"Martin" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 May 2011 07:07:56 +0100, David Rance
wrote:

On Sun, 29 May 2011 Janet wrote:

I have just taken a look at GardenAlley dotcom. Like gardenbanter,it's
a website which acquires posts from urg to populate its website. But
there
the similarity ends.

Unlike gardenbaneter, Garden alley makes no mention of usenet m
uk.rec.gardening, or the fact the material comes from elsewhere. They
have
in fact renamed urg's content

"Gardening in the UK- yet another gardening in the United Kingdom forum"

In which case it's a good thing that the weekly "Welcome" message states
clearly that this is uk.rec.gardening. Maybe I'll alter the intro to
make it even clearer! ;-)

Maybe we should all have a sig that points out the origin of our
messages posted here.

--
ORIGINALLY POSTED TO UK.REC.GARDENING
--

Martin


:-))

Why not?

That's only another form of advertising, .... this time for urg ;-))

Mike


--

....................................
It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice.
....................................

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-29 08:53:52 +0100, Martin said:

On Sun, 29 May 2011 07:07:56 +0100, David Rance
wrote:

On Sun, 29 May 2011 Janet wrote:

I have just taken a look at GardenAlley dotcom. Like gardenbanter,it's
a website which acquires posts from urg to populate its website. But
there
the similarity ends.

Unlike gardenbaneter, Garden alley makes no mention of usenet m
uk.rec.gardening, or the fact the material comes from elsewhere. They
have
in fact renamed urg's content

"Gardening in the UK- yet another gardening in the United Kingdom
forum"

In which case it's a good thing that the weekly "Welcome" message states
clearly that this is uk.rec.gardening. Maybe I'll alter the intro to
make it even clearer! ;-)

Maybe we should all have a sig that points out the origin of our
messages posted here.

--
ORIGINALLY POSTED TO UK.REC.GARDENING

Good idea. What Garden Banter and Garden Alley do is at the least, a form
of intellectual theft. Or at the end of each post people could write
"This will be stolen and used by advertising forums" ;-)
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.com
South Devon



But isn't advertising what all businesses need and require?

And this is a FREE form of advertising, how the blazes can that be wrong?

Henry Ford said 'Half of the money I spend on advertising is a waste of
time. The trouble is I don't know which half'.

Mike



--

....................................
It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice.
....................................

In message , David Rance
writes
Sorry, I just don't agree with those who argue in favour of keeping
this a usenet-only means of communication. If I were still active in
the Fidonet I would port it over to that! WHAT DOES IT MATTER? (I'm not
shouting, it's the only means I have of emphasising.) Usenet is in the
public domain so no theft, intellectual or otherwise, is taking place.
The more we argue about our "rights" the more these sites will
endeavour to prove that we have none.

The consensus is that participants hold the copyright in their posts. By
posting the material to u.r.g. an implicit license is granted. But this
does not cover every possible use of the material. IANAL, but it seems
to me that in particular if a site that republishes a post is ignoring
x-no-archive headers they would be in breach of the implicit license.

OTOH, there doesn't seem to be much distinction between Google Groups
and Garden Banter, so I never really understood the opposition to Garden
Banter.
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

"Stewart Robert Hinsley" wrote in message
...
In message , David Rance
writes
Sorry, I just don't agree with those who argue in favour of keeping this
a usenet-only means of communication. If I were still active in the
Fidonet I would port it over to that! WHAT DOES IT MATTER? (I'm not
shouting, it's the only means I have of emphasising.) Usenet is in the
public domain so no theft, intellectual or otherwise, is taking place. The
more we argue about our "rights" the more these sites will endeavour to
prove that we have none.

The consensus is that participants hold the copyright in their posts. By
posting the material to u.r.g. an implicit license is granted. But this
does not cover every possible use of the material. IANAL, but it seems to
me that in particular if a site that republishes a post is ignoring
x-no-archive headers they would be in breach of the implicit license.

OTOH, there doesn't seem to be much distinction between Google Groups and
Garden Banter, so I never really understood the opposition to Garden
Banter.
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

Reference your last para, Violet Elizabeth Bott comes to mind

Mike



--

....................................
It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice.
....................................

On Sun, 29 May 2011 Sacha wrote:

And, more importantly, posts to urg have been altered by someone
malicious to my certain knowledge, especially those relating to the
charter.

Can you give an example?

David

--
David Rance writing from Caversham, Reading, UK
http://rance.org.uk

"David Rance" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 May 2011 Sacha wrote:

And, more importantly, posts to urg have been altered by someone malicious
to my certain knowledge, especially those relating to the charter.

Can you give an example?

David

--
David Rance writing from Caversham, Reading, UK
http://rance.org.uk


and why not sue them?

Mike

--

....................................
It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice.
....................................

In message , Sacha
writes
On 2011-05-29 13:52:01 +0100, David Rance
said:

On Sun, 29 May 2011 Sacha wrote:

And, more importantly, posts to urg have been altered by someone
malicious to my certain knowledge, especially those relating to the
charter.
Can you give an example?
David

Here it is. I think it shows the mischief that can be done by
malicious postings appearing to emanate from urg or its members but I
have no idea if this is the only example because I haven't gone
hunting. Read the paras from Binaries onwards:
http://www.gardenbanter.co.uk/united...r-uk-rec-garde
ning.html

That isn't a case of a post to u.r.g. being altered (on GardenBanter).
That was a troll "parody" of the charter that was posted on u.r.g.
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

Jake wrote:
snip
Example - a thread by Moonraker (Be Careful What You Wish For) with a
response from Martin appears on Garden Alley but not Garden Banter (or
in my Agent for that matter) but there are messages on Banter timed
after the time of Martin's post to Alley.

OTOH, I can't find this thread on Banter or Alley! Then nowhere can I
find two posts I made over an hour ago.

Now I wonder how much I'm not getting through my news service
(Giganews)! But that's another matter for me to sort with my provider.


I'm a bit confused what you mean here Jake. Are you not seeing the Moonraker
thread on Giganews?

If it's any help, I'm seeing it via Zen Internet's own news server.


Ian

"Jake" Nospam@invalid wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 May 2011 14:28:45 +0100, Sacha wrote:

On 2011-05-29 13:52:01 +0100, David Rance
said:

On Sun, 29 May 2011 Sacha wrote:

And, more importantly, posts to urg have been altered by someone
malicious to my certain knowledge, especially those relating to the
charter.

Can you give an example?

David

Here it is. I think it shows the mischief that can be done by
malicious postings appearing to emanate from urg or its members but I
have no idea if this is the only example because I haven't gone
hunting. Read the paras from Binaries onwards:
http://www.gardenbanter.co.uk/united...gardening.html

This seems to be a case of someone taking a URG post and reposting a
new version rather than altering an existing post. Little can be done
to stop that - it's a fact of life. Just as, in a few minutes, I could
easily start posting to this group as Mike and unless people knew what
to look for in header fields, poor Mike would suffer the rebound!

I've just been looking through GB and GA. If the "welcome" message is
changed, it won't affect GB much as there's a "sticky" post of the
former "abc" titled message from 2003 right at the top of the message
list. You have to scroll down to find the more recent ones. People
probably won't do that. The "sticky" links to the original charter
wording though another link to demon is now broken. How one updates a
"sticky" on GB I don't know.

More sort of worryingly for me, there are a load of posts in both GB
and GA that I am not seeing in Agent. Ditto, the lists in GB and GA
are not necessarily complete and propagation seems inconsistent.

Example - a thread by Moonraker (Be Careful What You Wish For) with a
response from Martin appears on Garden Alley but not Garden Banter (or
in my Agent for that matter) but there are messages on Banter timed
after the time of Martin's post to Alley.

OTOH, I can't find this thread on Banter or Alley! Then nowhere can I
find two posts I made over an hour ago.

Now I wonder how much I'm not getting through my news service
(Giganews)! But that's another matter for me to sort with my provider.

Jake


This matter has been discussed on urg before when people have got irate
about their postings being pinched by gardenbanter etc.

Well there are two answers.

1) ""If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen"". If you don't
like your posts being transferred to GB, don't post

and

2) Start your own forum where people have to subscribe to be members, you
then have control over the nasties, AND, post a warning as a stickie that
any post re-posted on ANY OTHER forum or newsgroup and you will sue.

Simple

Mike


--

....................................
It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice.
....................................





--

....................................
It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice.
....................................

On Sun, 29 May 2011 15:12:06 +0100, "Ian B"
wrote:

Jake wrote:
snip
Example - a thread by Moonraker (Be Careful What You Wish For) with a
response from Martin appears on Garden Alley but not Garden Banter (or
in my Agent for that matter) but there are messages on Banter timed
after the time of Martin's post to Alley.

OTOH, I can't find this thread on Banter or Alley! Then nowhere can I
find two posts I made over an hour ago.

Now I wonder how much I'm not getting through my news service
(Giganews)! But that's another matter for me to sort with my provider.


I'm a bit confused what you mean here Jake. Are you not seeing the Moonraker
thread on Giganews?

If it's any help, I'm seeing it via Zen Internet's own news server.


Ian

Nope. And that's just one example. I'm going to build a list and fire
it off to Giganews tech support. Not seeing someone else's post is one
thing but when I cannot see my own, that says to me that something
needs to be looked at. I left Easynews because of problems like this.

Cheers

On Sun, 29 May 2011 15:12:06 +0100, "Ian B"
wrote:

Jake wrote:
snip
Example - a thread by Moonraker (Be Careful What You Wish For) with a
response from Martin appears on Garden Alley but not Garden Banter (or
in my Agent for that matter) but there are messages on Banter timed
after the time of Martin's post to Alley.

OTOH, I can't find this thread on Banter or Alley! Then nowhere can I
find two posts I made over an hour ago.

Now I wonder how much I'm not getting through my news service
(Giganews)! But that's another matter for me to sort with my provider.


I'm a bit confused what you mean here Jake. Are you not seeing the Moonraker
thread on Giganews?

If it's any help, I'm seeing it via Zen Internet's own news server.


Ian


I should have said in my just now reply (if that gets through) that
perhaps GB and GA are useful in helping us to check that news servers
are doing their job.

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
On 2011-05-29 15:11:31 +0100, Stewart Robert Hinsley
said:

In message , Sacha
writes
On 2011-05-29 13:52:01 +0100, David Rance
said:

On Sun, 29 May 2011 Sacha wrote:

And, more importantly, posts to urg have been altered by someone
malicious to my certain knowledge, especially those relating to the
charter.
Can you give an example?
David

Here it is. I think it shows the mischief that can be done by malicious
postings appearing to emanate from urg or its members but I have no idea
if this is the only example because I haven't gone hunting. Read the
paras from Binaries onwards:
http://www.gardenbanter.co.uk/united...r-uk-rec-garde
ning.html

That isn't a case of a post to u.r.g. being altered (on GardenBanter).
That was a troll "parody" of the charter that was posted on u.r.g.

Which, nonetheless, shows the damage that can be done, which is actually
the important point, rather than *how* it was done. As the second sentence
of the above says "appearing to emanate from urg or its members". HOW,
doesn't matter. If we're going to be correct and pedantic, I doubt anyone
can go into Garden Banter and alter what have then become 'their posts'.
What they can do, as you point out, is parody information given and unless
we're all going to monitor our posts' copies on GB, put your name or
anyone else's to something you have not said or alter its sense entirely.
I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that there are people posting and
lurking here who would love to do both because they have nothing better to
do, or because they have a grudge against urg. The post I cited is a
clear example of the latter, imo. Who would write an apparent urg post to
GB stating that advertising here is to be used in such a way and that 18
lines sigs are acceptable unless they hoped to harm this group and upset
its members? Can you think of anyone?
--
Sacha
South Devon



So ........

..

There are two answers.

1) ""If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen"". If you don't
like your posts being transferred to GB, don't post

and

2) Start your own forum where people have to subscribe to be members, you
then have control over the nasties, AND, post a warning as a stickie that
any post re-posted on ANY OTHER forum or newsgroup and you will sue.

Stop bleating

Mike

--

....................................
It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice.
....................................

"Janet" wrote in message
...
In article , says...

On 2011-05-29 15:11:31 +0100, Stewart Robert Hinsley
said:

That isn't a case of a post to u.r.g. being altered (on GardenBanter).
That was a troll "parody" of the charter that was posted on u.r.g.

Which, nonetheless, shows the damage that can be done, which is
actually the important point, rather than *how* it was done. As the
second sentence of the above says "appearing to emanate from urg or its
members". HOW, doesn't matter. If we're going to be correct and
pedantic, I doubt anyone can go into Garden Banter and alter what have
then become 'their posts'.

Anyone can report offensive posts on GB, to GB's moderators, for
removal.


What they can do, as you point out, is
parody information given and unless we're all going to monitor our
posts' copies on GB, put your name or anyone else's to something you
have not said or alter its sense entirely. I have absolutely no doubt
whatsoever that there are people posting and lurking here who would
love to do both because they have nothing better to do, or because they
have a grudge against urg. The post I cited is a clear example of the
latter, imo. Who would write an apparent urg post to GB

Nobody did that.

stating that
advertising here is to be used in such a way and that 18 lines sigs are
acceptable unless they hoped to harm this group and upset its members?
Can you think of anyone?

The original message was posted on urg.
It only appears on gardenbanter because gardenbanter mirrors urg posts.
Gardenbanters copy of the post, says it came from usenet.

Googlegroups archive, carries the same URG post, with urg headers


Offical URG Charter
View profile
Hide options Nov 11 2007, 7:34 pm
Newsgroups: uk.rec.gardening
From: Offical URG Charter OFFICIAL.URG@CHARTER
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 18:34:15 +0000
Local: Sun, Nov 11 2007 7:34 pm
Subject: Offical Charter of uk.rec.gardening

google shows it was posted to urg on 3 separate occasions and
received several appropriate responses from well known urglers.

Janet.



but some like to stamp their mark as "The Authority" :-(((((

Mike


--

....................................
It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice.
....................................

On Sun, 29 May 2011 Sacha wrote:

And, more importantly, posts to urg have been altered by someone
malicious to my certain knowledge, especially those relating to the
charter.

Can you give an example?
David

Here it is. I think it shows the mischief that can be done by
malicious postings appearing to emanate from urg or its members but I
have no idea if this is the only example because I haven't gone
hunting. Read the paras from Binaries onwards:
http://www.gardenbanter.co.uk/united...r-uk-rec-garde
ning.html

Ah yes, I see what you're referring to.

I note that the date is October 2007 and (it says) was by an external
usenet poster. I assume that means that it wasn't posted on Garden
Banter itself but was a mischievous attempt to make it look as though it
was by the reference at the bottom to where it can be accessed.

I'm not sure that that is conclusive evidence that Garden Banter was
responsible. According to the top of the message it *was* posted on urg
originally from which Garden Banter harvested it.

By the look of the changes they are a deliberate attempt to welcome the
things that we have deprecated for years, such as:

"The posting of small binaries 500k (for example, pictures of plants)
is
welcome and should begin with "PICTURE" or "PHOTO" in the subject
line."

where the charter categorically forbids it, and

"Participants in discussions may also include references to their
garden-related business in their .sig (max. EIGHTEEN lines)."

which has been changed from FOUR lines.

It looks to me very much like a wind-up by one of our regular readers
receiving it as a newsgroup. I think one might hazard a guess as to the
possible culprit!

But I don't think that anyone has taken it seriously. I haven't seen any
binaries, or complaints that binaries haven't appeared. And people who
run garden-related businesses are usually very good about their SIGs.

David

--
David Rance writing from Caversham, Reading, UK
http://rance.org.uk

On Sun, 29 May 2011 Jake wrote:

This seems to be a case of someone taking a URG post and reposting a
new version rather than altering an existing post. Little can be done
to stop that - it's a fact of life.

Just what I was trying to say.

I've just been looking through GB and GA. If the "welcome" message is
changed, it won't affect GB much as there's a "sticky" post of the
former "abc" titled message from 2003 right at the top of the message
list. You have to scroll down to find the more recent ones. People
probably won't do that. The "sticky" links to the original charter
wording though another link to demon is now broken.

Yes, we sorted that out a year or two ago. Cormaic is now hosting it
though he doesn't have time to post here any more.

How one updates a
"sticky" on GB I don't know.

Ask them, I suppose.

OTOH, I can't find this thread on Banter or Alley! Then nowhere can I
find two posts I made over an hour ago.

It's listed under the original title of the thread, "Weed free garden
anyone?"

David

--
David Rance writing from Caversham, Reading, UK
http://rance.org.uk