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

The message
from martin contains these words:

/sodding great snip/

Talking of trolls .... what are you doing in this newsgroup? You never seem
to have anything to say about gardening and your comments are usually
distasteful and inappropriate.

I totally disagree. Franz has had lots to say about gardening.
It's also clear you don't understand the meaning of troll. A troll is
not somebody, who doesn't agree with the clique all the time.

Would you like me to send you a pair of scissors?

--
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:

/sodding great snip/

Talking of trolls .... what are you doing in this newsgroup? You never seem
to have anything to say about gardening and your comments are usually
distasteful and inappropriate.

I totally disagree. Franz has had lots to say about gardening.
It's also clear you don't understand the meaning of troll. A troll is
not somebody, who doesn't agree with the clique all the time.

Would you like me to send you a pair of scissors?

--
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
 

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 08:31:37 GMT, Jaques d'Alltrades
wrote:

Would you like me to send you a pair of scissors?

and my news server, I cancelled that one.
--

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
 

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 08:31:37 GMT, Jaques d'Alltrades
wrote:

Would you like me to send you a pair of scissors?

and my news server, I cancelled that one.
--

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
 

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 08:31:37 GMT, Jaques d'Alltrades
wrote:

Would you like me to send you a pair of scissors?

and my news server, I cancelled that one.
--

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
 

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 08:31:37 GMT, Jaques d'Alltrades
wrote:

Would you like me to send you a pair of scissors?

and my news server, I cancelled that one.
--

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
 

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 08:31:37 GMT, Jaques d'Alltrades
wrote:

Would you like me to send you a pair of scissors?

and my news server, I cancelled that one.
--

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
 

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 08:31:37 GMT, Jaques d'Alltrades
wrote:

Would you like me to send you a pair of scissors?

and my news server, I cancelled that one.
--

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
 

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 08:31:37 GMT, Jaques d'Alltrades
wrote:

Would you like me to send you a pair of scissors?

and my news server, I cancelled that one.
--

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
 

The message
from "Anthony" contains
these words:


"martin" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 00:10:24 -0000, "Anthony"
wrote:
To discuss gardening issues relevant to the UK. These will include
flowers, shrubs, trees, fruit & vegetables, lawns, houseplants,
beneficial insects & animals, soils, composting, design, location,
situation, seasons/times, hard structures (paths, greenhouses,
cloches, rockeries), ponds, tools & materials, weeds and pests &
diseases. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list."

Which part of "This is not meant to be an exhaustive list." do you
find difficult to understand? Are you sure your read the charter?

So the word allotment is NOT specified!

Allotments are a gardening issue relevant to the UK. The term isn't
specified, and the list was "not exhaustive", because to list every
relevant gardening issue would take pages. The list also doesn't mention
fertiliser, seeds, sheds, climate, or weather, but I hardly think a
sensible person would claim that since those words weren't specified,
they are offtopic in urg.

Janet

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

The message
from "Anthony" contains
these words:


"martin" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 00:10:24 -0000, "Anthony"
wrote:
To discuss gardening issues relevant to the UK. These will include
flowers, shrubs, trees, fruit & vegetables, lawns, houseplants,
beneficial insects & animals, soils, composting, design, location,
situation, seasons/times, hard structures (paths, greenhouses,
cloches, rockeries), ponds, tools & materials, weeds and pests &
diseases. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list."

Which part of "This is not meant to be an exhaustive list." do you
find difficult to understand? Are you sure your read the charter?

So the word allotment is NOT specified!

Allotments are a gardening issue relevant to the UK. The term isn't
specified, and the list was "not exhaustive", because to list every
relevant gardening issue would take pages. The list also doesn't mention
fertiliser, seeds, sheds, climate, or weather, but I hardly think a
sensible person would claim that since those words weren't specified,
they are offtopic in urg.

Janet

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

The message
from "Anthony" contains
these words:


It is on topic due to historical reasons, but I was under the impression
that if a subject was not included it was off topic.

Your impression was mistaken, sorry.

(Franz said)
Please look at the list of current threads.

What? Just started one have you?

Not the ones I saw. Allotment posts occur frequently on urg, it's
nothing unusual.

In that case Franz should have said PAST threads, but as usual he was having
trouble making sense!

Sigh. Not very far past; this week. I hope we can agree that this
week's posts are current ones? I said "saw" because I'd already deleted
them; otherwise I'd have given you the thread-headers. (I hope you're
doing something useful with all these split hairs btw..knitting a little
scarf for actionman, or summat).

Thank you Janet for your post, I now have a better grasp of your argument
against the proposal.
I don't agree with it however :)

That's fine :-)

I don't claim to have time to have read every post on this subject, but some
people seem to be
making up non existant problems with which to try and put people off the
proposal for no other
reason than their own selfish goals.

I have read every post, and I honestly don't think any rational
contributors are chasing "selfish goals". The problems I foresee have
happened to other groups that split.

Janet.

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

The message
from "Anthony" contains
these words:


It is on topic due to historical reasons, but I was under the impression
that if a subject was not included it was off topic.

Your impression was mistaken, sorry.

(Franz said)
Please look at the list of current threads.

What? Just started one have you?

Not the ones I saw. Allotment posts occur frequently on urg, it's
nothing unusual.

In that case Franz should have said PAST threads, but as usual he was having
trouble making sense!

Sigh. Not very far past; this week. I hope we can agree that this
week's posts are current ones? I said "saw" because I'd already deleted
them; otherwise I'd have given you the thread-headers. (I hope you're
doing something useful with all these split hairs btw..knitting a little
scarf for actionman, or summat).

Thank you Janet for your post, I now have a better grasp of your argument
against the proposal.
I don't agree with it however :)

That's fine :-)

I don't claim to have time to have read every post on this subject, but some
people seem to be
making up non existant problems with which to try and put people off the
proposal for no other
reason than their own selfish goals.

I have read every post, and I honestly don't think any rational
contributors are chasing "selfish goals". The problems I foresee have
happened to other groups that split.

Janet.

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

Just to throw my tuppence worth in at this late stage...

Allotments *are* covered by URG. If you argue they aren't either implicitly
or explicitly then uk.rec.gardening.allotments has no business being a
subgroup of uk.rec.gardening

However, they are a specialist interest and I see no reason why anyone who
wants to can't be allowed to have a quiet corner to discuss them in, away
from the hussle and bussle which makes up the rest of the group. Anyone who
wants to listen in can subscribe as well.

The only two objections I've heard are that crossposting will cause problems
due to increased traffic, and that the group will be so under-used it will
fall into disuse and be killed. These are logically opposed arguments.
Either it is a problem because it is high traffic or because it is low
traffic - not both.

If it withers and dies then what was all the fuss about?
If on the other hand it grows then its formation was completely justified.
And to anyone worried about the crossposting, lets just ask urga not to do
it, and if it does, just set up your filters to filter the crossposts out.

For what it's worth, I voted YES.

--
Martin & Anna Sykes
( Remove x's when replying )
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~sykesm

"Anthony" wrote in message
...

"martin" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 00:10:24 -0000, "Anthony"
wrote:
To discuss gardening issues relevant to the UK. These will include
flowers, shrubs, trees, fruit & vegetables, lawns, houseplants,
beneficial insects & animals, soils, composting, design, location,
situation, seasons/times, hard structures (paths, greenhouses,
cloches, rockeries), ponds, tools & materials, weeds and pests &
diseases. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list."

Which part of "This is not meant to be an exhaustive list." do you
find difficult to understand? Are you sure your read the charter?

So the word allotment is NOT specified!
Have you read what you cut and pasted?
It seems to be hiden in a secret paragraph.
You see I could talk about telegraph poles, cars and cess pits, because
each
of my neighbours has one or more in their garden, and still be on topic by
your argument. It will always be OK because somebody says it is 'not an
exhaustive list'.

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

Just to throw my tuppence worth in at this late stage...

Allotments *are* covered by URG. If you argue they aren't either implicitly
or explicitly then uk.rec.gardening.allotments has no business being a
subgroup of uk.rec.gardening

However, they are a specialist interest and I see no reason why anyone who
wants to can't be allowed to have a quiet corner to discuss them in, away
from the hussle and bussle which makes up the rest of the group. Anyone who
wants to listen in can subscribe as well.

The only two objections I've heard are that crossposting will cause problems
due to increased traffic, and that the group will be so under-used it will
fall into disuse and be killed. These are logically opposed arguments.
Either it is a problem because it is high traffic or because it is low
traffic - not both.

If it withers and dies then what was all the fuss about?
If on the other hand it grows then its formation was completely justified.
And to anyone worried about the crossposting, lets just ask urga not to do
it, and if it does, just set up your filters to filter the crossposts out.

For what it's worth, I voted YES.

--
Martin & Anna Sykes
( Remove x's when replying )
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~sykesm

"Anthony" wrote in message
...

"martin" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 00:10:24 -0000, "Anthony"
wrote:
To discuss gardening issues relevant to the UK. These will include
flowers, shrubs, trees, fruit & vegetables, lawns, houseplants,
beneficial insects & animals, soils, composting, design, location,
situation, seasons/times, hard structures (paths, greenhouses,
cloches, rockeries), ponds, tools & materials, weeds and pests &
diseases. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list."

Which part of "This is not meant to be an exhaustive list." do you
find difficult to understand? Are you sure your read the charter?

So the word allotment is NOT specified!
Have you read what you cut and pasted?
It seems to be hiden in a secret paragraph.
You see I could talk about telegraph poles, cars and cess pits, because
each
of my neighbours has one or more in their garden, and still be on topic by
your argument. It will always be OK because somebody says it is 'not an
exhaustive list'.

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

"Jaques d'Alltrades" wrote in message
You have quoted 126 lines to post three. Please trim.
That Better?
And you obviously don't spend much time in here these days
Nope I'm usually out in the garden or at work. Fair point. I'm only dropping
in to these long threads cos I'm off with flu and can't do either of the
above.
or you would
have a more constructive view on Franz's posts.

He does have the unfortunate habit of rising to trolls though - and not
snipping.

Well I've only seen that kind of comment so far. Anyway maybe I was tring to
be too subtle (DOH ;0)) but the length of the IMHO off-topic threads was
part of my argument!
Anne

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

"Jaques d'Alltrades" wrote in message
You have quoted 126 lines to post three. Please trim.
That Better?
And you obviously don't spend much time in here these days
Nope I'm usually out in the garden or at work. Fair point. I'm only dropping
in to these long threads cos I'm off with flu and can't do either of the
above.
or you would
have a more constructive view on Franz's posts.

He does have the unfortunate habit of rising to trolls though - and not
snipping.

Well I've only seen that kind of comment so far. Anyway maybe I was tring to
be too subtle (DOH ;0)) but the length of the IMHO off-topic threads was
part of my argument!
Anne

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

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

It's also clear you don't understand the meaning of troll. A troll is
not somebody, who doesn't agree with the clique all the time.
I think I do! Trolls have various definitions and roles. Try this:
http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/t/troll.html
or this
http://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/troll.htm

Would you like me to send you a pair of scissors?

Sure if they're Felco I wouldn't say no.
Anne

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

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

It's also clear you don't understand the meaning of troll. A troll is
not somebody, who doesn't agree with the clique all the time.
I think I do! Trolls have various definitions and roles. Try this:
http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/t/troll.html
or this
http://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/troll.htm

Would you like me to send you a pair of scissors?

Sure if they're Felco I wouldn't say no.
Anne

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

"Janet Baraclough .." wrote in
message ...
The message
from "Anthony" contains
these words:
It's my post which you accuse of misquoting, Anthony. If you read it
again, you'll see that I quoted Gary's point in full in my previous
paragraph. So it's clear there was no intention to conceal its context
or alter intended meaning.

Yes I realise it was your post Janet, and your answer was in reply to my
reply to Franz, if you see what I mean :)
But what I was saying was that to cut the sentence before the full stop did,
in my opinion, alter the meaning.


SNIP quote of urg
charter).......................................... ........................

Time and again, urg posters have repeated that all the topics which
Gary wishes to discuss in a separate group, are on topic on urg and have
long been discussed; including allotment availability, rules,
management, prices, open days etc.(Just as we discuss public gardens,
botanical gardens, their management, prices, open days, meetings,
etc..they are all relevant to UK gardening.

It is on topic due to historical reasons, but I was under the impression
that if a subject was not included it was off topic.


(Franz said)
Please look at the list of current threads.

What? Just started one have you?

Not the ones I saw. Allotment posts occur frequently on urg, it's
nothing unusual.

In that case Franz should have said PAST threads, but as usual he was having
trouble making sense!

But I cannot for the life of me understand why you would want to oppose
just
because the proposer hasn't posted enough to urg in the past, or has
chosen to
remain on the sidelines.

Look up the requirements for the formation of a new group within the
Big 8 hierarchy on usenet. A new-group proposal is supposed to fill an
empty niche, to provide a discussion opportunity that isn't available
elsewhere. Urg is an active rec.group where discussion of allotments is
on topic, frequent,welcomed, and has covered all the issues Gary claims
to need a new group for.So the fact that what Gary proposes has been
long-established within the same usenet hierarchy, and he doesn't make
use of it, is a relevant issue to informed voters.

Thank You. At last a proper answer.

I suspect that his earlier claim to be an urg lurker was as inaccurate
as his "summary of the RFD discussion" in the CFV, his claim that the
new group will benefit urg, and your claim about this group's charter.

If Gary's proposal doesn't meet the required standard to form a group
within the Big 8 hierarchies, he could always go downmarket and start an
alt.group about allotments. Oops, I'm forgetting..he already thought of
that, and got blown out of the water then too, for equally good reasons.

Google/groups search facility is such a mixed blessing, isn't it? :-)

Janet

Thank you Janet for your post, I now have a better grasp of your argument
against the proposal.
I don't agree with it however :)
I don't claim to have time to have read every post on this subject, but some
people seem to be
making up non existant problems with which to try and put people off the
proposal for no other
reason than their own selfish goals.

Regards
Anthony

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

"Janet Baraclough .." wrote in
message ...
The message
from "Anthony" contains
these words:
It's my post which you accuse of misquoting, Anthony. If you read it
again, you'll see that I quoted Gary's point in full in my previous
paragraph. So it's clear there was no intention to conceal its context
or alter intended meaning.

Yes I realise it was your post Janet, and your answer was in reply to my
reply to Franz, if you see what I mean :)
But what I was saying was that to cut the sentence before the full stop did,
in my opinion, alter the meaning.


SNIP quote of urg
charter).......................................... ........................

Time and again, urg posters have repeated that all the topics which
Gary wishes to discuss in a separate group, are on topic on urg and have
long been discussed; including allotment availability, rules,
management, prices, open days etc.(Just as we discuss public gardens,
botanical gardens, their management, prices, open days, meetings,
etc..they are all relevant to UK gardening.

It is on topic due to historical reasons, but I was under the impression
that if a subject was not included it was off topic.


(Franz said)
Please look at the list of current threads.

What? Just started one have you?

Not the ones I saw. Allotment posts occur frequently on urg, it's
nothing unusual.

In that case Franz should have said PAST threads, but as usual he was having
trouble making sense!

But I cannot for the life of me understand why you would want to oppose
just
because the proposer hasn't posted enough to urg in the past, or has
chosen to
remain on the sidelines.

Look up the requirements for the formation of a new group within the
Big 8 hierarchy on usenet. A new-group proposal is supposed to fill an
empty niche, to provide a discussion opportunity that isn't available
elsewhere. Urg is an active rec.group where discussion of allotments is
on topic, frequent,welcomed, and has covered all the issues Gary claims
to need a new group for.So the fact that what Gary proposes has been
long-established within the same usenet hierarchy, and he doesn't make
use of it, is a relevant issue to informed voters.

Thank You. At last a proper answer.

I suspect that his earlier claim to be an urg lurker was as inaccurate
as his "summary of the RFD discussion" in the CFV, his claim that the
new group will benefit urg, and your claim about this group's charter.

If Gary's proposal doesn't meet the required standard to form a group
within the Big 8 hierarchies, he could always go downmarket and start an
alt.group about allotments. Oops, I'm forgetting..he already thought of
that, and got blown out of the water then too, for equally good reasons.

Google/groups search facility is such a mixed blessing, isn't it? :-)

Janet

Thank you Janet for your post, I now have a better grasp of your argument
against the proposal.
I don't agree with it however :)
I don't claim to have time to have read every post on this subject, but some
people seem to be
making up non existant problems with which to try and put people off the
proposal for no other
reason than their own selfish goals.

Regards
Anthony

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

"Gary Poston" wrote in message
...
Hi urg

What will I gain with reference to a proposed newsgroup urga?
Well, What I will gain (and others) is bringing people together that rent
or
even own Allotments This might include, crop rotation,

bin done in urg

raised bed issues,

bin done in urg

local meetings, Club AGM's ECT, ECT..

bin done in urg

Will we discuss Fruit trees?

bin done in urg

or when to plant tomato plants?

bin done in urg

Well, Yes, Sometimes, but isn't that what urg
newsgroup is for?

Precisely. Have you not got the point yet?

I don't want to take that away from an excellent
gardening newsgroup such as urg, but there are other discussions and
issues
that can be held in urga.

And they have been and can be discussed in urg.

Nothing stops discussion of *any* of those topics in urg, as you would have
known if you had been participating in urg for a while.

If it encourages new Allotment holders, SO BE IT!.

Who gives someone the right to object to such a group when it can benefit
all of us?

Those of us who feel that setting up such a spurious group is simply empire
building on your part, to the detriment of urg.

Franz

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

"Gary Poston" wrote in message
...
Hi urg

What will I gain with reference to a proposed newsgroup urga?
Well, What I will gain (and others) is bringing people together that rent
or
even own Allotments This might include, crop rotation,

bin done in urg

raised bed issues,

bin done in urg

local meetings, Club AGM's ECT, ECT..

bin done in urg

Will we discuss Fruit trees?

bin done in urg

or when to plant tomato plants?

bin done in urg

Well, Yes, Sometimes, but isn't that what urg
newsgroup is for?

Precisely. Have you not got the point yet?

I don't want to take that away from an excellent
gardening newsgroup such as urg, but there are other discussions and
issues
that can be held in urga.

And they have been and can be discussed in urg.

Nothing stops discussion of *any* of those topics in urg, as you would have
known if you had been participating in urg for a while.

If it encourages new Allotment holders, SO BE IT!.

Who gives someone the right to object to such a group when it can benefit
all of us?

Those of us who feel that setting up such a spurious group is simply empire
building on your part, to the detriment of urg.

Franz

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

The message
from "Anne Wheeldon" contains these words:

Nope I'm usually out in the garden or at work. Fair point. I'm only dropping
in to these long threads cos I'm off with flu and can't do either of the
above.

Hope it gets better soon. And cut the floodlit gardening - it's not good
for you. Get flu or something, what?

He does have the unfortunate habit of rising to trolls though - and not
snipping.

Well I've only seen that kind of comment so far. Anyway maybe I was tring to
be too subtle (DOH ;0)) but the length of the IMHO off-topic threads was
part of my argument!

I'm afraid I tend not to read a lot of his posts. If there's no reply
text on the screen under quoted stuff, I tend to delete and go on to the
next in the thread.

Sometimes though, I'm too nosey for my own good....

--
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 "Anne Wheeldon" contains these words:

Nope I'm usually out in the garden or at work. Fair point. I'm only dropping
in to these long threads cos I'm off with flu and can't do either of the
above.

Hope it gets better soon. And cut the floodlit gardening - it's not good
for you. Get flu or something, what?

He does have the unfortunate habit of rising to trolls though - and not
snipping.

Well I've only seen that kind of comment so far. Anyway maybe I was tring to
be too subtle (DOH ;0)) but the length of the IMHO off-topic threads was
part of my argument!

I'm afraid I tend not to read a lot of his posts. If there's no reply
text on the screen under quoted stuff, I tend to delete and go on to the
next in the thread.

Sometimes though, I'm too nosey for my own good....

--
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
 

"John Rouse" wrote in message
...
It must be me, I read that as "Create unmolested newsgroup"

John
--
John Rouse

If we could do that we would all be rich :-)

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

"martin" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 00:10:24 -0000, "Anthony"
wrote:
To discuss gardening issues relevant to the UK. These will include
flowers, shrubs, trees, fruit & vegetables, lawns, houseplants,
beneficial insects & animals, soils, composting, design, location,
situation, seasons/times, hard structures (paths, greenhouses,
cloches, rockeries), ponds, tools & materials, weeds and pests &
diseases. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list."

Which part of "This is not meant to be an exhaustive list." do you
find difficult to understand? Are you sure your read the charter?

So the word allotment is NOT specified!
Have you read what you cut and pasted?
It seems to be hiden in a secret paragraph.
You see I could talk about telegraph poles, cars and cess pits, because each
of my neighbours has one or more in their garden, and still be on topic by
your argument. It will always be OK because somebody says it is 'not an
exhaustive list'.

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

"Franz Heymann" wrote in message
...
Yes but it WASN'T the FULL QUOTE, which affected its meaning.

Who do you think you are bluffing? I have just looked again at the
original
and it is clear that my quotation conveys the sense of the original.

It wasn't YOUR quotation, it belonged to Janet, whom I replied to.
Having trouble following the thread Franz?
Taking credit for something written by another, theres a name for that!

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

Where does he say he wants to split urg? The actual quote please.
What realistically do you think the harm would be?

Where did I say that he *said* he wants to split urg?
I *deduced* that he wants to split urg. Why else would he be proposing a
new group when in fact there are allotmenteers happily contributing to
urg?
The proposer has not once tried to raise matters of interest to
allotmenteers in urg. Indeed, it seems that he has never even lurked in
urg, otherwise he would have been aware that allotment issues *are* in
fact
discussed there.

You are making it up as you go along! How on earth can you know that someone
has not 'lurked' in a group?
That is the most stupid remark you have made so far...................

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

Again, Quote to me where in the charter of urg. it specifies the
discussion
of allotments.

Are you really as silly as you come across? The charter does not say
anywhere that growing lavender bushes or raising half hardy seedlings are
suitable topics for discussion in urg either. So, are we supposed to
avert
our eyes when those topics crop up?

Not covered under 'flowers or shrubs' then?
Wow, no wonder you subscribe to this group, your gardening knowledge is very
poor.
Now tell me what allotments would come under the heading of?


If it not specified it is strictly speaking OFF topic.
I have read the charter, have you? Can you find it?

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.

What? Just started one have you?

You are obviously quite unfamiliar with the contents of urg in the past
and
now. That does not put you in a good position for defending the setting
up
of a breakaway group.

Use Google, I know how long you have been posting.

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.

Its not for me to spell out the case for the formation for the new
group.

Why have you then written this particular note?

But I cannot for the life of me understand why you would want to oppose
just
because
the proposer hasn't posted enough to urg in the past, or has chosen to
remain on the sidelines.

Snip an attempted insult .

The bandwidth issue has been spouted but no evidence has been given to
prove
that more space
would be taken up by the new group. Time and again, you Franz, have
stated
that all posts to the
proposed group would be crossposted, again without a shread of evidence
being cited.

You are being even more silly than you are. How on earth can evidence
have
accrued for an event in the future?

It was your argument Franz, how soon you forget. Use google to check what
you have posted in the past if your memory is failing.

But for a somewhat analogous case, look at what happened in uk.rec.audio
when uk.rec.audio.vinyl and uk.rec.audio.car were spawned.

Many reasons therefore against the motion with a distinct lack of
evidence.

You are being needlessly repetitive.

The proposer has been accused of 'Empire Building', I personally think
that
some people are
frightened that their own 'little empire' may be under threat in some
way.
Still we can agree to differ can't we Franz. You vote your way, I'll
vote
mine.

Of course. Why did you bother to post?

Why did you waste bandwidth replying?

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

"Franz Heymann" wrote in message
...
Yes but it WASN'T the FULL QUOTE, which affected its meaning.

Who do you think you are bluffing? I have just looked again at the
original
and it is clear that my quotation conveys the sense of the original.

It wasn't YOUR quotation, it belonged to Janet, whom I replied to.
Having trouble following the thread Franz?
Taking credit for something written by another, theres a name for that!

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

Where does he say he wants to split urg? The actual quote please.
What realistically do you think the harm would be?

Where did I say that he *said* he wants to split urg?
I *deduced* that he wants to split urg. Why else would he be proposing a
new group when in fact there are allotmenteers happily contributing to
urg?
The proposer has not once tried to raise matters of interest to
allotmenteers in urg. Indeed, it seems that he has never even lurked in
urg, otherwise he would have been aware that allotment issues *are* in
fact
discussed there.

You are making it up as you go along! How on earth can you know that someone
has not 'lurked' in a group?
That is the most stupid remark you have made so far...................

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

Again, Quote to me where in the charter of urg. it specifies the
discussion
of allotments.

Are you really as silly as you come across? The charter does not say
anywhere that growing lavender bushes or raising half hardy seedlings are
suitable topics for discussion in urg either. So, are we supposed to
avert
our eyes when those topics crop up?

Not covered under 'flowers or shrubs' then?
Wow, no wonder you subscribe to this group, your gardening knowledge is very
poor.
Now tell me what allotments would come under the heading of?


If it not specified it is strictly speaking OFF topic.
I have read the charter, have you? Can you find it?

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.

What? Just started one have you?

You are obviously quite unfamiliar with the contents of urg in the past
and
now. That does not put you in a good position for defending the setting
up
of a breakaway group.

Use Google, I know how long you have been posting.

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.

Its not for me to spell out the case for the formation for the new
group.

Why have you then written this particular note?

But I cannot for the life of me understand why you would want to oppose
just
because
the proposer hasn't posted enough to urg in the past, or has chosen to
remain on the sidelines.

Snip an attempted insult .

The bandwidth issue has been spouted but no evidence has been given to
prove
that more space
would be taken up by the new group. Time and again, you Franz, have
stated
that all posts to the
proposed group would be crossposted, again without a shread of evidence
being cited.

You are being even more silly than you are. How on earth can evidence
have
accrued for an event in the future?

It was your argument Franz, how soon you forget. Use google to check what
you have posted in the past if your memory is failing.

But for a somewhat analogous case, look at what happened in uk.rec.audio
when uk.rec.audio.vinyl and uk.rec.audio.car were spawned.

Many reasons therefore against the motion with a distinct lack of
evidence.

You are being needlessly repetitive.

The proposer has been accused of 'Empire Building', I personally think
that
some people are
frightened that their own 'little empire' may be under threat in some
way.
Still we can agree to differ can't we Franz. You vote your way, I'll
vote
mine.

Of course. Why did you bother to post?

Why did you waste bandwidth replying?

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

"Franz Heymann" wrote in message
...
Yes but it WASN'T the FULL QUOTE, which affected its meaning.

Who do you think you are bluffing? I have just looked again at the
original
and it is clear that my quotation conveys the sense of the original.

It wasn't YOUR quotation, it belonged to Janet, whom I replied to.
Having trouble following the thread Franz?
Taking credit for something written by another, theres a name for that!

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

Where does he say he wants to split urg? The actual quote please.
What realistically do you think the harm would be?

Where did I say that he *said* he wants to split urg?
I *deduced* that he wants to split urg. Why else would he be proposing a
new group when in fact there are allotmenteers happily contributing to
urg?
The proposer has not once tried to raise matters of interest to
allotmenteers in urg. Indeed, it seems that he has never even lurked in
urg, otherwise he would have been aware that allotment issues *are* in
fact
discussed there.

You are making it up as you go along! How on earth can you know that someone
has not 'lurked' in a group?
That is the most stupid remark you have made so far...................

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

Again, Quote to me where in the charter of urg. it specifies the
discussion
of allotments.

Are you really as silly as you come across? The charter does not say
anywhere that growing lavender bushes or raising half hardy seedlings are
suitable topics for discussion in urg either. So, are we supposed to
avert
our eyes when those topics crop up?

Not covered under 'flowers or shrubs' then?
Wow, no wonder you subscribe to this group, your gardening knowledge is very
poor.
Now tell me what allotments would come under the heading of?


If it not specified it is strictly speaking OFF topic.
I have read the charter, have you? Can you find it?

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.

What? Just started one have you?

You are obviously quite unfamiliar with the contents of urg in the past
and
now. That does not put you in a good position for defending the setting
up
of a breakaway group.

Use Google, I know how long you have been posting.

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.

Its not for me to spell out the case for the formation for the new
group.

Why have you then written this particular note?

But I cannot for the life of me understand why you would want to oppose
just
because
the proposer hasn't posted enough to urg in the past, or has chosen to
remain on the sidelines.

Snip an attempted insult .

The bandwidth issue has been spouted but no evidence has been given to
prove
that more space
would be taken up by the new group. Time and again, you Franz, have
stated
that all posts to the
proposed group would be crossposted, again without a shread of evidence
being cited.

You are being even more silly than you are. How on earth can evidence
have
accrued for an event in the future?

It was your argument Franz, how soon you forget. Use google to check what
you have posted in the past if your memory is failing.

But for a somewhat analogous case, look at what happened in uk.rec.audio
when uk.rec.audio.vinyl and uk.rec.audio.car were spawned.

Many reasons therefore against the motion with a distinct lack of
evidence.

You are being needlessly repetitive.

The proposer has been accused of 'Empire Building', I personally think
that
some people are
frightened that their own 'little empire' may be under threat in some
way.
Still we can agree to differ can't we Franz. You vote your way, I'll
vote
mine.

Of course. Why did you bother to post?

Why did you waste bandwidth replying?

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

In message , Franz Heymann
writes

"martin" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:00:27 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"

It is in uk.net.news.announce and it should have been posted here too

I don't see it in uk.net.news.announce and I don't see it in urg either.
What is going on?

btinternet = crap newserver.

news.individual.net is your friend.
--
Chris French and Helen Johnson, Leeds
urg Suppliers and References FAQ:
http://www.familyfrench.co.uk/garden/urgfaq/index.html

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

In message , Franz Heymann
writes

"martin" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:00:27 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"

It is in uk.net.news.announce and it should have been posted here too

I don't see it in uk.net.news.announce and I don't see it in urg either.
What is going on?

btinternet = crap newserver.

news.individual.net is your friend.
--
Chris French and Helen Johnson, Leeds
urg Suppliers and References FAQ:
http://www.familyfrench.co.uk/garden/urgfaq/index.html

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

In message , Franz Heymann
writes

"martin" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:00:27 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"

It is in uk.net.news.announce and it should have been posted here too

I don't see it in uk.net.news.announce and I don't see it in urg either.
What is going on?

btinternet = crap newserver.

news.individual.net is your friend.
--
Chris French and Helen Johnson, Leeds
urg Suppliers and References FAQ:
http://www.familyfrench.co.uk/garden/urgfaq/index.html

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

"Franz Heymann" wrote in message
...

"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



According to the voting rules, between 18 and 28 days.

From the call for votes :-

"To receive a ballot paper, you must send an email to the Ballot
Request Address, which is xurga at request.ukvoting.org.uk."

Regards

Neil

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

"Franz Heymann" wrote in message
...

"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



According to the voting rules, between 18 and 28 days.

From the call for votes :-

"To receive a ballot paper, you must send an email to the Ballot
Request Address, which is xurga at request.ukvoting.org.uk."

Regards

Neil

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

"Franz Heymann" wrote in message
...

"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



According to the voting rules, between 18 and 28 days.

From the call for votes :-

"To receive a ballot paper, you must send an email to the Ballot
Request Address, which is xurga at request.ukvoting.org.uk."

Regards

Neil

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

Hi urg

What will I gain with reference to a proposed newsgroup urga?
Well, What I will gain (and others) is bringing people together that rent or
even own Allotments This might include, crop rotation, raised bed issues,
local meetings, Club AGM's ECT, ECT... Will we discuss Fruit trees? or when
to plant tomato plants? Well, Yes, Sometimes, but isn't that what urg
newsgroup is for? I don't want to take that away from an excellent
gardening newsgroup such as urg, but there are other discussions and issues
that can be held in urga.


If it encourages new Allotment holders, SO BE IT!.


Who gives someone the right to object to such a group when it can benefit
all of us?



Regards



Gary Poston

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

The message
from "Gary Poston" contains these words:


Who gives someone the right to object to such a group when it can benefit
all of us?

You haven't shown any benefit for uk.rec.gardening, only the
disadvantage of losing allotment posts.

Janet.

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

"martin" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 00:10:24 -0000, "Anthony"
wrote:


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

Yes but it WASN'T the FULL QUOTE, which affected its meaning.

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

Where does he say he wants to split urg? The actual quote please.
What realistically do you think the harm would be?


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

Again, Quote to me where in the charter of urg. it specifies the
discussion
of allotments.
If it not specified it is strictly speaking OFF topic.
I have read the charter, have you? Can you find it?

"Charter of uk.rec.gardening
(Not Moderated)
To discuss gardening issues relevant to the UK. These will include
flowers, shrubs, trees, fruit & vegetables, lawns, houseplants,
beneficial insects & animals, soils, composting, design, location,
situation, seasons/times, hard structures (paths, greenhouses,
cloches, rockeries), ponds, tools & materials, weeds and pests &
diseases. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list."

Which part of "This is not meant to be an exhaustive list." do you
find difficult to understand? Are you sure your read the charter?

Unless allotment gardening is not actually concerned with gardening in the
UK, surely it is unnecessary to read lower down than the very first sentence
in urg's charter.

Franz

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

"Anthony" wrote in message
...

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

Yes but it WASN'T the FULL QUOTE, which affected its meaning.

Who do you think you are bluffing? I have just looked again at the original
and it is clear that my quotation conveys the sense of the original.

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

Where does he say he wants to split urg? The actual quote please.
What realistically do you think the harm would be?

Where did I say that he *said* he wants to split urg?
I *deduced* that he wants to split urg. Why else would he be proposing a
new group when in fact there are allotmenteers happily contributing to urg?
The proposer has not once tried to raise matters of interest to
allotmenteers in urg. Indeed, it seems that he has never even lurked in
urg, otherwise he would have been aware that allotment issues *are* in fact
discussed there.

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

Again, Quote to me where in the charter of urg. it specifies the
discussion
of allotments.

Are you really as silly as you come across? The charter does not say
anywhere that growing lavender bushes or raising half hardy seedlings are
suitable topics for discussion in urg either. So, are we supposed to avert
our eyes when those topics crop up?

If it not specified it is strictly speaking OFF topic.
I have read the charter, have you? Can you find it?

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.

What? Just started one have you?

You are obviously quite unfamiliar with the contents of urg in the past and
now. That does not put you in a good position for defending the setting up
of a breakaway group.

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.

Its not for me to spell out the case for the formation for the new group.

Why have you then written this particular note?

But I cannot for the life of me understand why you would want to oppose
just
because
the proposer hasn't posted enough to urg in the past, or has chosen to
remain on the sidelines.

Far be it from me to specify where the bounds of your understanding should
lie.

The bandwidth issue has been spouted but no evidence has been given to
prove
that more space
would be taken up by the new group. Time and again, you Franz, have stated
that all posts to the
proposed group would be crossposted, again without a shread of evidence
being cited.

You are being even more silly than you are. How on earth can evidence have
accrued for an event in the future?
But for a somewhat analogous case, look at what happened in uk.rec.audio
when uk.rec.audio.vinyl and uk.rec.audio.car were spawned.

Many reasons therefore against the motion with a distinct lack of
evidence.

You are being needlessly repetitive.

The proposer has been accused of 'Empire Building', I personally think
that
some people are
frightened that their own 'little empire' may be under threat in some
way.
Still we can agree to differ can't we Franz. You vote your way, I'll vote
mine.

Of course. Why did you bother to post?

Franz