On 8/9/04 19:59, in article , "Peter Crosland"
wrote:
snip
I cannot imagine anything more potentially damaging than believing
such specialised advice from the net. DON'T DO IT!

That is a very sweeping statement Sacha and somewhat cynical.

You bet.

Of course with
any advice given here it needs to be taken with considerable care and should
not be considered definitive.

Which is what I said.

Having said that I agree that many of the
answers given have been littered with errors and omissions. That does not
mean to say that all the points are worthless. Are we to assume that all the
gardening answers are to be treated as perfect? There are plenty of dangers
in the garden if people take flawed advice!


Precisely. Are you a lawyer, qualified to give an opinion that will stand
up in a court of law? How do we know that you are correct that the answers
given are littered with errors and omissions? You do not include your own
in that, presumably? If you don't, why not? Are you a lawyer, qualified
to give such advice?

Perhaps you would be good enough to post your qualis and the name of your
firm here, so that anyone wishing to follow your advice may check your
ability to give it.

I post our point of contact always (except when I have a memory lapse). That
means people can choose to trust me or not - when I don't know an answer and
consult my husband or stepson, I say so. You show me *your* qualis because
I've shown you mine. ;-)

What I am doing is emphasising Caveat lector. What are you doing?
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove the weeds to email me)