Chris wrote:
It was picked up by me, the OP (Original Poster).
The seeds are still on the windowsill.
No germination yet - but they haven't had long.

Indeed. It has never happened to me - all seeds not germinating that
is. Off course not all germinate. But your case is strange and I hope
you have some result soon or there's no salad for you!

I've been very lucky with some proteas seeds this year. I'm not sure
which one I have yet. The leaves are too small. Outta 8, 4 took but I
lost one to the slugs. The seeds kinda fell cough in my friend's
pocket when she was in south africa. The seedlings are still outside
but I will soon bring them in.

Now I'm horrified to pot them on - apparently they need no phosphate at
all AT ALL or I'll lose them. It's like a nut allergy - I'm frighten
some phosphate will sip in somehow !!

The message . com
from "La puce" contains these words:
How can I give
evidence of your rude posts in return when they have been removed after
3 days? The link is no longer available,

Fortunately, it is.. I reposted it in full in the phormium thread,
and made sure it would get archived .
Nice try, bad luck.


see below, but we can read the
gist of it. You can see how rude you were to me regarding the compost
myth thread. You thought I had written 'I make fairly rubbish compost
at the moment' when in fact it was gentlegreen and you reported me as
'another post, same author' and added 'looks like you might be one of
them'.

Your fantasy invention. This can't be accidental, can it? Here's the
full version, containing the ATTRIBUTIONS of gentlegreens post. That
shows that I was responding TO gentlegreen's post, talking ABOUT
gentlegreens post. So when I said "same author".obviously .that's
gentlegreen again And then I quote her other post, which even you admit
is hers, not yours. In other words, my post does not contain a single
reference to you, or to anything you posted. You invented a complete
lie.

...Google
archive........................................... .................................................. .................

28. Janet Baraclough Oct 10, 8:39 pm hide options
Newsgroups: uk.rec.gardening
From: Janet Baraclough - Find messages by
this author
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 20:39:03 +0100
Local: Mon, Oct 10 2005 8:39 pm
Subject: grr !! Monty Don perpetuating compost myths ....
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse
Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This
message will be removed from Groups in 7 hours (Oct 17, 8:39 pm).

The message k
from "gentlegreen" contains these words:

Zillions of gardeners CAN be wrong ;-)

and from another post, same author

I actually make fairly rubbish compost at the moment

Looks like you might be one of them

Janet.

................................................. ................................


Later on you carried on with the possibility I was a troll
regarding my advice about soaking seeds which somebody elses came up
with and to which you didn't commented on.

No, not regarding your seedy advice, that's yet another lying
misrepresentation by you of what I said.(copy below).It's exactly your
persistent, unrepentant misrepresentation of what other people post,
which identifies you as a troll. You've proved it in spades.

Janet

The message
from Janet Baraclough contains these words:

The message
from Kay contains these words:

In article .com, La
puce writes

Kay wrote:

What on earth might be wrong?
Could be that the seeds are NG...H
Could be wrong temperature.

That's very strange indeed. Have you tried to soak them before hand?
Do you still have the packet to check the date of the seeds?

Your way of keeping in only the last attribution confuses me. I wrote
the third line of the above. I did not write either the first or the
second lines. Could you please consider keeping in the attributions for
the previous responses? Either that, or reply to the post that your
reply is relevant to, rather than replying to one several replies down
the line.

LOL. I've just had the same problem from Puce in the "Are slugs and
snails eating phormium?" thread. Probably trolling, going by her
irrational responses there.

Janet

Janet Baraclough wrote:
[... bizarre and unnecessary but apparently accidental mutual
wire-crossings, misunderstandings, etc snipped...]

I think all this comes under the heading "Oh, for goodness' sake!" to
include "Water under the bridge".

--
Mike.

The message
from "Mike Lyle" contains these words:

Janet Baraclough wrote:
[... bizarre and unnecessary but apparently accidental mutual
wire-crossings, misunderstandings, etc snipped...]


No wirecrossing or misunderstanding on my part.

I think all this comes under the heading "Oh, for goodness' sake!"

Oh, I thought it was for the sake of the truth.

to
include "Water under the bridge".

The only thing under the bridge, is the troll.


Janet

In article .com, La
puce writes

Chris wrote:

The seeds are still on the windowsill.
No germination yet - but they haven't had long.

Indeed. It has never happened to me - all seeds not germinating that
is. Off course not all germinate. But your case is strange and I hope
you have some result soon or there's no salad for you!

There *is* some result now. Not the seeds on the kitchen roll - but
they haven't had much time. Some of the seeds outdoors in seed compost
have germinated. Someone mentioned that the temperature might have been
wrong - and I reckon that was probably it. It was probably too hot -
because these seeds are designed to be sown in "the colder months".

There are sill some seeds left and so I shall try some every week to see
which conditions are OK.

If successful, this will be a useful kind of lettuce. It will be good
to have fresh salad through the winter.

Has anyone else tried them?
--
Chris

Janet Baraclough wrote:
It's exactly your
persistent, unrepentant misrepresentation of what other people post,
which identifies you as a troll. You've proved it in spades.

Persistent? Persistant you mean. Other people posts?! Which people? Who
are all these people Janet but in your immagination?! Do you hear
voices too?! You were rude and you carry on being rude. So I'll now
ignore you.

In article , Janet Baraclough
writes
The message . com
from "La puce" contains these words:
How can I give
evidence of your rude posts in return when they have been removed after
3 days? The link is no longer available,

Fortunately, it is.. I reposted it in full in the phormium thread,
and made sure it would get archived .
Nice try, bad luck.


Just to step in here -

I can vouch for LaP and the fact that she is neither a troll nor
unpleasant. However, she is French

Unfortunately, this does seem to result in more than the fair share of
misunderstandings in the two dimensional world of usenet posts

And, Helene - your newsreader is being a bit remiss in keeping correct
attributions. I presume you are using google or something similar? My
work has - for what its worth - long been settled on Outlook, etc.
(There are numerous advantages to it in the office situation - but
newsgroups is not one of them). However, I continue to use Turnpike for
news and personal mail. Can't you do that?

That said, whilst the attributions are not right - I think the level of
complaint is a bit unjustified. The single remaining attribution that
is left on LaP's posts might - at a quick glance - look as if it is
saying that one person wrote all of the post. However, it is pretty
clear that this is not the case once you notice that the different bits
of the post have different levels of indentation and line prefixes (and
maybe even colour) - and the attribution itself only matches one of
these.

So, a bit of all round backing off would seem sensible here, imo, of
course.

--
regards andyw

La puce wrote:
Janet Baraclough wrote:
It's exactly your
persistent, [...]

Persistent? Persistant you mean. [...]

Enough, already! And it _is_ "persistent".

--
Mike.

newsb wrote:
Just to step in here -

Glad you did. I thank you (and isn't it great we can say 'thank you' in
here ;o)

I can vouch for LaP and the fact that she is neither a troll nor
unpleasant. However, she is French

Tst tst ...

(snip)

However, I continue to use Turnpike for
news and personal mail. Can't you do that?

I'm looking into it now. I'm fed up with this beta rubbish googling
thang. Pages expire very quickly. It's no good. I'll have a word with
my IT chap. I'm not sure where to start see ...

Mike Lyle wrote:
Enough, already! And it _is_ "persistent".

Yus. Persistant ... in french, which also means 'evergreen'. I thought
I'd throw this one in )

"Mike Lyle" wrote:

Enough, already!

Amen to that!

Perhaps the person, admittedly new to this "culture" is unaware that
complaining about another's spelling is proof that they have nothing useful
to say. Doubly so if it's _wrong_!

Here in the northeastern U.S., there still has not been a frost, though
last night came pretty close. A good thing, since I have yet to finish
preparing the bed and planting a thousand or so garlic cloves...


Gary Woods AKA K2AHC- PGP key on request, or at home.earthlink.net/~garygarlic
Zone 5/6 in upstate New York, 1420' elevation. NY WO G

Gary Woods wrote:
Amen to that!
Perhaps the person, admittedly new to this "culture" is unaware that
complaining about another's spelling is proof that they have nothing useful
to say. Doubly so if it's _wrong_!

Ha! But it wasn't! And that 'culture' has been mine for over 25 years.
And I've even planted my garlic already. But only twenty gloves or so
....

The message .com
from "La puce" contains these words:


Janet Baraclough wrote:
It's exactly your
persistent, unrepentant misrepresentation of what other people post,
which identifies you as a troll. You've proved it in spades.

Persistent? Persistant you mean.

We're speaking English. It's persistent; check in any English dictionary.

How very typical of you, to accuse someone else of making a mistake they
did not, while the person hopelessly and ignorantly in the wrong is
yourself. Yet again, the simplest check would have saved you from
making a fool of yourself.

Other people posts?! Which people?

Gentlegreen. Remember? You wrongly insisted you wrote her "zillions
of gardeners can be wrong" post to the phormium thread; google proves
you did not. Also, you misattributed posts by Kay Chris and Harold in
this thread.

Who
are all these people Janet but in your immagination?

They are other posters in this newsgroup. Surely you can't have
forgotten that already?

Janet.

The message
from newsb contains these words:

That said, whilst the attributions are not right - I think the level of
complaint is a bit unjustified.

Excuse me? My "level of complaint" was in another thread, a simple
reply-post to her saying "No, I did not write that, please mind your
attributions".

That unleashed from Puce a diatribe of denials , claiming the problem
was at my end, blaming me for her error, and making wildly stupid and
wrong accusations about other posts of mine (and another poster), which
Puce specified. Google's archives prove she was utterly wrong on every
count. She has refused ample opportunity to check and recognise her
errors and retract them, but instead, insists on repeating lies.

Trolls often insist on endlessly repeating the same lies in the hope
that gullible people who don't check the facts for themselves, will
start to believe them. Puce continues to lie through her teeth in the
face of google's archived evidence.

Refuting unjustified, abusive, repeated lies about my posts , does
not seem "a bit unjustified" to me.

Janet

The message . com
from "La puce" contains these words:


Gary Woods wrote:
Amen to that!
Perhaps the person, admittedly new to this "culture" is unaware that
complaining about another's spelling is proof that they have nothing
useful
to say. Doubly so if it's _wrong_!

Ha! But it wasn't!

I'm sure you can all see now, where the problem lies.

Janet