On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 Emery Davis wrote:

Gorgeous birch, David.

Thank you. It's been well hidden for some years by the hedge and the
shrubs but I'm now going to cut the others back so as to show the birch
off to its best advantage.

David

--
David Rance writing from Caversham, Reading, UK

On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 stuart noble wrote:

On 30/01/2014 12:32, Peter & Jeanne wrote:
It showed up as an embedded link as Martin could have pointed out and
not grumbling
about posting jpg's here.

All it needed was reposting correctly (as I did) and the dreadful hedge
was clear
for all to see in all its un-glory.

Regards
Pete

Out of interest, and while we're on the subject of who sees what, why
is your reply not showing up in my reply unless I copy and paste it?

Because Pete's reply was below the tear line and some mail readers
(including mine) do not quote what's below the tear line, assuming it to
be just someone's sig.

Same thing happens with Mike Crowe's postings - which is a blessing,
really! ;-)

--
David Rance writing from Caversham, Reading, UK

On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 Martin wrote:

On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 12:17:19 +0000, David Rance
wrote:

On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 Martin wrote:

On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 09:47:12 +0000, David Rance
wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 Martin wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:02:55 +0000, stuart noble

wrote:

Anyone got any suggestions?

http://i59.tinypic.com/vdegpw.jpg

The hedge had been allowed to get out of hand for a few years by the
previous owners, so we have reduced height by a foot, and are wondering
whether to thin it out a little in the Spring. Maybe those bare stalks
will sprout leaves if the top is kept trimmed?
Any advice appreciated

You can't post .jpg files to this group, urg is a plain text only group.

He didn't! It's a link as denoted by "http:...." etc.

This was already discussed.

Well, I never!!

It doesn't show as a link with some readers,
including Agent. http://i59.tinypic.com/vdegpw.jpg does.

Then what did it show as?

Normal text.

From what you quoted you could see that it was
a link (see your quote above).

What I quoted was the result of previous messages in this thread, which you
obviously still haven't read.

Yours was the first reply in the thread so there weren't any previous
messages that you could quote. Which means that you KNEW that it was a
link. So come on, stop pretending!

David

--
David Rance writing from Caversham, Reading, UK

On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 Martin wrote:

What I quoted was the result of previous messages in this thread, which you
obviously still haven't read.

Yours was the first reply in the thread so there weren't any previous
messages that you could quote. Which means that you KNEW that it was a
link. So come on, stop pretending!

You didn't reply to my first post. You replied to something I posted today.

sigh No, I didn't! I did reply to your first message in this thread
which was yesterday, so stop wriggling. Look, here it is again - and
look at the date. Although my reader doesn't show the time of your
message it was actually 10:46:48, about forty-five minutes after Stuart
posted his original message.

================================================== ==

On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 Martin wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:02:55 +0000, stuart noble
wrote:

Anyone got any suggestions?

http://i59.tinypic.com/vdegpw.jpg

The hedge had been allowed to get out of hand for a few years by the
previous owners, so we have reduced height by a foot, and are wondering
whether to thin it out a little in the Spring. Maybe those bare stalks
will sprout leaves if the top is kept trimmed?
Any advice appreciated

You can't post .jpg files to this group, urg is a plain text only group.

He didn't! It's a link as denoted by "http:...." etc.

David

--
David Rance writing from Caversham, Reading, UK

"David Rance" wrote in message ...

sigh No, I didn't! I did reply to your first message in this thread which
was yesterday, so stop wriggling. Look, here it is again - and look at the
date. Although my reader doesn't show the time of your message it was
actually 10:46:48, about forty-five minutes after Stuart posted his
original message.


My reader gives date and time ----

"On 2014-01-29 10:46:48 +0000, Martin said:"

Even if it just a silly old microsoft proggy - lol

Nice hedge btw

Regards
Pete

On 30/01/2014 16:25, Peter & Jeanne wrote:


"David Rance" wrote in message
...

sigh No, I didn't! I did reply to your first message in this thread
which was yesterday, so stop wriggling. Look, here it is again - and
look at the date. Although my reader doesn't show the time of your
message it was actually 10:46:48, about forty-five minutes after
Stuart posted his original message.


My reader gives date and time ----

"On 2014-01-29 10:46:48 +0000, Martin said:"

Even if it just a silly old microsoft proggy - lol

Nice hedge btw

Regards
Pete

Children!
Children.
The way this thread had degenerated makes it more like a look into a
kindergarten,
Who cares who posted what first or did someone post a jpeg.
If they tried to post a jpeg then nothing would show on the site, I saw
a link which opened.
I really think that these two must be posting some name or another
http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/f...ps0c3a862c.jpg
Lets get back to adult gardening discussions .

On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 16:25:58 Peter & Jeanne wrote:



"David Rance" wrote in message ...

sigh No, I didn't! I did reply to your first message in this thread
which was yesterday, so stop wriggling. Look, here it is again - and
look at the date. Although my reader doesn't show the time of your
message it was actually 10:46:48, about forty-five minutes after
Stuart posted his original message.


My reader gives date and time ----

"On 2014-01-29 10:46:48 +0000, Martin said:"

Even if it just a silly old microsoft proggy - lol

It's just the way I had it configured. I've now put the time in. See
above!

Nice hedge btw

Thanks. I'm pleased with the way it looks now.

David

--
David Rance writing from Caversham, Reading, UK

On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 16:50:48 David Hill wrote:

On 30/01/2014 16:25, Peter & Jeanne wrote:


"David Rance" wrote in message
...

sigh No, I didn't! I did reply to your first message in this thread
which was yesterday, so stop wriggling. Look, here it is again - and
look at the date. Although my reader doesn't show the time of your
message it was actually 10:46:48, about forty-five minutes after
Stuart posted his original message.


My reader gives date and time ----

"On 2014-01-29 10:46:48 +0000, Martin said:"

Even if it just a silly old microsoft proggy - lol

Nice hedge btw

Regards
Pete

Children!
Children.
The way this thread had degenerated makes it more like a look into a
kindergarten,
Who cares who posted what first or did someone post a jpeg.
If they tried to post a jpeg then nothing would show on the site, I saw
a link which opened.
I really think that these two must be posting some name or another
http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/f...owers/2014%20g
eneral/bill-and-ben-flobbadob-5000514_zps0c3a862c.jpg
Lets get back to adult gardening discussions .

Sorry, daddy! :-)

David

--
David Rance writing from Caversham, Reading, UK

On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 17:55:35 Martin wrote:

On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 15:59:33 +0000, David Rance
wrote:

On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 Martin wrote:

What I quoted was the result of previous messages in this thread, which you
obviously still haven't read.

Yours was the first reply in the thread so there weren't any previous
messages that you could quote. Which means that you KNEW that it was a
link. So come on, stop pretending!

You didn't reply to my first post. You replied to something I posted today.

sigh No, I didn't! I did reply to your first message in this thread
which was yesterday, so stop wriggling. Look, here it is again - and
look at the date. Although my reader doesn't show the time of your
message it was actually 10:46:48, about forty-five minutes after Stuart
posted his original message.

================================================ ====

On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 Martin wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:02:55 +0000, stuart noble
wrote:

Anyone got any suggestions?

http://i59.tinypic.com/vdegpw.jpg

The hedge had been allowed to get out of hand for a few years by the
previous owners, so we have reduced height by a foot, and are wondering
whether to thin it out a little in the Spring. Maybe those bare stalks
will sprout leaves if the top is kept trimmed?
Any advice appreciated

You can't post .jpg files to this group, urg is a plain text only group.

He didn't! It's a link as denoted by "http:...." etc.

You referred to a post I posted after my initial post.

What time was your original post? If there was an earlier one it didn't
arrive here. Can you re-quote it?

Lest David H. chastise us again, I am concerned that I don't get some
posts.

David

--
David Rance writing from Caversham, Reading, UK

On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 17:57:50 Martin wrote:

On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 16:25:58 -0000, "Peter & Jeanne"
wrote:



"David Rance" wrote in message ...

sigh No, I didn't! I did reply to your first message in this thread which
was yesterday, so stop wriggling. Look, here it is again - and look at the
date. Although my reader doesn't show the time of your message it was
actually 10:46:48, about forty-five minutes after Stuart posted his
original message.


My reader gives date and time ----

"On 2014-01-29 10:46:48 +0000, Martin said:"

Even if it just a silly old microsoft proggy - lol

Nice hedge btw

I didn't say that.
Also it wasn't an embedded image as you claimed, it was an embedded URL.

No? This is what you wrote:

You can't post .jpg files to this group, urg is a plain text only group.

David

--
David Rance writing from Caversham, Reading, UK

On 30/01/2014 13:24, stuart noble wrote:

Out of interest, and while we're on the subject of who sees what, why is
your reply not showing up in my reply unless I copy and paste it?

Because he has got the sig separator in the message, rather than down
the bottom above a sig.

I've removed the space that follows the 2 hyphens, so it will now
appear. Many news readers will cut off anything after a properly
configured sig separator (2 hyphens followed by a space) - in order to
not quote the sig. If you have that combination above text you want, it
won't be quoted.


--

It showed up as an embedded link as Martin could have pointed out and
not grumbling about posting jpg's here.

All it needed was reposting correctly (as I did) and the dreadful
hedge was clear for all to see in all its un-glory.


Just as the text below won't be quoted

--
regards
andy

In article ,
News wrote:
On 30/01/2014 13:24, stuart noble wrote:

Out of interest, and while we're on the subject of who sees what, why is
your reply not showing up in my reply unless I copy and paste it?

Because he has got the sig separator in the message, rather than down
the bottom above a sig.

I've removed the space that follows the 2 hyphens, so it will now
appear. Many news readers will cut off anything after a properly
configured sig separator (2 hyphens followed by a space) - in order to
not quote the sig. If you have that combination above text you want, it
won't be quoted.

That utter stupidity was sneaked into an RFC on something else by
a loonie with a bee in his bonnet and very little knowledge of the
wider world of Email, and has never been more than patchily accepted
by the Internet community. Inter alia, trailing spaces in Email have
never been specified to be either preserved or not inserted.

While it has the effect you describe with SOME mailers, it doesn't
with others, and there are other such aberrations used by other
mailers that are intended to have the same effect and which work
even less well. It's total lunacy.

Just as the text below won't be quoted

--
regards
andy

Oh, yeah? And I am using the descendent of the de facto canonical
Unix newsreader and mailer (which is used for transport, for the
non-geeks out there).



Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

and all the OP wanted was a bit of advice on his hedge.

Mike


---------------------------------------------------------------
www.friendsofshanklintheatre.co.uk
www.hmscollingwoodassociation.com
www.rneba.org.uk
www.nsrafa.org



"Nick Maclaren" wrote in message ...

In article ,
News wrote:
On 30/01/2014 13:24, stuart noble wrote:

Out of interest, and while we're on the subject of who sees what, why is
your reply not showing up in my reply unless I copy and paste it?

Because he has got the sig separator in the message, rather than down
the bottom above a sig.

I've removed the space that follows the 2 hyphens, so it will now
appear. Many news readers will cut off anything after a properly
configured sig separator (2 hyphens followed by a space) - in order to
not quote the sig. If you have that combination above text you want, it
won't be quoted.

That utter stupidity was sneaked into an RFC on something else by
a loonie with a bee in his bonnet and very little knowledge of the
wider world of Email, and has never been more than patchily accepted
by the Internet community. Inter alia, trailing spaces in Email have
never been specified to be either preserved or not inserted.

While it has the effect you describe with SOME mailers, it doesn't
with others, and there are other such aberrations used by other
mailers that are intended to have the same effect and which work
even less well. It's total lunacy.

Just as the text below won't be quoted

--
regards
andy

Oh, yeah? And I am using the descendent of the de facto canonical
Unix newsreader and mailer (which is used for transport, for the
non-geeks out there).



Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

"'Mike'" wrote in message ...

and all the OP wanted was a bit of advice on his hedge.

Mike


Well perhaps, but he got some extra free advice on how to do links as
well !

All part of the Newsgroup contributors little helpful ways that have
developed over decades - lol

Pete

On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 14:07:33 +0000, Stephen Wolstenholme
wrote:


Live Mail is the worst newsreader ever written but that's probably
because MS do not anyone reading Usenet as they can't control it.

Steve