On 1/3/07 10:28, in article ,
"charles" wrote:
snip

I have never met Sacha, but in her place I would do just the same.

The thing that absolutely amazes me, is that two women who so often make
crystal clear their thorough dislike of me would even consider wanting to
come to our home and make this ridiculous foot-stamping fuss about doing
something they don't want to do with someone they don't like!
If people here can't figure out for themselves who the two banned people are
and why, they really have NOT been paying attention to this group for a
lonnnnng time. Naming them would simply have given them the attention they
desire but don't merit, IMO.

--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/
(remove weeds from address)

"Sacha" wrote in message
. uk...
On 1/3/07 10:28, in article ,
"charles" wrote:
snip

I have never met Sacha, but in her place I would do just the same.

The thing that absolutely amazes me, is that two women who so often make
crystal clear their thorough dislike of me would even consider wanting to
come to our home and make this ridiculous foot-stamping fuss about doing
something they don't want to do with someone they don't like!

If that's the case, then what's the point in going public on their banned
status?

On 1/3/07 14:50, in article , "BAC"
wrote:


"Sacha" wrote in message
. uk...
On 1/3/07 10:28, in article ,
"charles" wrote:
snip

I have never met Sacha, but in her place I would do just the same.

The thing that absolutely amazes me, is that two women who so often make
crystal clear their thorough dislike of me would even consider wanting to
come to our home and make this ridiculous foot-stamping fuss about doing
something they don't want to do with someone they don't like!

If that's the case, then what's the point in going public on their banned
status?

I'm surprised at this. June & Anne are not the people I will not have here,
though after this display both would need the hides of rhinos to imagine
they would be actually welcomed with open arms! As both of them dislike me
so intensely, I don't understand why they are making all this fuss, other
than the fact that both have made it clear that what they really want is a
fight. Pathetic! It would be much more to the point, if they were thinking
of the good of this group, if they deplored the behaviour in this group
which led to me having to do this. Common sense would dictate that I am not
having in our home, people who have sworn at me, insulted me, virtually
stalked me and in one case harassed me for years.
--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/
(remove weeds from address)

"Sacha" wrote in message
. uk...
On 1/3/07 14:50, in article , "BAC"
wrote:


"Sacha" wrote in message
. uk...
On 1/3/07 10:28, in article ,
"charles" wrote:
snip

I have never met Sacha, but in her place I would do just the same.

The thing that absolutely amazes me, is that two women who so often
make
crystal clear their thorough dislike of me would even consider wanting
to
come to our home and make this ridiculous foot-stamping fuss about
doing
something they don't want to do with someone they don't like!

If that's the case, then what's the point in going public on their
banned
status?

I'm surprised at this. June & Anne are not the people I will not have
here,
though after this display both would need the hides of rhinos to imagine
they would be actually welcomed with open arms! As both of them dislike
me
so intensely, I don't understand why they are making all this fuss, other
than the fact that both have made it clear that what they really want is a
fight. Pathetic! It would be much more to the point, if they were
thinking
of the good of this group, if they deplored the behaviour in this group
which led to me having to do this. Common sense would dictate that I am
not
having in our home, people who have sworn at me, insulted me, virtually
stalked me and in one case harassed me for years.

It's perfectly understandable for you to want to exclude from your home
people who, from the sound of it, you clearly detest. However, it does seem
that there are more than two urglers who suspected you may have meant them.

On 1/3/07 17:20, in article , "BAC"
wrote:

snip

It's perfectly understandable for you to want to exclude from your home
people who, from the sound of it, you clearly detest. However, it does seem
that there are more than two urglers who suspected you may have meant them.

I think the confusion arose when I spoke of the two women making all this
fuss. Otherwise, everyone seemed perfectly clear as to whom I mean, as Sue
said.
--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/
(remove weeds from address)

In message , Sacha
writes
On 1/3/07 17:20, in article , "BAC"
wrote:

snip

It's perfectly understandable for you to want to exclude from your home
people who, from the sound of it, you clearly detest. However, it does seem
that there are more than two urglers who suspected you may have meant them.

I think the confusion arose when I spoke of the two women making all this
fuss. Otherwise, everyone seemed perfectly clear as to whom I mean, as Sue
said.
Well, I certainly didn't know and am still not 100% sure who they are.
It makes me feel much better that I am not one of them.
--
June Hughes

In message , Sacha
writes
On 1/3/07 14:50, in article , "BAC"
wrote:


"Sacha" wrote in message
. uk...
On 1/3/07 10:28, in article ,
"charles" wrote:
snip

I have never met Sacha, but in her place I would do just the same.

The thing that absolutely amazes me, is that two women who so often make
crystal clear their thorough dislike of me would even consider wanting to
come to our home and make this ridiculous foot-stamping fuss about doing
something they don't want to do with someone they don't like!

If that's the case, then what's the point in going public on their banned
status?

I'm surprised at this. June & Anne are not the people I will not have here,
Thank you for telling us. I really believed I was one of those excluded
after the things you have said to and about me in ukfd and here. I am
pleased.
though after this display both would need the hides of rhinos to imagine
they would be actually welcomed with open arms! As both of them dislike me
so intensely,
I thought it was you who disliked me - after all, it was you who accused
me when we had been having a friendly email correspondence (I had
thought you liked me at last - silly me!) of weedling personal
information out of you so that I could in some peculiar way use it
against you. It was also you who accused me of 'cosying up' to Puce
against Judith - wrong again, Sacha but you wouldn't take my word for
it, would you? You called me hypocritical and when no-one listened to
you, you stormed out of ukfd in a huff, insulting almost everyone as you
went, only to re-appear a few days later as if nothing had happened.
I don't understand why they are making all this fuss, other
than the fact that both have made it clear that what they really want is a
fight.

Wrong again Sacha. Your original post about the meet has now proved to
be misleading and confusing. Never mind. I hope you all enjoy it.
Pathetic! It would be much more to the point, if they were thinking
of the good of this group, if they deplored the behaviour in this group
which led to me having to do this. Common sense would dictate that I am not
having in our home, people who have sworn at me, insulted me, virtually
stalked me and in one case harassed me for years.
Well, AFAIK, I have not sworn at you, stalked you or harrassed you at
all, although I do remember a few months ago in ukfd typing in a post
that I couldn't give a flying f**k about what you were saying about me
(when you were being at your most insulting) but that is all.



--
June Hughes

On 1/3/07 19:00, in article , "June
Hughes" wrote:

In message , Sacha
writes
On 1/3/07 14:50, in article , "BAC"
wrote:


"Sacha" wrote in message
. uk...
On 1/3/07 10:28, in article ,
"charles" wrote:
snip

I have never met Sacha, but in her place I would do just the same.

The thing that absolutely amazes me, is that two women who so often make
crystal clear their thorough dislike of me would even consider wanting to
come to our home and make this ridiculous foot-stamping fuss about doing
something they don't want to do with someone they don't like!

If that's the case, then what's the point in going public on their banned
status?

I'm surprised at this. June & Anne are not the people I will not have here,
Thank you for telling us. I really believed I was one of those excluded
after the things you have said to and about me in ukfd and here. I am
pleased.
though after this display both would need the hides of rhinos to imagine
they would be actually welcomed with open arms! As both of them dislike me
so intensely,
I thought it was you who disliked me
snip

Let us put this down to a misunderstanding, shall we? Whatever has gone
before, there has never been a moment in which I have felt your behaviour
towards me was in any way sinister or potentially dangerous to me or my
family. I think that, to most people here, those I do not wish to see at
our home are very clearly identifiable for unpleasantly obvious reasons.
You and I may have differences of opinion but I don't think they even begin
to enter the realms that would make me ban you from our home.
--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/
(remove weeds from address)

On Mar 1, 11:24 pm, Sacha wrote:
On 1/3/07 19:00, in article , "June





Hughes" wrote:
In message , Sacha
writes
On 1/3/07 14:50, in article , "BAC"
wrote:

"Sacha" wrote in message
. co.uk...
On 1/3/07 10:28, in article ,
"charles" wrote:
snip

I have never met Sacha, but in her place I would do just the same.

The thing that absolutely amazes me, is that two women who so often make
crystal clear their thorough dislike of me would even consider wanting to
come to our home and make this ridiculous foot-stamping fuss about doing
something they don't want to do with someone they don't like!

If that's the case, then what's the point in going public on their banned
status?

I'm surprised at this. June & Anne are not the people I will not have here,
Thank you for telling us. I really believed I was one of those excluded
after the things you have said to and about me in ukfd and here. I am
pleased.
though after this display both would need the hides of rhinos to imagine
they would be actually welcomed with open arms! As both of them dislike me
so intensely,
I thought it was you who disliked me

snip

Let us put this down to a misunderstanding, shall we? Whatever has gone
before, there has never been a moment in which I have felt your behaviour
towards me was in any way sinister or potentially dangerous to me or my
family. I think that, to most people here, those I do not wish to see at
our home are very clearly identifiable for unpleasantly obvious reasons.
You and I may have differences of opinion but I don't think they even begin
to enter the realms that would make me ban you from our home.
--
Sachahttp://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devonhttp://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/
(remove weeds from address)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

A generous post, well done Sacha, you really are a nice person, I did
tell you that June, didn't I?

Judith (Goodnight)

On 1/3/07 23:14, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

On Thu, 1 Mar 2007 19:00:10 +0000, June Hughes

wrote:

snip
.
Well, AFAIK, I have not sworn at you, stalked you or harrassed you at
all, although I do remember a few months ago in ukfd typing in a post
that I couldn't give a flying f**k about what you were saying about me
(when you were being at your most insulting) but that is all.

So will you be going, June?

Does your wooden spoon have a name, Martin? ;-) Give it a rest.

--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/
(remove weeds from address)

On 2 Mar, 11:34, Martin wrote:
I call it Puce.

Oy! With all the hens about, your plumage is magnificent. Just watch
you don't fall off your perch ;o)

On 2 Mar, 22:21, Martin wrote:
on the midden?

Guano.

Cockadoodle do!

You mad fella you ))

"Martin" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 01 Mar 2007 12:36:40 +0000, Sacha

wrote:

On 1/3/07 10:28, in article ,
"charles" wrote:
snip

I have never met Sacha, but in her place I would do just the same.

The thing that absolutely amazes me, is that two women

Duh! Sacha. All this time I thought it was a man and a woman.

Me, too. Does that mean that Mike could cruise over from the IOW and attend?

Personally, I don't see a need to mention that some people might be
excluded, if it is made clear that people wishing to attend should contact
the organiser in advance, to request a 'ticket', and that entry will be
permitted to ticket holders only. That would allow the organiser to control
numbers and to exclude any known 'undesirables', if they were to apply,
which seems unlikely, with minimum of fuss and embarrassment all round.

"BAC" wrote
"Martin" wrote
Duh! Sacha. All this time I thought it was a man and a woman.

Me, too. Does that mean that Mike could cruise over from the IOW and
attend?

LOL you two aren't paying attention.

The two women refers to the ones making the hoohah about who might or
might not be excluded. Everyone else knows exactly who was meant by the
exclusions, I should think.

--
Sue

On 1/3/07 14:26, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

On Thu, 01 Mar 2007 12:36:40 +0000, Sacha
wrote:

On 1/3/07 10:28, in article ,
"charles" wrote:
snip

I have never met Sacha, but in her place I would do just the same.

The thing that absolutely amazes me, is that two women

Duh! Sacha. All this time I thought it was a man and a woman.

Dear Martin - that is probably what they want you to think. Surely you're
not falling for it?!

--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/
(remove weeds from address)