!!

I consider it a privilege to be able to use usenet and I am irrevocably
opposed to fouling it up with a quite unnecessary plethora of newsgroups
which will just become dormant within a few months.
This newly proposed group is quite precisely unnecessary because as true as
I am sitting here, anything in it of real interest will be crossposted to
urg.

The quotes in this thread about Urg's charter, show that allotments are
not
specifically INCLUDED, this alone may
may be why people see a need for a new group.

That is an idiotic response. The culture of Dahlias is also not
specifically INCLUDED in urg's charter

Either way fear is no reason
to try and stop the formation of this proposed group.

No, but wasting usenet resources is.

I for one will vote in favour of its formation, so thats 2 uk. gardening
groups I could subscribe to, wheres the problem?

You're welcome to vote whichever way you wish.
Are votes against it also counted? If so I put mine in that box.

Franz

Franz