|
Access via Google
Anne Jackson writes
The message from "Alan Holmes" contains these words: I think you are putting your ire to the wrong person, you should be addressing Puke! If everyone put Puke into their killfile we would not ahve to read all this. Aye, but think about the damage she could do, with all her misleading 'advice'? Other people would answer the question as well, and sheer weight of numbers would help the OP work out which advice to take. -- Kay |
Access via Google
"Anne Jackson" wrote in message ... The message from "Alan Holmes" contains these words: I think you are putting your ire to the wrong person, you should be addressing Puke! If everyone put Puke into their killfile we would not ahve to read all this. Aye, but think about the damage she could do, with all her misleading 'advice'? Except that no one would see it! Alan |
Access via Google
"Martin" wrote in message ... On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 21:04:43 GMT, Anne Jackson wrote: The message from "Alan Holmes" contains these words: I think you are putting your ire to the wrong person, you should be addressing Puke! If everyone put Puke into their killfile we would not ahve to read all this. Aye, but think about the damage she could do, with all her misleading 'advice'? maybe I should put Alan in my OAP home killfile too? Why not, go on then! -- Martin |
Access via Google
"June Hughes" wrote in message ... In message , Alan Holmes writes "Anne Jackson" wrote in message .. . The message from Sacha contains these words: On 10/3/07 12:21, "La Puce" wrote: On 10 Mar, 12:03, " wrote: Thanks for all the information Mike. I have received a letter this morning which confirms that I won't have to killfile one person in urg anymore as she has been ORDERED not to write in any way, shape or form on a public group, anything libellious or inflammatory about me. What? I can write what I want and when I want. You however cannot. I've seen Sacha's letter and it's laughable. And if you mention, as you've been told, my husband and my organisation once more, this will then be more serious than you would have ever expected. I don't think your 'colleague' as you grandly refer to the senior director of URBED London, considered it a laughing matter. His reply to me indicated as much. Try it on once more with me and I'll have a lawyer onto you for harassment so fast, it will make your eyes water. For crying out ****ing loud, Sacha! Do you EVER say something and MEAN IT? Are we NEVER to have any peace and quiet in here, until you finally prove that you are a totally unreliable LIAR!! I will admit that I breathed a HUGE sigh of relief when I read, last Monday, that you were leaving! This behaviour is causing people, good people, helpful people, to abandon this group in droves...do you think for one minute that we can't survive without YOUR input? We managed fine before you arrived, we'll manage fine when you leave... Just GO AWAY, as you SAID you were doing, or take it to e-mail, or talk through your bloody lawyers, but for crying out bloody loud GIVE US PEACE! I think you are putting your ire to the wrong person, you should be addressing Puke! If everyone put Puke into their killfile we would not ahve to read all this. Alan Alan. You don't have to reply to every post here. We love you but give some of it a rest? Sorry, sometimes just get carried away, will you forgive me? PS I am still waiting to hear from you about Borough Market. Still trying to find a gap in my busy schedule!(:-) Alan |
Access via Google
On 12/3/07 20:42, in article , "Alan
Holmes" wrote: "Anne Jackson" wrote in message ... The message from "Alan Holmes" contains these words: I think you are putting your ire to the wrong person, you should be addressing Puke! If everyone put Puke into their killfile we would not ahve to read all this. Aye, but think about the damage she could do, with all her misleading 'advice'? Except that no one would see it! Alan I'm afraid that's not so, Alan. There are newbies constantly at urg, especially in spring and there are lurkers we know nothing about. -- Sacha http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk South Devon http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/ (remove weeds from address) |
Access via Google
In message , Sacha
writes On 12/3/07 20:42, in article , "Alan Holmes" wrote: "Anne Jackson" wrote in message ... The message from "Alan Holmes" contains these words: I think you are putting your ire to the wrong person, you should be addressing Puke! If everyone put Puke into their killfile we would not ahve to read all this. Aye, but think about the damage she could do, with all her misleading 'advice'? Except that no one would see it! Alan I'm afraid that's not so, Alan. There are newbies constantly at urg, especially in spring and there are lurkers we know nothing about. But surely there are plenty of knowledgeable people around here to give the right advice? Just because they do not know a great deal about gardening (which goes for many of us here) doesn't mean to say newbies are all stupid. If you don't like someone, it is surely better to kill-file them and then if a question you can answer comes up, all you have to do is expand the thread and see who has given answers. Saves all the grief. -- June Hughes |
Access via Google
On 11 Mar, 23:17, K wrote:
Other people would answer the question as well, and sheer weight of numbers would help the OP work out which advice to take. Off course. But that's not what the lady wants isn't it. She wants full control. I've been trying to get in touch with Stewart for ages regarding his photos and articles on lavatera for my plants portfolio. Sadly I just cannot because I'm presumably killed filed because of someone in here. And looking at all these supposedly bad advices I gave, I'd like to see them listed. Is it the Jackman's rosemary? Is it growing rhubbard in pots, which is still a silly idea - which one should it be? Because if this group is there to help giving advice, I get put down rather than being 'advised'. And I have never been told 'you might be wrong here' or 'have you thought about this'. No. I get severe and rude language and ultimately it gets personnal. Then you have a wondering ghost calling me puke, and that same person has been in hundreds of people kill files for years!! How strange. |
Access via Google
"La Puce" wrote Sadly I just cannot because I'm presumably killed filed because of someone in here. Tommyrot. No-one is in charge of a anyone's killfile except themselves. If you're in there it's because they themselves decided to put you there. *Do* stop trying to blame anyone and everyone except yourself for your own responses and conduct. And I have never been told 'you might be wrong here' or 'have you thought about this'. No. I get severe and rude language and ultimately it gets personnal. More distortion. Most here have longer memories than you seem to think. All have access to archives if they need any reminders. You've been asked politely. You've been given help. When that didn't get through you've been told forthrightly. Right from the outset when you started here, you had it pointed out dozens and dozens of times how your attitude, refusal to accept being told when you get things wrong, childish insults, name-calling and vendettas were getting on most people's wick. Stop pretending you're a victim, start taking responsibility for your own actions, and *do grow up*. -- Sue |
Access via Google
"La Puce" wrote in message oups.com... snip I've been trying to get in touch with Stewart for ages regarding his photos and articles on lavatera for my plants portfolio. Puce ,in the light of distasteful things that have happened with you and other members you surely don't find it strange that some members wish to steer well clear and not have themselves, their work, writings etc. associated with you ,in any way, whatsoever. Google archives are just too powerful. |
Access via Google
On 13 Mar, 10:35, "Sue" wrote:
Most here have longer memories than you seem to think. All have access to archives if they need any reminders. No - you cannot show me where my advices have been wrong other than showing me posts where people took it in a personnal way and dragged family and work in the process. I have never given a bad advice. The first argument here was about cordyline - I had suggested the use of copper though it would have required a large ring indeed. Then there was the 'frost in Manchester' where I was told we had it until end of May which is untrue. But then again someone who doesn't live here argued with me and started talking about my organisation. And it goes on and on you see. It's not about advice, it's about personnalities and yes, I give as good as I get. Still - it doesn't really matter as long as you stop saying that I give bad advice or show me the proof. It's only fair. |
Access via Google
"La Puce" wrote On 13 Mar, 10:35, "Sue" wrote: Most here have longer memories than you seem to think. All have access to archives if they need any reminders. No - you cannot show me where my advices have been wrong other than showing me posts where people took it in a personnal way and dragged family and work in the process. I have never given a bad advice.The first argument here was about cordyline - I had suggested the use of copper though it would have required a large ring indeed. Then there was the 'frost in Manchester' where I was told we had it until end of May which is untrue. But then again someone who doesn't live here argued with me and started talking about my organisation. And it goes on and on you see. It's not about advice, it's about personnalities and yes, I give as good as I get. Still - it doesn't really matter as long as you stop saying that I give bad advice or show me the proof. It's only fair. You have a very selective memory about your own actions. There are numerous incidents, as we all know. One of the very earliest I remember was about rhododendrons and how long they take to flower from seed. See the thread titled 'shrub ID please' from November 2005. Read your own responses in that one. It's got steadily worse since. QED. And while we're on the subject of what you do, and before I give up a lost cause - another of your unattractive traits is quoting info culled wholesale from websites, but without giving a reference or acknowledgement of the author, and thus giving the false impression it's your own work or knowledge. You've been picked up on that too, but it still happens, e.g. there was a question about agapanthus varieties IIRC. -- Sue |
Access via Google
On 13 Mar, 18:20, "Sue" wrote:
One of the very earliest I remember was about rhododendrons and how long they take to flower from seed. See the thread titled 'shrub ID please' from November 2005. Oh I remember indeed! It was a plant ID - it was a rhodo and Ruppert thought it was a skimmia. Then he realised it wasn't. I then thought about potash since it didn't flower and because it was a rhodo from seed and it was very young I did mentioned that it took 2 to 3 years to flower from seeds, which they do. And indeed it degenerated - I had a kneejerk reaction there because I was told I was misleading in capital letters. I got annoyed because I knew I was right. And who gave me agro? The same very person who is still giving me agro now. As for quoting without giving references - I've been studying for 4 years now and I'm surrounded with references books and notes form college etc. I'm even trying to get hold of copyrighted material and I can't, as you've seen!! I grow a lot of plants too and agapanthus happens to be one. Perhaps next time I should just phone or email a friend who runs a nursery and ask him or her or their spouse and tell you about it that way. Is it more acceptable? Pah!! It's ridiculous really. |
Access via Google
Sue writes
"La Puce" wrote Sadly I just cannot because I'm presumably killed filed because of someone in here. Tommyrot. No-one is in charge of a anyone's killfile except themselves. If you're in there it's because they themselves decided to put you there. *Do* stop trying to blame anyone and everyone except yourself for your own responses and conduct. And I have never been told 'you might be wrong here' or 'have you thought about this'. No. I get severe and rude language and ultimately it gets personnal. You were the first to get personal (with your talk of women with moustaches), which is why I kf-ed you many months ago. -- Kay |
Access via Google
On 13 Mar, 20:16, K wrote:
You were the first to get personal (with your talk of women with moustaches), which is why I kf-ed you many months ago. Is this a good reason? In my workplace we called women with moustaches those women who are robbust and in high ranks. It has nothing to do with what they look like - just that they've become less feminine, harsh and similar to men in this 'man's world'. I can't recall when I said it, but it wasn't anything to do with look since I'd seen none of the faces in urg (until recently when someone posted a link to a past meet). I think there's been a lot of confusion, it could even be a culture misunderstanding - I only wish I was taken as lightly as some people here, who have recently posted a lot of rude words and have also been thanked if not encouraged for it. Let's be totally honest now then. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:35 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter