Bye Bye
 

This group is too large, there is not enough time to read all the messages,
so goodbye to all and I hope that you will resolve the cat problem in the
near future ;-))
Roberto

Bye Bye
 

On Thu, 24 Apr 2003 21:01:24 +0100, "Roberto"
wrote:

I hope that you will resolve the cat problem in the
near future ;-))

I'm sure they will,
would you like them to send you the pelt? ;-)

Bart

Bye Bye
 

"Roberto" wrote in message
...
This group is too large, there is not enough time to read all the
messages,
so goodbye to all and I hope that you will resolve the cat problem in the
near future ;-))
Roberto



Err?? Why not just read fewer messages?
Seems a bit daft not to read any. You might miss something
important/interesting.

Victor

Bye Bye
 

The message
from "Roberto" contains these words:

This group is too large, there is not enough time to read all the messages,

Do you read every single article in your daily newspaper? Or do you
select whichever headlines/authors/topics interest you?

Big is beautiful where usenet is concerned. We're lucky in this group
to have such a wide range of posts that it's always possible to find
some worth reading. Boorish topics and posters can be automatically
filtered out by software, or left unopened.

Janet.

Bye Bye
 

On Thu, 24 Apr 2003 23:10:12 +0100, Janet Baraclough
wrote:

The message
from "Roberto" contains these words:

This group is too large, there is not enough time to read all the messages,

Do you read every single article in your daily newspaper? Or do you
select whichever headlines/authors/topics interest you?

Big is beautiful where usenet is concerned. We're lucky in this group
to have such a wide range of posts that it's always possible to find
some worth reading. Boorish topics and posters can be automatically
filtered out by software, or left unopened.

Janet.

He's using Outlook Express, not a proper newsreader - perhaps it isn't
possible to filter out what he doesn't want?

Regards, VivienB

Bye Bye
 

OE is easy enough to filter out what you don't want, and it's easier to use
than most Newsreaders (IMHO).

Charlie.

"VivienB" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 Apr 2003 23:10:12 +0100, Janet Baraclough
wrote:

The message
from "Roberto" contains these words:

This group is too large, there is not enough time to read all the
messages,

Do you read every single article in your daily newspaper? Or do you
select whichever headlines/authors/topics interest you?

Big is beautiful where usenet is concerned. We're lucky in this group
to have such a wide range of posts that it's always possible to find
some worth reading. Boorish topics and posters can be automatically
filtered out by software, or left unopened.

Janet.

He's using Outlook Express, not a proper newsreader - perhaps it isn't
possible to filter out what he doesn't want?

Regards, VivienB


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.474 / Virus Database: 272 - Release Date: 18/04/03

Bye Bye
 

In message , Charlie
writes
OE is easy enough to filter out what you don't want, and it's easier to
use than most Newsreaders (IMHO).

Charlie.

"VivienB" wrote in message
.. .

can it also enable one to post at the bottom in line with usenet
conventions??

--
dave @ stejonda

Bye Bye
 

"dave @ stejonda" wrote in message
...

can it also enable one to post at the bottom in line with usenet
conventions??


I'd say so, I just prefer not to. =D

There aren't any newsreader I know that begin reading at the bottom of the
message!

Charlie.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.474 / Virus Database: 272 - Release Date: 18/04/03

Bye Bye
 

Previously on Buffy the Vampire Slayer ^W^W^W^W uk.rec.gardening, I
heard Charlie say...

"dave @ stejonda" wrote in message
...

can it also enable one to post at the bottom in line with usenet
conventions??


I'd say so, I just prefer not to. =D

There aren't any newsreader I know that begin reading at the bottom of the
message!

There don't need to be. Judicious use of snipping when replying means
that the entire message, in the correct order, is displayed on the
screen. I automatically scroll to the bottom of long posts and then
wonder why nothing has been added at the bottom.
--
Fenny
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will ****
on your computer." - Bruce Graham

Bye Bye
 

!taht rof dog knaht

!egassem
fo mottob eht ta gnifaer nigeb taht wonk I redaerswen yna t'nera erehT


??snoitnevnoc
tenesu htiw enil ni mottob eht ta tsop ot eno elbane osla ti nac

pins

--
dave @ stejonda

Bye Bye
 

The message
from "Charlie" contains these words:


"dave @ stejonda" wrote in message
...

can it also enable one to post at the bottom in line with usenet
conventions??


I'd say so, I just prefer not to. =D

There aren't any newsreader I know that begin reading at the bottom of the
message!

It's your choice, but you'll find that the posters who are here for
the gardening chat, and want to be understood in multiple-poster
conversations, use bottom posting so that other readers can make sense
of the thread and join in it.

Most regulars here make an effort to include new posters by replying to
them however awkwardly their message is presented, but eventually stop
bothering if a top poster makes no effort to learn how to help group
conversations flow logically and economically for everyone's benefit.

Janet.

Bye Bye
 

I agree Charlie! As long as it's on topic who cares?

Badger (Top posting)


"Charlie" wrote in message
...

"dave @ stejonda" wrote in message
...

can it also enable one to post at the bottom in line with usenet
conventions??


I'd say so, I just prefer not to. =D

There aren't any newsreader I know that begin reading at the bottom of the
message!

Charlie.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.474 / Virus Database: 272 - Release Date: 18/04/03

Bye Bye
 

Boy, you're gonna get flamed now! =D

Charlie.

"Little Badger" wrote in message
...
I agree Charlie! As long as it's on topic who cares?

Badger (Top posting)


"Charlie" wrote in message
...

"dave @ stejonda" wrote in message
...

can it also enable one to post at the bottom in line with usenet
conventions??


I'd say so, I just prefer not to. =D

There aren't any newsreader I know that begin reading at the bottom of
the
message!

Charlie.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.474 / Virus Database: 272 - Release Date: 18/04/03






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.474 / Virus Database: 272 - Release Date: 18/04/03

Bye Bye
 

"dave @ stejonda" wrote in message
...
In message , Charlie
writes
OE is easy enough to filter out what you don't want, and it's easier to
use than most Newsreaders (IMHO).

Charlie.

"VivienB" wrote in message
.. .

can it also enable one to post at the bottom in line with usenet
conventions??

Yes.

Alan


--
dave @ stejonda

Bye Bye
 

The message
from "Charlie" contains these words:

Boy, you're gonna get flamed now! =D

He's not likely to get any reaction at all from those who don't bother
reading persistent top-posters.

Janet

Bye Bye
 

On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 21:54:35 +0100, Janet Baraclough
wrote:

The message
from "Charlie" contains these words:

Boy, you're gonna get flamed now! =D

He's not likely to get any reaction at all from those who don't bother
reading persistent top-posters.

Janet

I'm a bit surprised to see so much contention in a group devoted to one
of life's most peaceful activities, maybe some of those inconsiderate
top posters should get out in the garden more often g

Bart

Bye Bye
 

On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 21:54:35 +0100, Janet Baraclough
wrote:

The message
from "Charlie" contains these words:

Boy, you're gonna get flamed now! =D

He's not likely to get any reaction at all from those who don't bother
reading persistent top-posters.

Oh come on! Do you mean to say Janet, that when you open a message
and see "original text" at the top you delete it straight away?

I don't top post (unless with good reason) but I suppose I might
aggravate people by cutting off the whole of the dialogue before the
remark to which I am replying. I will however include sufficient of
the previous dialogue if otherwise the message I was sending wouldn't
make sense as a whole.

If it's starts at the top when I open the message, I know what the
thread's about so I might know exactly what the person's talking
about. I can't remember ever getting annoyed at paging down to find
out the context of the remark.

All this anti top posting is maybe so we can all pride ourselves in
endless interjections ....

... and that I do find inconvenient, Scrolling down through the
message politely finding the farewell salutation and then finding a
bit more original text to find it starts with "but on the other hand"
or some such. Then you're damn well forced to read the previous text
to find out .. oh what's this then, if you are that interested anyway
because the original thread has been threaded into further trains of
thought or argument (usually the latter).

In fact I think I would prefer a top post starting with "You say it's
not important to dilute your wee before putting it on the compost
heap, but the other day ...."

Whose side am I on anyway?

Nobody's but mee oon

Please forgive the conceit.

Hussein
Grow a little garden

spam block - for real addy, reverse letters of second level domain.

Bye Bye
 

"Hussein M." wrote ...
Janet Baraclough wrote:

He's not likely to get any reaction at all from those who don't
bother
reading persistent top-posters.

Oh come on! Do you mean to say Janet, that when you open a message
and see "original text" at the top you delete it straight away?

I'm with Janet on this - in 99% of cases I too skip top postings.
Life is too short to bother sorting out who said what :~)
Jenny

Bye Bye
 

In article , JennyC
writes


Life is too short to bother sorting out who said what :~)
Jenny


and what do you do with the extra seconds you save by not sorting it all
out?

Rather like the motorist who has to overtake you to save half a minute.
What does he do with that half a minute?

Mike

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forthcoming reunions. H.M.S.Collingwood Association Chatham May 30th - June 2nd
British Pacific Fleet Hayling Island Sept 5th - 8th
Castle Class Corvettes Assn. Isle of Wight. Oct 3rd - 6th.
R.N. Trafalgar Weekend Leamington Spa. Oct 10th - 13th. Plus many more

Bye Bye
 

".........Rather like the motorist who has to overtake you to save half a
minute.
What does he do with that half a minute?...."

He/she spends it waiting at the traffic lights that just turn red as they
get to them.



--
David Hill
Abacus Nurseries
www.abacus-nurseries.co.uk

Bye Bye
 

In article , Hussein M.
writes
On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 21:54:35 +0100, Janet Baraclough
wrote:

He's not likely to get any reaction at all from those who don't bother
reading persistent top-posters.

Oh come on! Do you mean to say Janet, that when you open a message
and see "original text" at the top you delete it straight away?

If it is a reply which includes lots of quotes underneath, I certainly
don't bother to read it.
I just skip to the next article in the hope that I will be able to
follow the conversation in a logical sequence instead of having to
scroll down to get the gist and then scroll back up to see what the
reply relates to.
Similarly with people who don't snip threads. If I can't see a reply
after one scroll, I just go on to the next article.
URG is now so big that I just don't have time to read all bits of every
article and trying to find out where the reply is and what it refers to
is something I just don't bother doing any more.
--
Jane Ransom in Lancaster.
I won't respond to private emails that are on topic for urg
but if you need to email me for any other reason,
put jandg dot demon dot co dot uk where you see deadspam.com

Bye Bye
 

"Jane Ransom" wrote
snipped
URG is now so big that I just don't have time to read all bits of
every
article and trying to find out where the reply is and what it refers
to
is something I just don't bother doing any more.
Jane Ransom in Lancaster.

I also skip everything with 'cat' in the title
And nearly all vegetable queries
And leylandi stuff
And grass/lawns
And fruit trees...................

Makes URG much more manageable
Jenny :~)

Bye Bye
 

In message , Janet Baraclough
writes
The message
from "Charlie" contains these words:

Boy, you're gonna get flamed now! =D

He's not likely to get any reaction at all from those who don't bother
reading persistent top-posters.

Indeed, I didn't see the post until Charlie quoted it.

--
dave @ stejonda

Bye Bye
 

VivienB wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2003 23:10:12 +0100, Janet Baraclough
wrote:

The message
from "Roberto" contains these words:

This group is too large, there is not enough time to read all the
messages,

Do you read every single article in your daily newspaper? Or do you
select whichever headlines/authors/topics interest you?

Big is beautiful where usenet is concerned. We're lucky in this group
to have such a wide range of posts that it's always possible to find
some worth reading. Boorish topics and posters can be automatically
filtered out by software, or left unopened.

He's using Outlook Express, not a proper newsreader - perhaps it isn't
possible to filter out what he doesn't want?


Seems like a strange remark for a group dedicated to gardening in the UK.
still, variety is the spice of life - they say and whilst everyone is
entitled to employ preference in their own choice of software, please ensure
you have facts available - many newbies read this group

===

Large, active groups have their virtues, it rather depends on your
motivation for subscribing. Many come to usenet to share/acquire
knowledge/views, for others it is a relatively cheap recreational activity.
well for me it's cheaper than gardening and we do that on a shoe-string
budget.

In any event, have fun
--
William Tasso

Bye Bye
 

in article , JennyC at
wrote on 27/4/03 7:39 am:


"Hussein M." wrote ...
Janet Baraclough wrote:

He's not likely to get any reaction at all from those who don't
bother
reading persistent top-posters.

Oh come on! Do you mean to say Janet, that when you open a message
and see "original text" at the top you delete it straight away?

I'm with Janet on this - in 99% of cases I too skip top postings.
Life is too short to bother sorting out who said what :~)
Jenny


Agreed. If people can't be bothered to follow a logical sequence of posting,
why should anyone else be bothered to figure out their laziness?
--

Sacha

Bye Bye
 

in article , Mike at
wrote on 27/4/03 8:01 am:

In article , JennyC
writes


Life is too short to bother sorting out who said what :~)
Jenny


and what do you do with the extra seconds you save by not sorting it all
out?

Rather like the motorist who has to overtake you to save half a minute.
What does he do with that half a minute?

I read another, better laid out message from a more considerate poster.
--

Sacha

Bye Bye
 

Not really Charlie!
I'm tired of scrolling down for ages just to see:
LOL or ROTFL!

I read all messages I'm interested in whether it's top posted or not!
If there is information to be gained then it is worth it, don't you think?

Badger



"Charlie" wrote in message
...
Boy, you're gonna get flamed now! =D

Charlie.

"Little Badger" wrote in message
...
I agree Charlie! As long as it's on topic who cares?

Badger (Top posting)


"Charlie" wrote in message
...

"dave @ stejonda" wrote in message
...

can it also enable one to post at the bottom in line with usenet
conventions??


I'd say so, I just prefer not to. =D

There aren't any newsreader I know that begin reading at the bottom of
the
message!

Charlie.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.474 / Virus Database: 272 - Release Date: 18/04/03






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.474 / Virus Database: 272 - Release Date: 18/04/03

Bye Bye
 

The message
from Hussein M. contains these words:

On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 21:54:35 +0100, Janet Baraclough
wrote:

The message
from "Charlie" contains these words:

Boy, you're gonna get flamed now! =D

He's not likely to get any reaction at all from those who don't bother
reading persistent top-posters.

Oh come on! Do you mean to say Janet, that when you open a message
and see "original text" at the top you delete it straight away?

No. Haven't you followed the thread? When newbies arrive, I make a
point of answering **however awkwardly their posts are presented**. IOW,
I read innocent newbies who top-post, but only for a limited time. As
they become habitual urglers, I expect them to gradually pick up the
rudiments of clear posting, (which is made easy for them in the weekly
abc post).

After a while, even after someone has politely suggested otherwise,
some no-longer-new posters persistently top post, or repost unedited
unnecessary screeds unedited. I consider that a discourtesy to the group
because it makes big threads so hard to follow; and I've noticed that
those who deliberately go down that road, seldom have anything witty or
wise to say.

No, I don't bother to open their posts then shut them; I just set my
newsreader so that I don't see them any more (unless someone else quotes
from them, as Charlie did Badger's in this instance). As this thread
shows, I'm not alone.

Some newbie top-posters don't realise what effect their habit has on
other readers. They might prefer to continue getting replies from
posters who know what they are talking about.

Janet.

Bye Bye
 

"Little Badger" wrote in message
...
I agree Charlie! As long as it's on topic who cares?

Who cares about what?

Alan
--
Reply to alan(at)windsor-berks(dot)freeserve(dot)co(dot)uk

Bye Bye
 

"Charlie" wrote in message
...
Boy, you're gonna get flamed now! =D

Flamed about what?

Alan
--
Reply to alan(at)windsor-berks(dot)freeserve(dot)co(dot)uk

Bye Bye
 

On Sun, 27 Apr 2003 20:41:14 +0100, Janet Baraclough
wrote:

The message
from Hussein M. contains these words:

On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 21:54:35 +0100, Janet Baraclough
wrote:

The message
from "Charlie" contains these words:

Boy, you're gonna get flamed now! =D

He's not likely to get any reaction at all from those who don't bother
reading persistent top-posters.

Oh come on! Do you mean to say Janet, that when you open a message
and see "original text" at the top you delete it straight away?

No. Haven't you followed the thread? When newbies arrive, I make a
point of answering **however awkwardly their posts are presented**. IOW,
I read innocent newbies who top-post, but only for a limited time. As
they become habitual urglers, I expect them to gradually pick up the
rudiments of clear posting, (which is made easy for them in the weekly
abc post).

After a while, even after someone has politely suggested otherwise,
some no-longer-new posters persistently top post, or repost unedited
unnecessary screeds unedited. I consider that a discourtesy to the group
because it makes big threads so hard to follow; and I've noticed that
those who deliberately go down that road, seldom have anything witty or
wise to say.

No, I don't bother to open their posts then shut them; I just set my
newsreader so that I don't see them any more (unless someone else quotes
from them, as Charlie did Badger's in this instance). As this thread
shows, I'm not alone.

Some newbie top-posters don't realise what effect their habit has on
other readers. They might prefer to continue getting replies from
posters who know what they are talking about.

OK Janet,

I don't generally top post but I suppose I am a little more flexible
when reading others. If it's a thread in which I am generally
interested I am prepared to make allowances.

I think the crux of the matter is that posts should be clear however
they are constructed and I have already pointed out that simply bottom
posting does not, of itself, necessarily achieve that.

Am I about to go into your kill file then? Actually I wouldn't
blame you - if only for the content of many of my messages which do
tend to blather on somewhat. :-(

Pax

Hussein
Grow a little garden

spam block - for real addy, reverse letters of second level domain.

Bye Bye
 

"Hussein M." wrote in message
...
dross snipped
I don't generally top post but I suppose I am a little more flexible
when reading others. If it's a thread in which I am generally
interested I am prepared to make allowances.

I think the crux of the matter is that posts should be clear however
they are constructed and I have already pointed out that simply bottom
posting does not, of itself, necessarily achieve that.



I just wish people would learn to *snip* the irrelevent parts out of the
thread they are replying to as they learn how to *snip* flowers.

With threads as long as some of them on URG, it becomes difficult to follow
when someone top posts as one doesn`t know which answer is being replied to.

Surely it`s easy to hit Reply Group, read through a post from the top and
cut out the irrelevent sections. By this time you are at the bottom of the
post where you put your reply.

--
Regards,
Alan.

Preserve wildlife - Pickle a SQUIRREL to reply.

Bye Bye
 

On Mon, 28 Apr 2003 02:27:16 +0100, "Alan Gabriel"
wrote:


"Hussein M." wrote in message
.. .

I think the crux of the matter is that posts should be clear however
they are constructed and I have already pointed out that simply bottom
posting does not, of itself, necessarily achieve that.

I just wish people would learn to *snip* the irrelevent parts out of the
thread they are replying to as they learn how to *snip* flowers.

With threads as long as some of them on URG, it becomes difficult to follow
when someone top posts as one doesn`t know which answer is being replied to.

Surely it`s easy to hit Reply Group, read through a post from the top and
cut out the irrelevent sections. By this time you are at the bottom of the
post where you put your reply.

Which is exactly what I do. Though I must say I would not insert the
tag "Dross snipped" having deleted the irrelevant text!

Hussein
Grow a little garden

spam block - for real addy, reverse letters of second level domain.

Bye Bye
 

The message
from Hussein M. contains these words:


Am I about to go into your kill file then? Actually I wouldn't
blame you - if only for the content of many of my messages which do
tend to blather on somewhat. :-(

You said it, (and in only one sentence, which means there's hope for
you yet).

Janet.

Bye Bye
 

On Mon, 28 Apr 2003 22:32:01 +0100, Janet Baraclough
wrote:

The message
from Hussein M. contains these words:


Am I about to go into your kill file then? Actually I wouldn't
blame you - if only for the content of many of my messages which do
tend to blather on somewhat. :-(

You said it, (and in only one sentence, which means there's hope for
you yet).

I deserve it because I mean well.

Hussein
Grow a little garden

spam block - for real addy, reverse letters of second level domain.