On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 16:26:13 -0400, Boron Elgar
wrote:

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 14:15:03 -0500, dave weil
wrote:


But I'm glad that you found that post informative "boron".

You have either been on Usenet too long or not long enough if the two
initial posts caused you such displeasure.

Annoyance might be a better word. And it wasn't the INITIAL post that
was the annoyance. If you thought that, then you're mistaken. You
might find MY response to the post as evidence. I found the initial
post as something that deserved a careful reply.

My interest is in finding out that someone else would even attempt the
roses indoors. If that engenders a discussion of any sort whatsoever,
even to the point where my own post has contributed something, however
meager, than it may interest someone else to join into the thread,
too. Other wise the initial post might go unanswered altogether.

Well, it already hadn't. But, as I said, YOUR own post had more
relevant content than the rather flip and promotional post from Mr.
Double.

This group is not so heavily laden with posts that this thread and its
replies should be taken to task. There is no need to discourage posts
that might stir a good conversation.

Well, that's sort of my point. If a post has something to offer,
that's fine. One might argue that a book recommendation was an
offering. However, the OP wanted info on hybrid teas, so the
helpfulness is questionable.

Some threads need more nurturing
than others to blossom nicely...they are similar to roses in that
respect.

Well yes - they don't need to be buried behind billboards. Or craven
posts either.