|
Looks like we're being listened to
The long... http://news.independent.co.uk/digita...p?story=419064 and the short of it http://tinyurl.com/fd9j fair use Proving that the garden makeover concept can be as strong on the computer screen as it already is in the television schedules, the new version of the software, Geoff Hamilton's 3D Garden Designer, which costs £30, has been a surprising bestseller in the eight weeks since it was released, according to the high-street chain, Game. ..................... Some, though, seem to be sticking with traditional methods - even if they do have access to a computer. In the internet discussion group uk.rec.gardening, one user who had tried a number of the products wrote: "Dunno if I'd use garden design software in anger. Graph paper or better, a sketch pad if you're artistic, give the most flexibility and allow you to work on it onsite." Others agreed. "You are much better off with some squared paper and a pencil, it's quicker and you can get a better idea of what you're doing," wrote "Pete the Gardener" in March /fair use Warwick |
Looks like we're being listened to
Warwick wrote:
The long... http://news.independent.co.uk/digita...p?story=419064 and the short of it http://tinyurl.com/fd9j fair use Proving that the garden makeover concept can be as strong on the computer screen as it already is in the television schedules, the new version of the software, Geoff Hamilton's 3D Garden Designer, which costs £30, has been a surprising bestseller in the eight weeks since it was released, according to the high-street chain, Game. .................... Some, though, seem to be sticking with traditional methods - even if they do have access to a computer. In the internet discussion group uk.rec.gardening, one user who had tried a number of the products wrote: "Dunno if I'd use garden design software in anger. Graph paper or better, a sketch pad if you're artistic, give the most flexibility and allow you to work on it onsite." Others agreed. "You are much better off with some squared paper and a pencil, it's quicker and you can get a better idea of what you're doing," wrote "Pete the Gardener" in March /fair use In other words a researcher/journalist has done their work and is giving the source. Wish someone'd pay me stacks of dosh to write about how I use the web;-) // Jim |
Looks like we're being listened to
|
Looks like we're being listened to
Chris Norton wrote:
(Jim W) wrote: In other words a researcher/journalist has done their work and is giving the source. Wish someone'd pay me stacks of dosh to write about how I use the web;-) // Jim Whats the chances of a gardening journo suddenly getting asked to do a piece on gardening software and them being a lurker on here? Come on reveal yourself. 8-) They wouldn't have to be a lurker though would they? Just know how to use the web.. Anyone with a resoanable level of experience in using the web for research will have come across google groups archive.. All they have to do is search the archives for 'Gardening Software (etcetc) and mebbe read URG and lurk for a few weeks. IF they wanted they could even start a thread to their benefit with a sockpuppet.. The searching of archives they could have in minutes.. The thread would take a week or so longer.. It would depend on their deadline. They're also likly to have access to pro research facilities (the fee paying ones), libraries that hold stuff like gardening whiich? Trade journals etc etc.. If they lurk here.. then... HELLO JOURNALIST TYPE PEOPLE!!-))) // Jim |
Looks like we're being listened to
The message
from Chris Norton contains these words: On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 00:19:15 +0100, (Jim W) wrote: In other words a researcher/journalist has done their work and is giving the source. Imho trawling usenet archives for unverifiable soundbites hardly counts as research...or even, professional journalism :~} Whats the chances of a gardening journo suddenly getting asked to do a piece on gardening software and them being a lurker on here? Come on reveal yourself. 8-) We have in the past had a self-styled journalist turn up on urg openly looking for material he intended to sell. Janet. |
Looks like we're being listened to
"Janet Baraclough" wrote Chris Norton contains these words: (Jim W) wrote: In other words a researcher/journalist has done their work and is giving the source. Imho trawling usenet archives for unverifiable soundbites hardly counts as research...or even, professional journalism :~} Janet. So what counts as serious research Janet ? Surely the web is just as reliable or not as other sources ........? Jenny |
Looks like we're being listened to
In article , JennyC
writes Surely the web is just as reliable or not as other sources ........? The WWW as a whole is well down on the list of reliability, as is UseNet. (There's very little quality control on either.) Some bits are good, others are nonsense, and one has to be able to tell the difference. -- Stewart Robert Hinsley http://www.meden.demon.co.uk/Malvaceae/Malvaceae.html |
Looks like we're being listened to
On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 13:17:06 +0100, Janet Baraclough
wrote: The message from Chris Norton contains these words: On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 00:19:15 +0100, (Jim W) wrote: In other words a researcher/journalist has done their work and is giving the source. Imho trawling usenet archives for unverifiable soundbites hardly counts as research...or even, professional journalism :~} Usenet archives are an extremely valuable research tool, which you would know if you ever bothered to look. Just because your usual, somewhat flimsy arguments are discredited via online resources, doesn't mean many of us should follow the dead end you have led yourself, how strange to have the world at your fingertips, and yet try to isolate yourself? seems daft to me. Whats the chances of a gardening journo suddenly getting asked to do a piece on gardening software and them being a lurker on here? Come on reveal yourself. 8-) We have in the past had a self-styled journalist turn up on urg openly looking for material he intended to sell. And why not, resource is resource, as long as he never quoted you I think he would be quite safe. -- So, you dont like reasoned, well thought out, civil debate? I understand. /´¯/) /¯../ /..../ /´¯/'...'/´¯¯`·¸ /'/.../..../......./¨¯\ ('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...') \.................'...../ ''...\.......... _.·´ \..............( \.............\.. |
Looks like we're being listened to
In article , JennyC
writes "Janet Baraclough" wrote Chris Norton contains these words: (Jim W) wrote: In other words a researcher/journalist has done their work and is giving the source. Imho trawling usenet archives for unverifiable soundbites hardly counts as research...or even, professional journalism :~} Janet. So what counts as serious research Janet ? Surely the web is just as reliable or not as other sources ........? Depends what sources you're thinking about, doesn't it? It's as reliable as anywhere else as a source of opinion, but it doesn't have as rigorous a peer review as scientific papers, for example. -- Kay Easton Edward's earthworm page: http://www.scarboro.demon.co.uk/edward/index.htm |
Looks like we're being listened to
On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 07:51:45 +0100, Stewart Robert Hinsley
wrote: In article , JennyC writes Surely the web is just as reliable or not as other sources ........? The WWW as a whole is well down on the list of reliability, as is UseNet. (There's very little quality control on either.) Some bits are good, others are nonsense, and one has to be able to tell the difference. The same applies to newspapers, magazine articles, TV and the Prime Minister's spin doctor. -- martin |
Looks like we're being listened to
JennyC wrote in message ... Surely the web is just as reliable or not as other sources ........? "..And she shows you where to look Among the garbage and the flowers " -- Anton |
Looks like we're being listened to
"Stewart Robert Hinsley" wrote in message ... In article , JennyC writes Surely the web is just as reliable or not as other sources .........? The WWW as a whole is well down on the list of reliability, as is UseNet. (There's very little quality control on either.) Some bits are good, others are nonsense, and one has to be able to tell the difference. But HOW ?? Jenny |
Looks like we're being listened to
"anton" wrote in message ... JennyC wrote in message ... Surely the web is just as reliable or not as other sources .........? "..And she shows you where to look Among the garbage and the flowers " Anton Hi Anton ! She is wearing rags and feathers From Salvation Army counters............ That's me that is :~)) Jenny |
Looks like we're being listened to
In article , JennyC
writes "Stewart Robert Hinsley" wrote in message ... In article , JennyC writes Surely the web is just as reliable or not as other sources ........? The WWW as a whole is well down on the list of reliability, as is UseNet. (There's very little quality control on either.) Some bits are good, others are nonsense, and one has to be able to tell the difference. But HOW ?? Jenny By not quite 'believing' fully the first time you read something, but to continue your research into the matter further. Just been a very interesting thread on uk.people.ex-forces where someone said they were going to dive on H.M.S.Falmouth. There was a discussion about it and an ex crew member came on line and said 'My old ship', I posted details of the H.M.S.Falmouth of the 1960's and he said 'Yup, that's her' We could have all gone away 'believing' this was the one we were all talking about, but it turned out we were all wrong, it was the H.M.S.Falmouth which was hit by 2 torpedoes at 4.52 on August 19th 1916 and headed for home, but was hit twice again off Flamborough Head by another U Boat. So whilst the research could have ended with one ship, further questions proved that to be wrong. About 5 people joined into this conversation feeding a bit here and a bit there to make the full picture. Mike -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Forthcoming reunions. 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 |
Looks like we're being listened to
On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 16:24:34 +0200, "JennyC" wrote:
"anton" wrote in message ... JennyC wrote in message ... Surely the web is just as reliable or not as other sources ........? "..And she shows you where to look Among the garbage and the flowers " Anton Hi Anton ! She is wearing rags and feathers From Salvation Army counters............ That's me that is :~)) Jenny oh no it's not it's Susanne. :-) -- martin |
Looks like we're being listened to
On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 15:59:28 +0100, Mike
wrote: In article , JennyC writes "Stewart Robert Hinsley" wrote in message ... In article , JennyC writes Surely the web is just as reliable or not as other sources ........? The WWW as a whole is well down on the list of reliability, as is UseNet. (There's very little quality control on either.) Some bits are good, others are nonsense, and one has to be able to tell the difference. But HOW ?? Jenny By not quite 'believing' fully the first time you read something, but to continue your research into the matter further. Just been a very interesting thread on uk.people.ex-forces where someone said they were going to dive on H.M.S.Falmouth. There was a discussion about it and an ex crew member came on line and said 'My old ship', I posted details of the H.M.S.Falmouth of the 1960's and he said 'Yup, that's her' We could have all gone away 'believing' this was the one we were all talking about, but it turned out we were all wrong, it was the H.M.S.Falmouth which was hit by 2 torpedoes at 4.52 on August 19th 1916 and headed for home, but was hit twice again off Flamborough Head by another U Boat. So whilst the research could have ended with one ship, further questions proved that to be wrong. About 5 people joined into this conversation feeding a bit here and a bit there to make the full picture. I have had something similar recently regarding the aircraft carrier Karel Dorman, there have been two of them since the war. -- martin |
Looks like we're being listened to
In article , martin
writes I have had something similar recently regarding the aircraft carrier Karel Dorman, there have been two of them since the war. and just to add even more confusion, whilst at the time I made my posting re the 1960's H.M.S.Falmouth and was 'certain' I was on the same one, there was an H.M.S.Falmouth during the Second World War!! BUT, she was broken up in Blyth in 1968 so I 'knew' she wasn't the one!!! The Ministry of Defence and the Royal Navy Pay and Pensions group send people to me who are researching Father's Brother's etc Service time and unless I 'know' for certain which age, era and ships they are talking about, it is very difficult to give accurate information. And now that I am involved with the Royal Air Force via the National Service (Royal Air Force) Association, I am getting all sorts of questions there!! :-)) Very fortunately I have a wealth of contacts in the RAFA and RAF Associations, once again proving that one does not believe 'for certain' the first but of information, but digs deeper!! Mike -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Forthcoming reunions. 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 |
Looks like we're being listened to
On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 16:42:00 +0100, Mike
wrote: In article , martin writes I have had something similar recently regarding the aircraft carrier Karel Dorman, there have been two of them since the war. and just to add even more confusion, whilst at the time I made my posting re the 1960's H.M.S.Falmouth and was 'certain' I was on the same one, there was an H.M.S.Falmouth during the Second World War!! BUT, she was broken up in Blyth in 1968 so I 'knew' she wasn't the one!!! The Ministry of Defence and the Royal Navy Pay and Pensions group send people to me who are researching Father's Brother's etc Service time and unless I 'know' for certain which age, era and ships they are talking about, it is very difficult to give accurate information. And now that I am involved with the Royal Air Force via the National Service (Royal Air Force) Association, I am getting all sorts of questions there!! :-)) Very fortunately I have a wealth of contacts in the RAFA and RAF Associations, once again proving that one does not believe 'for certain' the first but of information, but digs deeper!! Jane's Fighting Ships is very useful. -- martin |
Looks like we're being listened to
In article , martin
writes Jane's Fighting Ships is very useful. :-) Are we talking Jane's 'all the years through'? :-(( Very expensive and beyond me ;-( Jane's W.W.I? or Jane's WWII? Got a copy, but find that 'The Dictionary of Ships of the Royal Navy of the Second World War' by John Young, (donated to me by a very generous shipmate) far more detailed. Another book I purchased, is 'Shore Establishments of the Royal Navy' by Lt Cdr B. Warlow RN (He was a Sub.Lt when he served with me on H.M.S.Gambia in 1959) which lists shore establishments back to the year dot :-) Mike -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Forthcoming reunions. 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 |
Looks like we're being listened to
On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 17:08:05 +0100, Mike
wrote: In article , martin writes Jane's Fighting Ships is very useful. :-) Are we talking Jane's 'all the years through'? :-(( Very expensive and beyond me ;-( I have two, Jane's Fighting Ships of WWII that was remaindered and JFS 1972 from a jumble sale. another good source for any second hand book is http://dogbert.abebooks.com You can even find gardening books this way back OT -- martin |
Looks like we're being listened to
In article , martin
writes You can even find gardening books this way back OT Boom Boom ;-) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Forthcoming reunions. 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 |
Looks like we're being listened to
On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 17:26:24 +0100, Mike
wrote: In article , martin writes You can even find gardening books this way back OT Boom Boom ;-) did you try using it? There are lots of JFS in UK second hand bookshops some even cheap. -- martin |
Looks like we're being listened to
In article , JennyC
writes The WWW as a whole is well down on the list of reliability, as is UseNet. (There's very little quality control on either.) Some bits are good, others are nonsense, and one has to be able to tell the difference. But HOW ?? I don't see that there's a difference in principle between evaluating information on the Net and elsewhere, but the Net has a greater proportion of more outright malicious, fraudulent or dishonest material than most other media. Google evaluating quality information InterNet gives a long list of pages on how to evaluate information on the net. (Of course, there is the question as to how to ascertain which of these are reliable. :-) ) But there probably better than an attempt by myself to crystallise the unformalised processes I practice, and anyway university librarians are a more authoritative source on the topic than myself. See also my "Bulletin Board Bestiary" page (semi-humerous) at http://www.meden.demon.co.uk/Articles/bestiary.html for various sources of noise, as opposed to signal, on discussion groups. -- Stewart Robert Hinsley |
Looks like we're being listened to
"Stewart Robert Hinsley" wrote JennyC writes The WWW as a whole is well down on the list of reliability, as is UseNet. (There's very little quality control on either.) Some bits are good, others are nonsense, and one has to be able to tell the difference. But HOW ?? I don't see that there's a difference in principle between evaluating information on the Net and elsewhere, but the Net has a greater proportion of more outright malicious, fraudulent or dishonest material than most other media. Google evaluating quality information InterNet gives a long list of pages on how to evaluate information on the net. (Of course, there is the question as to how to ascertain which of these are reliable. :-) ) But there probably better than an attempt by myself to crystallise the unformalised processes I practice, and anyway university librarians are a more authoritative source on the topic than myself. See also my "Bulletin Board Bestiary" page (semi-humerous) at http://www.meden.demon.co.uk/Articles/bestiary.html for various sources of noise, as opposed to signal, on discussion groups. Stewart Robert Hinsley Thanks for the info Stewart, but after looking at a few "how to evaluate the info" sites, I think I'll go back to relying on my 'shoulder blade intuition' :~)) Jenny PS Nice site you have ( huge !!!) |
Looks like we're being listened to
The message
from "JennyC" contains these words: "Janet Baraclough" wrote Imho trawling usenet archives for unverifiable soundbites hardly counts as research...or even, professional journalism :~} Janet. So what counts as serious research Janet ? Surely the web is just as reliable or not as other sources ........? I referred to archives of usenet discussion groups, where misguided advice or opinion from an inexperienced ignoramus is recorded together with the careful observations of those who have learned from experience. A "researcher" with no personal knowledge of a particular field,would have the greatest difficulty in sorting the wheat from the chaff, and any conclusions he drew would therefore be suspect. Janet |
Looks like we're being listened to
|
Looks like we're being listened to
In article MPG.19698ab573da6a169897bf@lateinos, Warwick
writes OB Gardening After the healthy dose of rain on Friday night I'd not watered the hanging baskets or the greenhouse on Saturday.. A brief look around the garden at 2pm had the hosepipe out to some slightly soory looking plants And today it's going to rain :-) -- Kay Easton Edward's earthworm page: http://www.scarboro.demon.co.uk/edward/index.htm |
Looks like we're being listened to
In article , Kay Easton
writes In article MPG.19698ab573da6a169897bf@lateinos, Warwick writes OB Gardening After the healthy dose of rain on Friday night I'd not watered the hanging baskets or the greenhouse on Saturday.. A brief look around the garden at 2pm had the hosepipe out to some slightly soory looking plants And today it's going to rain :-) and today it 'is' raining Isle of Wight Mike -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Forthcoming reunions. 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 |
Looks like we're being listened to
|
Looks like we're being listened to
Janet Baraclough wrote:
The message from "JennyC" contains these words: "Janet Baraclough" wrote Imho trawling usenet archives for unverifiable soundbites hardly counts as research...or even, professional journalism :~} Janet. So what counts as serious research Janet ? Surely the web is just as reliable or not as other sources ........? I referred to archives of usenet discussion groups, where misguided advice or opinion from an inexperienced ignoramus is recorded together with the careful observations of those who have learned from experience. A "researcher" with no personal knowledge of a particular field,would have the greatest difficulty in sorting the wheat from the chaff, and any conclusions he drew would therefore be suspect. Janet And who ever said journalists were 'professional' LOL;-)) // J |
Looks like we're being listened to
"Jim W" wrote Janet Baraclough wrote: from "JennyC" contains these words: Imho trawling usenet archives for unverifiable soundbites hardly counts as research...or even, professional journalism :~} Janet. So what counts as serious research Janet ? Surely the web is just as reliable or not as other sources .........? I referred to archives of usenet discussion groups, where misguided advice or opinion from an inexperienced ignoramus is recorded together with the careful observations of those who have learned from experience. A "researcher" with no personal knowledge of a particular field,would have the greatest difficulty in sorting the wheat from the chaff, and any conclusions he drew would therefore be suspect. Janet And who ever said journalists were 'professional' LOL;-)) // J Yeah - look what happened at the new York Times :~))) Jenny |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:40 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter