1st CFV : Create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.gardening.allotments
 

"martin" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 19:05:50 GMT, Janet Baraclough ..
wrote:


Quote from start of thread: The Proponent is Gary Poston
================================================= ==================

PROPONENT's Summary of Discussion

I've not taken part in the discussion but monitored it and think I
can win. On monitoring the threads for the last 10 days and come to
a conclusion that I expect to have at least 12 more yes votes than
no votes.

"Some" people are still against the formation of
uk.rec.gardening.allotments. "Most" believe that "Allotments" are a
total different issue to "Gardening" for example; Allotments are
"plots of land" not your common house "garden".

People with Allotments are more likely to use
uk.rec.gardening.allotments
because this will be more common to them and would cut bandwidth with
regards to uk.rec.gardening general gardening threads. A lot of people
are in favour of an uk.rec.gardening.allotments newsgroup, a select
few "beg to differ" or are in two minds which way to vote.


That "summary" does not tally with my reading of the discussion either
here or in unnc.
For instance, I saw nothing in the public discussion to support the
claim that (of the people who took part),

"Most" believe allotments are a total different issue to gardening"
(sic).

*full quote*
"Most" believe that "Allotments" are a total different issue to "Gardening"
for example;
Allotments are "plots of land" not your common house "garden".
*full quote*



He totally ignored all the negative comments made to his proposed
charter.
Urglers should note Gary's final para about "cutting bandwidth to urg
general gardening threads". In other words his stated aim and intention
is that his new group will reduce the number of postings to urg on a
topic that has often enriched urg gardening discussions in the past.

Is that good for uk.rec.gardening? I beg to differ.

Where in the proposal does he say that a new group would be good for URG?

But where would the harm come from? A minority of posts on a subject not
included in urgs'
charter on another group, where people can talk vegetables, sheds and
planning to their
hearts content. This would leave urg to become the proper place to discuss
plants/planting/growing
in the home gardening situation, like its title.
Subscribe to both, if, as some say, 'it will die', so be it!
If it flourishes, more power to it!
Either way, you will have to read no more posts (unless it takes off), once
you have marked a post as read
it is read on the next group as well (well it does on the most common
newsreader), so you only have to read
'unread' posts.
Which ever way it goes the only winner can be Horticulture!
(should urg be u.r h? :) )

Anthony

1st CFV : Create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.gardening.allotments
 

"martin" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 19:05:50 GMT, Janet Baraclough ..
wrote:


Quote from start of thread: The Proponent is Gary Poston
================================================= ==================

PROPONENT's Summary of Discussion

I've not taken part in the discussion but monitored it and think I
can win. On monitoring the threads for the last 10 days and come to
a conclusion that I expect to have at least 12 more yes votes than
no votes.

"Some" people are still against the formation of
uk.rec.gardening.allotments. "Most" believe that "Allotments" are a
total different issue to "Gardening" for example; Allotments are
"plots of land" not your common house "garden".

People with Allotments are more likely to use
uk.rec.gardening.allotments
because this will be more common to them and would cut bandwidth with
regards to uk.rec.gardening general gardening threads. A lot of people
are in favour of an uk.rec.gardening.allotments newsgroup, a select
few "beg to differ" or are in two minds which way to vote.


That "summary" does not tally with my reading of the discussion either
here or in unnc.
For instance, I saw nothing in the public discussion to support the
claim that (of the people who took part),

"Most" believe allotments are a total different issue to gardening"
(sic).

*full quote*
"Most" believe that "Allotments" are a total different issue to "Gardening"
for example;
Allotments are "plots of land" not your common house "garden".
*full quote*



He totally ignored all the negative comments made to his proposed
charter.
Urglers should note Gary's final para about "cutting bandwidth to urg
general gardening threads". In other words his stated aim and intention
is that his new group will reduce the number of postings to urg on a
topic that has often enriched urg gardening discussions in the past.

Is that good for uk.rec.gardening? I beg to differ.

Where in the proposal does he say that a new group would be good for URG?

But where would the harm come from? A minority of posts on a subject not
included in urgs'
charter on another group, where people can talk vegetables, sheds and
planning to their
hearts content. This would leave urg to become the proper place to discuss
plants/planting/growing
in the home gardening situation, like its title.
Subscribe to both, if, as some say, 'it will die', so be it!
If it flourishes, more power to it!
Either way, you will have to read no more posts (unless it takes off), once
you have marked a post as read
it is read on the next group as well (well it does on the most common
newsreader), so you only have to read
'unread' posts.
Which ever way it goes the only winner can be Horticulture!
(should urg be u.r h? :) )

Anthony

1st CFV : Create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.gardening.allotments
 

"martin" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 19:05:50 GMT, Janet Baraclough ..
wrote:


Quote from start of thread: The Proponent is Gary Poston
================================================= ==================

PROPONENT's Summary of Discussion

I've not taken part in the discussion but monitored it and think I
can win. On monitoring the threads for the last 10 days and come to
a conclusion that I expect to have at least 12 more yes votes than
no votes.

"Some" people are still against the formation of
uk.rec.gardening.allotments. "Most" believe that "Allotments" are a
total different issue to "Gardening" for example; Allotments are
"plots of land" not your common house "garden".

People with Allotments are more likely to use
uk.rec.gardening.allotments
because this will be more common to them and would cut bandwidth with
regards to uk.rec.gardening general gardening threads. A lot of people
are in favour of an uk.rec.gardening.allotments newsgroup, a select
few "beg to differ" or are in two minds which way to vote.


That "summary" does not tally with my reading of the discussion either
here or in unnc.
For instance, I saw nothing in the public discussion to support the
claim that (of the people who took part),

"Most" believe allotments are a total different issue to gardening"
(sic).

*full quote*
"Most" believe that "Allotments" are a total different issue to "Gardening"
for example;
Allotments are "plots of land" not your common house "garden".
*full quote*



He totally ignored all the negative comments made to his proposed
charter.
Urglers should note Gary's final para about "cutting bandwidth to urg
general gardening threads". In other words his stated aim and intention
is that his new group will reduce the number of postings to urg on a
topic that has often enriched urg gardening discussions in the past.

Is that good for uk.rec.gardening? I beg to differ.

Where in the proposal does he say that a new group would be good for URG?

But where would the harm come from? A minority of posts on a subject not
included in urgs'
charter on another group, where people can talk vegetables, sheds and
planning to their
hearts content. This would leave urg to become the proper place to discuss
plants/planting/growing
in the home gardening situation, like its title.
Subscribe to both, if, as some say, 'it will die', so be it!
If it flourishes, more power to it!
Either way, you will have to read no more posts (unless it takes off), once
you have marked a post as read
it is read on the next group as well (well it does on the most common
newsreader), so you only have to read
'unread' posts.
Which ever way it goes the only winner can be Horticulture!
(should urg be u.r h? :) )

Anthony

1st CFV : Create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.gardening.allotments
 

Quote from start of thread: The Proponent is Gary Poston
================================================== =================

PROPONENT's Summary of Discussion

I've not taken part in the discussion but monitored it and think I
can win. On monitoring the threads for the last 10 days and come to
a conclusion that I expect to have at least 12 more yes votes than
no votes.

"Some" people are still against the formation of
uk.rec.gardening.allotments. "Most" believe that "Allotments" are a
total different issue to "Gardening" for example; Allotments are
"plots of land" not your common house "garden".

People with Allotments are more likely to use uk.rec.gardening.allotments
because this will be more common to them and would cut bandwidth with
regards to uk.rec.gardening general gardening threads. A lot of people
are in favour of an uk.rec.gardening.allotments newsgroup, a select
few "beg to differ" or are in two minds which way to vote.

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

That "summary" does not tally with my reading of the discussion either
here or in unnc.
For instance, I saw nothing in the public discussion to support the
claim that (of the people who took part),

"Most" believe allotments are a total different issue to gardening" (sic).


Urglers should note Gary's final para about "cutting bandwidth to urg
general gardening threads". In other words his stated aim and intention
is that his new group will reduce the number of postings to urg on a
topic that has often enriched urg gardening discussions in the past.

Is that good for uk.rec.gardening? I beg to differ.

Janet

1st CFV : Create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.gardening.allotments
 

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 19:05:50 GMT, Janet Baraclough ..
wrote:


Quote from start of thread: The Proponent is Gary Poston
================================================= ==================

PROPONENT's Summary of Discussion

I've not taken part in the discussion but monitored it and think I
can win. On monitoring the threads for the last 10 days and come to
a conclusion that I expect to have at least 12 more yes votes than
no votes.

"Some" people are still against the formation of
uk.rec.gardening.allotments. "Most" believe that "Allotments" are a
total different issue to "Gardening" for example; Allotments are
"plots of land" not your common house "garden".

People with Allotments are more likely to use uk.rec.gardening.allotments
because this will be more common to them and would cut bandwidth with
regards to uk.rec.gardening general gardening threads. A lot of people
are in favour of an uk.rec.gardening.allotments newsgroup, a select
few "beg to differ" or are in two minds which way to vote.

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

That "summary" does not tally with my reading of the discussion either
here or in unnc.
For instance, I saw nothing in the public discussion to support the
claim that (of the people who took part),

"Most" believe allotments are a total different issue to gardening" (sic).



He totally ignored all the negative comments made to his proposed
charter.


Urglers should note Gary's final para about "cutting bandwidth to urg
general gardening threads". In other words his stated aim and intention
is that his new group will reduce the number of postings to urg on a
topic that has often enriched urg gardening discussions in the past.

Is that good for uk.rec.gardening? I beg to differ.

Vote NO!
--

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit;
Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad

1st CFV : Create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.gardening.allotments
 

"Neil Jones" wrote in message
...

"Franz Heymann" wrote in message
...

"Neil Jones" wrote in message
...

"Jaques d'Alltrades" wrote in
message ...
The message
from "Franz Heymann" contains
these
words:

I see nothing relating to the allotments issue in
uk.net.news.config.
What date and what title should I see?

1st CFV : Create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.gardening.allotments

Ah. Too late, I see.


Too late? The voting has only just started...

How can it have started if I have not yet seen any reference
whatsoever to
this in ok.net.news.config?

Franz

I don't know precisely why you haven't seen it but the call for votes
was cross posted to the various groups rather than (as is implied in the
message) being posted to each group individually. Maybe you filter
crossposts?

No, I don't.
I guess I will just have to wait for a day or two to see what gives.
How long is the voting period likely to last?

Franz

1st CFV : Create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.gardening.allotments
 

"Pedt" "\"@ wrote in message
...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Franz Heymann said:

"Neil Jones" wrote in message
...

"Jaques d'Alltrades" wrote in
message ...
The message
from "Franz Heymann" contains
these
words:

I see nothing relating to the allotments issue in
uk.net.news.config.
What date and what title should I see?

1st CFV : Create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.gardening.allotments

Ah. Too late, I see.


Too late? The voting has only just started...

How can it have started if I have not yet seen any reference whatsoever
to
this in ok.net.news.config?

The CFV appears to not have reached some news servers. It *was* posted
to uk.net.news.announce, uk.net.news.config, uk.rec.gardening under
Message-ID:


I see someone has copied the CFV into urg elsewhere in this thread. That
copy is the same as posted to unna/unnc/urg for the avoidance of doubt
*Read it before requesting a ballot paper*. Ballot paper is available
by emailing which is the follow-up on the
original CFV.

Posts not propagating properly is a fact of life on Usenet.

This post PGP signed as owner of dontspame.com

Many thanks for the info.

Franz

1st CFV : Create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.gardening.allotments
 

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:11:58 GMT, Jaques d'Alltrades
wrote:

~The message
~from (jane) contains these words:
~
~ This is the first notification of the CFV I've seen. How does one vote
~ please?
~
~Will be if you're using Demon's news server: it's been more-or-less dead
~for two days. Allegedly. I'm surprised you got the OP.
~
I use bt's, sadly, thanks to the adsl gateway... Though I switched to
use freenews.netfront.net to see if it's any better. Certainly it
received 180 more posts than bt: admittedly I had to plonk half of
them!
I have to revert to bt to post though.


--
jane

Don't part with your illusions. When they are gone,
you may still exist but you have ceased to live.
Mark Twain

Please remove onmaps from replies, thanks!

1st CFV : Create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.gardening.allotments
 

"martin" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 19:05:50 GMT, Janet Baraclough ..
wrote:


Quote from start of thread: The Proponent is Gary Poston
================================================= ==================

PROPONENT's Summary of Discussion

I've not taken part in the discussion but monitored it and think I
can win. On monitoring the threads for the last 10 days and come to
a conclusion that I expect to have at least 12 more yes votes than
no votes.

"Some" people are still against the formation of
uk.rec.gardening.allotments. "Most" believe that "Allotments" are a
total different issue to "Gardening" for example; Allotments are
"plots of land" not your common house "garden".

People with Allotments are more likely to use
uk.rec.gardening.allotments
because this will be more common to them and would cut bandwidth with
regards to uk.rec.gardening general gardening threads. A lot of people
are in favour of an uk.rec.gardening.allotments newsgroup, a select
few "beg to differ" or are in two minds which way to vote.


That "summary" does not tally with my reading of the discussion either
here or in unnc.
For instance, I saw nothing in the public discussion to support the
claim that (of the people who took part),

"Most" believe allotments are a total different issue to gardening"
(sic).

*full quote*
"Most" believe that "Allotments" are a total different issue to "Gardening"
for example;
Allotments are "plots of land" not your common house "garden".
*full quote*



He totally ignored all the negative comments made to his proposed
charter.
Urglers should note Gary's final para about "cutting bandwidth to urg
general gardening threads". In other words his stated aim and intention
is that his new group will reduce the number of postings to urg on a
topic that has often enriched urg gardening discussions in the past.

Is that good for uk.rec.gardening? I beg to differ.

Where in the proposal does he say that a new group would be good for URG?

But where would the harm come from? A minority of posts on a subject not
included in urgs'
charter on another group, where people can talk vegetables, sheds and
planning to their
hearts content. This would leave urg to become the proper place to discuss
plants/planting/growing
in the home gardening situation, like its title.
Subscribe to both, if, as some say, 'it will die', so be it!
If it flourishes, more power to it!
Either way, you will have to read no more posts (unless it takes off), once
you have marked a post as read
it is read on the next group as well (well it does on the most common
newsreader), so you only have to read
'unread' posts.
Which ever way it goes the only winner can be Horticulture!
(should urg be u.r h? :) )

Anthony

1st CFV : Create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.gardening.allotments
 

The message
from martin contains these words:

I voted yesterday. I may vote again tomorrow.

How? You can't vote until you are sent the 'ballot slip'.

--
Rusty
Open the creaking gate to make a horrid.squeak, then lower the foobar.
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/

1st CFV : Create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.gardening.allotments
 

The message
from martin contains these words:

I voted yesterday. I may vote again tomorrow.

How? You can't vote until you are sent the 'ballot slip'.

--
Rusty
Open the creaking gate to make a horrid.squeak, then lower the foobar.
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/

1st CFV : Create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.gardening.allotments
 

"Janet Baraclough .." wrote in
message ...

Quote from start of thread: The Proponent is Gary Poston
================================================== =================

PROPONENT's Summary of Discussion

I've not taken part in the discussion but monitored it and think I
can win. On monitoring the threads for the last 10 days and come to
a conclusion that I expect to have at least 12 more yes votes than
no votes.

"Some" people are still against the formation of
uk.rec.gardening.allotments. "Most" believe that "Allotments" are a
total different issue to "Gardening" for example; Allotments are
"plots of land" not your common house "garden".

People with Allotments are more likely to use uk.rec.gardening.allotments
because this will be more common to them and would cut bandwidth with
regards to uk.rec.gardening general gardening threads. A lot of people
are in favour of an uk.rec.gardening.allotments newsgroup, a select
few "beg to differ" or are in two minds which way to vote.

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

That "summary" does not tally with my reading of the discussion either
here or in unnc.
For instance, I saw nothing in the public discussion to support the
claim that (of the people who took part),

"Most" believe allotments are a total different issue to gardening"
(sic).

At best that is a total misinterpretation of the views I saw. At worst, it
is a lie in order to drum up support for his breakaway ng.

Urglers should note Gary's final para about "cutting bandwidth to urg
general gardening threads". In other words his stated aim and intention
is that his new group will reduce the number of postings to urg on a
topic that has often enriched urg gardening discussions in the past.

Is that good for uk.rec.gardening? I beg to differ.

In any case Gary is wrong about reducing the bandwidth usage, since it is
certain that the vast bulk of the threads in the new ng will be crossposted
to urg, for the sake of getting a reasonable participation rate.

I urge all urglers to take the trouble to vote NO, as this is an entiely
disruptive piece of empire building.

Franz

1st CFV : Create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.gardening.allotments
 

"Anthony" wrote in message
...

"martin" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 19:05:50 GMT, Janet Baraclough ..
wrote:


Quote from start of thread: The Proponent is Gary Poston
================================================= ==================

PROPONENT's Summary of Discussion

I've not taken part in the discussion but monitored it and think I
can win. On monitoring the threads for the last 10 days and come to
a conclusion that I expect to have at least 12 more yes votes than
no votes.

"Some" people are still against the formation of
uk.rec.gardening.allotments. "Most" believe that "Allotments" are a
total different issue to "Gardening" for example; Allotments are
"plots of land" not your common house "garden".

People with Allotments are more likely to use
uk.rec.gardening.allotments
because this will be more common to them and would cut bandwidth with
regards to uk.rec.gardening general gardening threads. A lot of people
are in favour of an uk.rec.gardening.allotments newsgroup, a select
few "beg to differ" or are in two minds which way to vote.


That "summary" does not tally with my reading of the discussion
either
here or in unnc.
For instance, I saw nothing in the public discussion to support the
claim that (of the people who took part),

"Most" believe allotments are a total different issue to gardening"
(sic).

*full quote*
"Most" believe that "Allotments" are a total different issue to
"Gardening"
for example;
Allotments are "plots of land" not your common house "garden".
*full quote*

So he did in fact say that QUOTE "Most" believe that "Allotments" are a
total different issue to "Gardening" UNQUOTE.

He totally ignored all the negative comments made to his proposed
charter.
Urglers should note Gary's final para about "cutting bandwidth to urg
general gardening threads". In other words his stated aim and intention
is that his new group will reduce the number of postings to urg on a
topic that has often enriched urg gardening discussions in the past.

Is that good for uk.rec.gardening? I beg to differ.

Where in the proposal does he say that a new group would be good for URG?

Ah, so is his intent just to split urg, thereby being the opposite of "good
for URG"

But where would the harm come from? A minority of posts on a subject not
included in urgs'
charter

That is total rubbish. Please familiarise yourself with urg's charter and
understand it before talking such nonsense.

on another group, where people can talk vegetables, sheds and
planning to their
hearts content.

Urglers are in fact this very minute discussing "sheds and planning to
their hearts content."
Please look at the list of current threads.

This would leave urg to become the proper place to discuss
plants/planting/growing
in the home gardening situation, like its title.

None of the above exclude the discussion of allotment gardening.
If you don't believe this, then instead of just bleating, post something
about allotment gardening to see what sort of response you get.

Subscribe to both, if, as some say, 'it will die', so be it!

That is not a sensible reason for starting a new group.

If it flourishes, more power to it!
Either way, you will have to read no more posts (unless it takes off),
once
you have marked a post as read
it is read on the next group as well (well it does on the most common
newsreader), so you only have to read
'unread' posts.
Which ever way it goes the only winner can be Horticulture!
(should urg be u.r h? :) )

I leave it for others to decide for themselves whether that last paragraph
spells out a case for splitting a very active group just to satisfy the whim
of a person, or small coterie of folk who have never tried to participate in
the existing group.

Franz

1st CFV : Create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.gardening.allotments
 

"Jaques d'Alltrades" wrote in
message ...
The message
from martin contains these words:

I voted yesterday. I may vote again tomorrow.

How? You can't vote until you are sent the 'ballot slip'.

I was sent my ballot yesterday and voted by return.

Neil

1st CFV : Create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.gardening.allotments
 

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 03:06:46 GMT, Jaques d'Alltrades
wrote:

The message
from martin contains these words:

I voted yesterday. I may vote again tomorrow.

How? You can't vote until you are sent the 'ballot slip'.

I was sent a ballot slip immediately.
--

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit;
Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad