On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:05:33 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
wrote:

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

If you are able to request messages by message id then this may help:


--
Stuart Baldwin
news\at/boxatrix\dot/co\dot/uk

"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?

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?

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

Anthony

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:05:33 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
wrote:

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

If you are able to request messages by message id then this may help:


--
Stuart Baldwin
news\at/boxatrix\dot/co\dot/uk

On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 15:05:33 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
wrote:

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

If you are able to request messages by message id then this may help:


--
Stuart Baldwin
news\at/boxatrix\dot/co\dot/uk

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:40:27 GMT, Janet Baraclough ..
wrote:

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.

It's worse than that: there appears to be an assumption that when a
subgroup is created, the subject of the subgroup becomes off-topic in
the parent group.

As for the argument that discussions can be crossposted, well, apart
from the question "why bother with a new group then?", an increasing
number of people filter out cross-posted messages as that is one of
the most effective way of increasing the Usenet signal-to-noise ratio.
--
Stuart Baldwin
news\at/boxatrix\dot/co\dot/uk

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?


--

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

The message
from martin contains these words:

My emu was received, a ballot dispatched, but it fell into a hole
somewhere. Replacement arrived and filled in. To be dispatched with this
upload.

My vote has been confirmed.

MTAAAW.

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

The message
from martin contains these words:

My emu was received, a ballot dispatched, but it fell into a hole
somewhere. Replacement arrived and filled in. To be dispatched with this
upload.

My vote has been confirmed.

MTAAAW.

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

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?

Well, your suggestion that 'it can benefit all of us' isn't universally
held. In fact, there are some who believe quite the reverse.

And as for the 'right' - everyone has the right to vote as he or she chooses.

For the record, I voted against its formation, though I shaln't stamp
about and throw a hissy-fit if it is.

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

The message
from martin contains these words:

My emu was received, a ballot dispatched, but it fell into a hole
somewhere. Replacement arrived and filled in. To be dispatched with this
upload.

My vote has been confirmed.

MTAAAW.

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

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?

Well, your suggestion that 'it can benefit all of us' isn't universally
held. In fact, there are some who believe quite the reverse.

And as for the 'right' - everyone has the right to vote as he or she chooses.

For the record, I voted against its formation, though I shaln't stamp
about and throw a hissy-fit if it is.

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

The message
from martin contains these words:

My emu was received, a ballot dispatched, but it fell into a hole
somewhere. Replacement arrived and filled in. To be dispatched with this
upload.

My vote has been confirmed.

MTAAAW.

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

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?

Well, your suggestion that 'it can benefit all of us' isn't universally
held. In fact, there are some who believe quite the reverse.

And as for the 'right' - everyone has the right to vote as he or she chooses.

For the record, I voted against its formation, though I shaln't stamp
about and throw a hissy-fit if it is.

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

The message
from "Anthony" contains
these words:


"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.

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.

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. **

**That is untrue, the urg charter says the opposite. Here it is;

charter of uk.rec.gardening.

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.
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

In the absence of more appropriate, geographically specific newsgroups,
discussion of gardening in Eire, the Channel Islands
and the Isle of Man will also be welcome. Because there are climatic,
legal, cultural and other differences, discussion of
gardening in other parts of the world is OFF TOPIC (there are other
regional gardening newsgroups, and the global
rec.gardens, one of which may be more appropriate). Please note that
this exclusion relates to subject matter, not people, and
posters from around the globe will be welcome to participate in or
initiate discussion of UK-relevant topics.
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Specifically, please remember that there is no direct correlation
between US climate zones and the climate of the UK.

(end 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.

(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.

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.

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

The message
from "Anthony" contains
these words:


"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.

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.

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. **

**That is untrue, the urg charter says the opposite. Here it is;

charter of uk.rec.gardening.

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.
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

In the absence of more appropriate, geographically specific newsgroups,
discussion of gardening in Eire, the Channel Islands
and the Isle of Man will also be welcome. Because there are climatic,
legal, cultural and other differences, discussion of
gardening in other parts of the world is OFF TOPIC (there are other
regional gardening newsgroups, and the global
rec.gardens, one of which may be more appropriate). Please note that
this exclusion relates to subject matter, not people, and
posters from around the globe will be welcome to participate in or
initiate discussion of UK-relevant topics.
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Specifically, please remember that there is no direct correlation
between US climate zones and the climate of the UK.

(end 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.

(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.

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.

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