"John Briggs" wrote in message
...
Jaques d'Alltrades wrote:

That's all very well for those who go online to chooses and to download
news, but those who have an offline reader of the type used by a lot of
ISPs gets everything posted in a subscribed-to group, will he, nil he.


will he, nil he?

In the style of Rusty, he has unmisspelt it.

Franz

"Jaques d'Alltrades" wrote in message
...
The message
from "John Briggs" contains these words:
Geoff Berrow wrote:
I noticed that Message-ID:
from John Briggs
contained the following:

That's all very well for those who go online to chooses and to
download
news, but those who have an offline reader of the type used by a lot
of
ISPs gets everything posted in a subscribed-to group, will he, nil
he.


will he, nil he?

will 'e, nil 'e

Actually, no. That should be the obsolete English verb *nill*, rather
than
the Latin 'nil' (a contraction of 'nihil', of course.)

looks it up

Coo! You learn something new every day on the internet!

Put that in your allotment and smoke it.
(Just getting back on topic)

Franz

"Brian {Hamilton Kelly}" wrote in message
...
In article ]

[snip]

I fully agree that urglers (what a weird name they call themselves:-)

Speak for yourself. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

{:-))

[snip]

Franz

"Brian {Hamilton Kelly}" wrote in message
...
In article ]

[snip]

I fully agree that urglers (what a weird name they call themselves:-)

Speak for yourself. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

{:-))

[snip]

Franz

"Brian Watson" wrote in message
...

Green wrote in message
...
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 11:34:05 GMT, Janet Baraclough ..
wrote:

Uk.rec.gardening is NOT a parent group trying to cast off an unweildy
subgroup. The proposal was made by someone who is not a visible user of
uk.rec.gardening.

nor was there any suggestion made on urg that a subgroup was necessary
or that allotment holders were being ignored.

No. I think it is that those who favour the proposition feel that
allotment
issues are not synonymous with gardening issues.

But neither are issues relating to growing roses and growing cacti in a
greenhouse. Both these and allotment issues find a comfortable home in URG.

Franz

"John Briggs" wrote in message
...
Jaques d'Alltrades wrote:

That's all very well for those who go online to chooses and to download
news, but those who have an offline reader of the type used by a lot of
ISPs gets everything posted in a subscribed-to group, will he, nil he.


will he, nil he?

In the style of Rusty, he has unmisspelt it.

Franz

"Brian {Hamilton Kelly}" wrote in message
...
In article ]

[snip]

I fully agree that urglers (what a weird name they call themselves:-)

Speak for yourself. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

{:-))

[snip]

Franz

"Jaques d'Alltrades" wrote in message
...
The message
from "John Briggs" contains these words:
Geoff Berrow wrote:
I noticed that Message-ID:
from John Briggs
contained the following:

That's all very well for those who go online to chooses and to
download
news, but those who have an offline reader of the type used by a lot
of
ISPs gets everything posted in a subscribed-to group, will he, nil
he.


will he, nil he?

will 'e, nil 'e

Actually, no. That should be the obsolete English verb *nill*, rather
than
the Latin 'nil' (a contraction of 'nihil', of course.)

looks it up

Coo! You learn something new every day on the internet!

Put that in your allotment and smoke it.
(Just getting back on topic)

Franz

"Brian Watson" wrote in message
...

Green wrote in message
...
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 11:34:05 GMT, Janet Baraclough ..
wrote:

Uk.rec.gardening is NOT a parent group trying to cast off an unweildy
subgroup. The proposal was made by someone who is not a visible user of
uk.rec.gardening.

nor was there any suggestion made on urg that a subgroup was necessary
or that allotment holders were being ignored.

No. I think it is that those who favour the proposition feel that
allotment
issues are not synonymous with gardening issues.

But neither are issues relating to growing roses and growing cacti in a
greenhouse. Both these and allotment issues find a comfortable home in URG.

Franz

On 31 Jan 2004 09:33:58 GMT, "Paul-B" wrote:

Pete Fenelon wrote:

In uk.net.news.config Wm...
wrote:
I do hope you don't mean me. I was the proponent for the current
urg charter but am certainly not interfering and don't think unn.*
has seen this proponent before; and while we are at it urg hasn't
seen this person before.

No, I meant the general tone of unn*. Nothing personal at all - I
didn't know you ewre the proponent for urg, it's not a part of the
hierarchy I have any interest in!

Pete has an allotment in his beard...

.... and a crop of spaghetti?
--
Martin

"John Briggs" wrote in message
...
Jaques d'Alltrades wrote:

That's all very well for those who go online to chooses and to download
news, but those who have an offline reader of the type used by a lot of
ISPs gets everything posted in a subscribed-to group, will he, nil he.


will he, nil he?

In the style of Rusty, he has unmisspelt it.

Franz

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 10:44:25 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
wrote:


"Brian {Hamilton Kelly}" wrote in message
...
In article ]

[snip]

I fully agree that urglers (what a weird name they call themselves:-)

Speak for yourself. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

small holder?

--
Martin

"Jaques d'Alltrades" wrote in message
...
The message
from "John Briggs" contains these words:
Geoff Berrow wrote:
I noticed that Message-ID:
from John Briggs
contained the following:

That's all very well for those who go online to chooses and to
download
news, but those who have an offline reader of the type used by a lot
of
ISPs gets everything posted in a subscribed-to group, will he, nil
he.


will he, nil he?

will 'e, nil 'e

Actually, no. That should be the obsolete English verb *nill*, rather
than
the Latin 'nil' (a contraction of 'nihil', of course.)

looks it up

Coo! You learn something new every day on the internet!

Put that in your allotment and smoke it.
(Just getting back on topic)

Franz

On 31 Jan 2004 09:33:58 GMT, "Paul-B" wrote:

Pete Fenelon wrote:

In uk.net.news.config Wm...
wrote:
I do hope you don't mean me. I was the proponent for the current
urg charter but am certainly not interfering and don't think unn.*
has seen this proponent before; and while we are at it urg hasn't
seen this person before.

No, I meant the general tone of unn*. Nothing personal at all - I
didn't know you ewre the proponent for urg, it's not a part of the
hierarchy I have any interest in!

Pete has an allotment in his beard...

.... and a crop of spaghetti?
--
Martin

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 10:44:25 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
wrote:


"Brian {Hamilton Kelly}" wrote in message
...
In article ]

[snip]

I fully agree that urglers (what a weird name they call themselves:-)

Speak for yourself. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

small holder?

--
Martin