On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 14:42:09 +0100, "Mike" wrote:

Certainly needed to keep the nasties out.

uk.rec.gardening.moderated

Does anyone actually know how to start a moderated group?

Bill wrote:
Does anyone actually know how to start a moderated group?
It is hardly different from starting a normal one:
http://www.usenet.org.uk/guidelines.html#guidelines
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newsgro...ted_newsgroups

"La Puce" wrote
Sue wrote:
Farm1 wrote nothing that was either aggressive or abusive - unlike
yourself.

And you always seem to pop in for an argument.

You're arguing; I was commenting on your twisting of thefacts, as you
were maligning another poster.

Where have I been abusive to Farm1?

In the post I replied to.

I recall her being very abusive to me in February to defend her mate,
as she always does, and trying for another go. That's what I am
seeing.

And I recall you were the one following someone around Usenet in order
to insult them. The thread is archived. If you got singed it was you who
lit the fire.

Keep out of it Sue.

Hard luck. This is a public newsgroup and you don't get a veto on who
comments. I've read URG for a long time and if you cry victim, putting a
twisted spin on someone else's words yet again, then I have the right to
contradict you.

The way you've behaved here from the outset is a matter of record, and
your version of events here and elsewhere just doesn't wash.

--
Sue

"Sue" wrote in message
reenews.net...



I've read URG for a long time --
Sue


Someone else wanting uk.rec.gardening.moderated in order to keep the nasties
out?

I think so

Mike

"Mike" wrote
Someone else wanting uk.rec.gardening.moderated in order to keep the
nasties out?

I think so

You think wrong - as usual.

"Sue" wrote in message
reenews.net...

"Mike" wrote
Someone else wanting uk.rec.gardening.moderated in order to keep the
nasties out?

I think so

You think wrong - as usual.

Sue please don't be too hard on him /Puce. All groups need the odd buffoons
to keep folk on their toes :-)

"Sue" wrote in message
reenews.net...

"Mike" wrote
Someone else wanting uk.rec.gardening.moderated in order to keep the
nasties out?

I think so

You think wrong - as usual.

Sue please don't be too hard on him /Puce. All groups need the odd buffoons
to keep folk on their toes :-)

Rupert (W.Yorkshire) wrote:
"Sue" wrote in message
reenews.net...

"Mike" wrote
Someone else wanting uk.rec.gardening.moderated in order to keep the
nasties out?

I think so

You think wrong - as usual.

Sue please don't be too hard on him /Puce. All groups need the odd buffoons
to keep folk on their toes :-)

From the buffon who wrote his post twice? I'll keep you on your toes,
Craig, or should I say Ed ... perhaps you could bring Sue to visit
alt.sex.stories huh?! I'm sure she'd like to see the double or triple
life you have. You're disgusting.

"Rupert (W.Yorkshire)" writes



You may assume 4 people, actually it is probably several dozen people but
most folk don't really bother with Puce type stuff because it is invariably
wrong. Newbies beware- Puce comes with a Health warning.

In fact, be aware generally that some of us kill file people whose posts
we find do not justify the time spent reading them, so silence does not
imply agreement with what is posted


--
Kay

"La Puce" wrote in message
Farm1 wrote:
You clearly don't want to admit it but you DID make erroneous
statements. And you have been told this by 3 people.

Yes, and who are these 3 people but the same ones who go on at me at
every opportunity? Is it a crime to say the wrong word? I have said
that I shouldn't have used the word 'based'. Why do you persist on
going on and on about it?

Sorry but that excuse doesn't wash. After saying that you shouldn't
have used the word "based" you then said you should have said
"influenced" by Steiner and Steiner was not an influence. Odum was.
P.A. Yeomans was also and Ken Kern.

Even Uncle pointed out that I had put the
wrong word. What do you want me to say?

I would like you to stop blaming, or dragging in, everyone but
yourself. Be responsible for what you write: be accurate and don't
lie to excuse yourself.

Both have an organic focus but

Yes, and that was solely my point. I had also said this to you but
you
said you didn't see my post. But it seems that you now have. So
perhaps
you ought to apologise?

You never "said" any such thing! You have never even mentioned the
word "organic" in this thread. Perhaps you should apologise for
continually changing your story?

Permaculture is not based on the work of Steiner and nor do
Permaculturalists rely on the various Formula 500-508 and other
techniques that the Biodynamics adherants do.

No they don't indeed. I have however pointed out to other
similarities.
The work I did in the permaculture trust in Middlewood Lancaster run
a
Steiner school since the 60s. This I have seen and it is not the
first
time that I see Steiner being close to permaculture and
biodynamics -
because of the ecological similaries. I'm young and excited about
all
this - and when it comes up I get involved. In France we call
biodynamics 'ecology' and we call permaculture 'ecology' because at
the
root of it all that's what it is and these was my first words in my
first post on this thread.

I can understand you being young and excited about something but that
does not excuse a lack of accuracy when called to account for making
wrong statements and continuing to compound on those wrong statements.

I thought that explaining to you in a manner that would enable you
to
check on what I say might help you to clear up your
misunderstanding.

Thank you for 'helping me clear up my understanding'. I don't feel
that
I don't understand. Quoting book's references when I am discussing
actual experiences in permaculture trust, projects and events is not
'helping me'

That's a pity. If you actually went away and did some research then
you might sound like you know what you are talking about. At the
moment you sound like you haven't a clue.

I have also read you here. I've also read you when you very
nastily
chose to stalk Janet into another ng where she posted.

Thank you. This is very much what I wanted you to come to it. You
are
having a go at me precisely because of this and not because of the
subject at hand. I knew that you had ulterior motives.

My ulterior motive and why I am having a "go" at you, is that you are
wrong on this subject and keep making wrong statements but worst of
all, you then make up lies to excuse your comments. You can't say
that you chose to use the wrong word in choosing "based" on Steiner,
when you simply changed the word to "influenced" by Steiner. Steiner
isn't part of the "base" or "influence" on Permaculture.

It was also
pointed out to you on the other ng that if people resorts to having
to
'stalk' another poster it's because they are angry.

If you are/were angry at Janet then that is your problem and you
should have taken it up with her in whichever forum where you first
got angry. Other readers on the forum can act as arbiters and how
they react to your anger might just let you know if your anger is
reasonable or if you are merely being a pillock. Going stalking to
another forum where there is already an established community is not
aceptable for a number of reasons. You got jumped on and deservedly
so and no doubt that just fed your anger.

You can go back to your books now.

Pity you don't appreciate books. They may be able to teach you
something, but I'm not confident of that.

"La Puce" wrote in message
Farm1 wrote:
Was it in February when you went stalking Janet? If it was in
February, then I probably was abusive, but then I don't like
stalkers.

Go away back to the farm ng, we don't need another abusive person
here.

Puce, just as you fail to take on board advice when you are told you
are wrong by at least 5 people now, I can also ignore advice from
someone I consider to be a twit.

I've been posting and reading here LONG before you came here, either
under you current or past names. And if it comes to being abusive, it
would seem that you are not considered in a very high regard in this
ng.

In reply to Farm1 (please@askifyouwannaknow) who wrote this in
, I, Marvo, say :

"La Puce" wrote in message
Farm1 wrote:
Was it in February when you went stalking Janet? If it was in
February, then I probably was abusive, but then I don't like
stalkers.

Go away back to the farm ng, we don't need another abusive person
here.

Puce, just as you fail to take on board advice when you are told you
are wrong by at least 5 people now, I can also ignore advice from
someone I consider to be a twit.

I've been posting and reading here LONG before you came here, either
under you current or past names. And if it comes to being abusive, it
would seem that you are not considered in a very high regard in this
ng.

I liked her ...

[sob]

"Uncle Marvo" wrote in message
...
In reply to Farm1 (please@askifyouwannaknow) who wrote this in
, I, Marvo, say
:

"La Puce" wrote in message
Farm1 wrote:
Was it in February when you went stalking Janet? If it was in
February, then I probably was abusive, but then I don't like
stalkers.

Go away back to the farm ng, we don't need another abusive person
here.

Puce, just as you fail to take on board advice when you are told you
are wrong by at least 5 people now, I can also ignore advice from
someone I consider to be a twit.

I've been posting and reading here LONG before you came here, either
under you current or past names. And if it comes to being abusive, it
would seem that you are not considered in a very high regard in this
ng.

I liked her ...

[sob]


and the bullies drove her away :-((
I bet they feel proud now.

Mike

In reply to Mike ) who wrote this in
, I, Marvo, say :

"Uncle Marvo" wrote in message
...
In reply to Farm1 (please@askifyouwannaknow) who wrote this in
, I,
Marvo, say


"La Puce" wrote in message
Farm1 wrote:
Was it in February when you went stalking Janet? If it was in
February, then I probably was abusive, but then I don't like
stalkers.

Go away back to the farm ng, we don't need another abusive person
here.

Puce, just as you fail to take on board advice when you are told you
are wrong by at least 5 people now, I can also ignore advice from
someone I consider to be a twit.

I've been posting and reading here LONG before you came here, either
under you current or past names. And if it comes to being abusive,
it would seem that you are not considered in a very high regard in
this ng.

I liked her ...

[sob]


and the bullies drove her away :-((
I bet they feel proud now.

Apart from the fact that she stands up for herself when taunted, I saw that
most of what she posted was proper gardening stuff. She's certainly a very
keen gardener, even if she is French and ever so slightly mad.

A sense of humour goes a heck of a long way, IMHO.

"Uncle Marvo" wrote in message
...
In reply to Mike ) who wrote this in
, I, Marvo, say :

"Uncle Marvo" wrote in message
...
In reply to Farm1 (please@askifyouwannaknow) who wrote this in
, I,
Marvo, say


"La Puce" wrote in message
Farm1 wrote:
Was it in February when you went stalking Janet? If it was in
February, then I probably was abusive, but then I don't like
stalkers.

Go away back to the farm ng, we don't need another abusive person
here.

Puce, just as you fail to take on board advice when you are told you
are wrong by at least 5 people now, I can also ignore advice from
someone I consider to be a twit.

I've been posting and reading here LONG before you came here, either
under you current or past names. And if it comes to being abusive,
it would seem that you are not considered in a very high regard in
this ng.

I liked her ...

[sob]


and the bullies drove her away :-((
I bet they feel proud now.

Apart from the fact that she stands up for herself when taunted, I saw
that most of what she posted was proper gardening stuff. She's certainly a
very keen gardener, even if she is French and ever so slightly mad.

A sense of humour goes a heck of a long way, IMHO.

Some people don't have a sense of humour. Hitler and his followers didn't.
They think certain people shouldn't breed :-((

Mike