[flup set to a.h.l.g.]

BR said:

[...]

Seriously, I don't want waist high grass and weeds right up
close to the house, so we just mow the weeds couple times a month three
inches high with a mulching mower. Eventually, the area becomes a lawn,
as the goldenrod doesn't like being cut short, only plants that prefer
being three inches high survive.

And, we all know there are no weeds with a growth habit of under three
inches. *rolls eyes*

Eventually, from /only/ mowing "a couple times a month" the area doesn't
"become a lawn", it becomes a patch of three inch high weeds.

--

Eggs

Do Lipton employees take coffee breaks?

Eggs Zachtly expounded:

[flup set to a.h.l.g.]

Followups reset. Why do you keep trying to redirect? There are
people in rec.gardens who are interested as well.
--
Ann, gardening in Zone 6a
South of Boston, Massachusetts
e-mail address is not checked
******************************

Ann said:

Eggs Zachtly expounded:

[flup set to a.h.l.g.]

Followups reset.

No they weren't. You only partially reset them. So, do you have a double
standard about crossposts? You only want them crossposted to where *you*
frequent?

Why do you keep trying to redirect? There are
people in rec.gardens who are interested as well.

I have no interest in misc.rural [1] and I don't read rec.gardens on a
regular basis, but in the future should both a.h.l.g. and r.g. be in the
crossposted message, *and* my reply is relevant [2] to both groups, tho I
detest crossposts, I'll leave them. Fair enough?

[1]. Which you didn't reset. And, which is apparently where the post I
replied to originated, unless it was a post by a nym-shifter. I've little
time to do that in-depth of a search to know if it was a nym-shifter, tho I
doubt it was.

[2] I replied to only a part of BR's post dealing with "lawn", which I felt
was more relevant to a.h.l.g.

Make sense? =)

--

Eggs

Show me a man with both feet firmly on the ground, and I'll show you a man
who can't get his pants off.

Eggs Zachtly expounded:

No they weren't. You only partially reset them. So, do you have a double
standard about crossposts? You only want them crossposted to where *you*
frequent?

NO, it was late and I didn't notice the other.

Why do you keep trying to redirect? There are
people in rec.gardens who are interested as well.

I have no interest in misc.rural [1] and I don't read rec.gardens on a
regular basis, but in the future should both a.h.l.g. and r.g. be in the
crossposted message, *and* my reply is relevant [2] to both groups, tho I
detest crossposts, I'll leave them. Fair enough?

Not really.
[1]. Which you didn't reset. And, which is apparently where the post I
replied to originated, unless it was a post by a nym-shifter. I've little
time to do that in-depth of a search to know if it was a nym-shifter, tho I
doubt it was.

Just leave the follups alone and you don't have to keep track of
anything.
[2] I replied to only a part of BR's post dealing with "lawn", which I felt
was more relevant to a.h.l.g.

Make sense? =)

{shrug} Not really. There are many in rec.gardens participating in
this thread, and interested. I only snip when it's a troll post and I
know a post about roses shoudln't go to say, alt.repair.toyota. Other
than that, when a conversation is going in and out of three or four
newsgroups and everyone seems to be participating I leave it alone.
--
Ann, gardening in Zone 6a
South of Boston, Massachusetts
e-mail address is not checked
******************************

Ann said:

Eggs Zachtly expounded:

No they weren't. You only partially reset them. So, do you have a double
standard about crossposts? You only want them crossposted to where *you*
frequent?

NO, it was late and I didn't notice the other.

Yet, you /still/ didn't restore the missing group. Your excuse this time
would be that it was too early?


Why do you keep trying to redirect? There are
people in rec.gardens who are interested as well.

I have no interest in misc.rural [1] and I don't read rec.gardens on a
regular basis, but in the future should both a.h.l.g. and r.g. be in the
crossposted message, *and* my reply is relevant [2] to both groups, tho I
detest crossposts, I'll leave them. Fair enough?

Not really.

Well, it is, and that's the way it'll be. I'll be the one to choose what,
when, and where I post. I snipped what was irrelevant to my reply, and my
reply was more relevant to a.h.l.g., so that's where the flup went.

[1]. Which you didn't reset. And, which is apparently where the post I
replied to originated, unless it was a post by a nym-shifter. I've little
time to do that in-depth of a search to know if it was a nym-shifter, tho I
doubt it was.

Just leave the follups alone and you don't have to keep track of
anything.

Again, I'll post as I see fit, in accordance with subject matter to which
I'm replying.

[2] I replied to only a part of BR's post dealing with "lawn", which I felt
was more relevant to a.h.l.g.

Make sense? =)

{shrug} Not really. There are many in rec.gardens participating in
this thread, and interested.

And, my post went to all of the groups, but the flup was set to the group
that was most relevant. If they choose to reply to the sub-thread, they can
do so, or not. The name of the group is *not* rec.lawn.garden. The
sub-thread had *nothing* to do with gardens. My flup went where it should.

I only snip when it's a troll post and I
know a post about roses shoudln't go to say, alt.repair.toyota. Other
than that, when a conversation is going in and out of three or four
newsgroups and everyone seems to be participating I leave it alone.

That's *you*, not me. I choose to post to the more appropriate group.

--

Eggs

-A conscience is what hurts when all of your other parts feel so good.

Eggs Zachtly expounded:

Yet, you /still/ didn't restore the missing group. Your excuse this time
would be that it was too early?

Do what you want. I'm not the only one who restored the followups you
set. I'll just do as I please from now on, also.
--
Ann, gardening in Zone 6a
South of Boston, Massachusetts
e-mail address is not checked
******************************

Ann said:

Eggs Zachtly expounded:

Yet, you /still/ didn't restore the missing group. Your excuse this time
would be that it was too early?

Do what you want. I'm not the only one who restored the followups you
set.

Sure you are. Only four people have replied to this sub-thread: You, BR,
Steveo, and myself. BR and Steveo both left the flup as I set it. I have no
hard-kills set for this group. Who else does do you see that restored the
groups? Noone. So, it seems that only *you* have a problem with it.

I'll just do as I please from now on, also.

That's as it should be. =)
--

Eggs

-Thou shalt not weigh more than thy refrigerator.

wrote:
[flup set to a.h.l.g.]

BR said:

[...]

Seriously, I don't want waist high grass and weeds right up
close to the house, so we just mow the weeds couple times a month three
inches high with a mulching mower. Eventually, the area becomes a
lawn, as the goldenrod doesn't like being cut short, only plants that
prefer being three inches high survive.

And, we all know there are no weeds with a growth habit of under three
inches. *rolls eyes*

Eventually, from /only/ mowing "a couple times a month" the area doesn't
"become a lawn", it becomes a patch of three inch high weeds.

A lawn is anything that covers the bare soil to a few people in this NG.

Eggs Zachtly wrote:
[flup set to a.h.l.g.]

BR said:

[...]

Seriously, I don't want waist high grass and weeds right up
close to the house, so we just mow the weeds couple times a month three
inches high with a mulching mower. Eventually, the area becomes a lawn,
as the goldenrod doesn't like being cut short, only plants that prefer
being three inches high survive.

And, we all know there are no weeds with a growth habit of under three
inches. *rolls eyes*

Eventually, from /only/ mowing "a couple times a month" the area doesn't
"become a lawn", it becomes a patch of three inch high weeds.


OK, so maybe it is just a patch of three inch high weeds, but it looks
OK to me and it is a lot less work than trying to maintain a
stereotypical suburban lawn.

--
Remove the TOS star ship captain to reply privately.

BR wrote:
it is a lot less work than trying to maintain a
stereotypical suburban lawn.

Cash cows.

On Oct 10, 12:30 pm, BR wrote:


OK, so maybe it is just a patch of three inch high weeds, but it looks
OK to me and it is a lot less work than trying to maintain a
stereotypical suburban lawn.


I was in Lowes yesterday passing through the lawn & garden dept when a
woman asked for advice. Her hubby wants a golf course look & feel to
their lawn. Earlier in the summer he got a restricted use pesticide
license just to buy insecticide to kill all the earthworms in the yard
because he could feel the little mounds when he walked on the grass.
Evidently used it all on one application. She was there to get off
the shelf pesticide to kill the "army worms" in the lawn. When asked
to describe the army worms, her description wasn't even close.
After a long discussion about the improbable perfect lawn, and seeing
what their goal was, I finally gave up.

Red

Red wrote:
he got a restricted use pesticide
license just to buy insecticide to kill all the earthworms in the yard
because he could feel the little mounds when he walked on the grass.
Evidently used it all on one application.

DDT?

On Oct 14, 10:59 am, Steveo wrote:
Red wrote:
he got a restricted use pesticide
license just to buy insecticide to kill all the earthworms in the yard
because he could feel the little mounds when he walked on the grass.
Evidently used it all on one application.

DDT?

Wife didn't say which one. I don't think you can buy DDT in the US can
you? Don't see it on the restricted list.

Red wrote:
On Oct 14, 10:59 am, Steveo wrote:
Red wrote:
he got a restricted use pesticide
license just to buy insecticide to kill all the earthworms in the
yard because he could feel the little mounds when he walked on the
grass. Evidently used it all on one application.

DDT?

Wife didn't say which one. I don't think you can buy DDT in the US can
you? Don't see it on the restricted list.

No it has been banned.

It was a tongue in cheek question, never mind. I try to avoid most of the
bizarre inquiries in here as much as I can. Less flames.

Red wrote:
On Oct 10, 12:30 pm, BR wrote:

OK, so maybe it is just a patch of three inch high weeds, but it looks
OK to me and it is a lot less work than trying to maintain a
stereotypical suburban lawn.


I was in Lowes yesterday passing through the lawn & garden dept when a
woman asked for advice. Her hubby wants a golf course look & feel to
their lawn. Earlier in the summer he got a restricted use pesticide
license just to buy insecticide to kill all the earthworms in the yard
because he could feel the little mounds when he walked on the grass.
Evidently used it all on one application. She was there to get off
the shelf pesticide to kill the "army worms" in the lawn. When asked
to describe the army worms, her description wasn't even close.
After a long discussion about the improbable perfect lawn, and seeing
what their goal was, I finally gave up.

Red



Sounds like a regler maroon to me. Tell him to get some Dylox, eat it
and then **** it onto the lawn. That's what the porfeshnul golf course
dudes do.

Actually, if true, the man should be in jail.