|
Climbing Plants
Hi Me again,
How come no one has responded to my cries for help my cries? I notice Ivy killing got a few and nut s and bolts got a few!! Noon e care about me and my privacy. BO HOO BO HOO Mary |
Hi Mary Try Clematis Armandii, it is evergreen and at the moment it is
flowering beautifully. Regards Grannieannie "mary prince" wrote in message ... Hi Me again, How come no one has responded to my cries for help my cries? I notice Ivy killing got a few and nut s and bolts got a few!! Noon e care about me and my privacy. BO HOO BO HOO Mary -- mary prince |
"Ann Heanes" wrote in message ... Hi Mary Try Clematis Armandii, it is evergreen and at the moment it is flowering beautifully. Regards Grannieannie "mary prince" wrote in message ... I'll second that, Clematis armandii , and lonicera henryi(sp?)much slower but similar, in fact several other honeysuckles may do. |
"mary prince" wrote in message ... Hi Me again, How come no one has responded to my cries for help my cries? I notice Ivy killing got a few and nut s and bolts got a few!! Noon e care about me and my privacy. BO HOO BO HOO Mary I seem to have missed your original post. Maybe you could post it again? I see someone mentioned that you are using gardenbanter,. Would be better if you used a 'proper' newsgroup :~)) Jenny |
In article , Janet Baraclough
writes You have been misled by gardenbanter. This is not an in-house service-on-demand advice bureau, so banging on the desk and bawling won't get you far. You are reading a usenet discussion group which has nothing to do with gardenbanter. Gardenbanter is something akin to a streetcorner newspaper vendor pretending to be the publisher of the newspapers he arranged on his stall. Janet. AND what's more, Garden Answers had the cheek to mention it as a great site on the Internet for gardening advice, when in actual fact it lifts our discussions clean out of their roots and transplants the as their own cuttings on their web site. Damn cheek..... Janet -- Janet Tweedy Dalmatian Telegraph http://www.lancedal.demon.co.uk |
"Janet Tweedy" wrote in message ... In article , Janet Baraclough writes You have been misled by gardenbanter. This is not an in-house service-on-demand advice bureau, so banging on the desk and bawling won't get you far. You are reading a usenet discussion group which has nothing to do with gardenbanter. Gardenbanter is something akin to a streetcorner newspaper vendor pretending to be the publisher of the newspapers he arranged on his stall. Janet. AND what's more, Garden Answers had the cheek to mention it as a great site on the Internet for gardening advice, when in actual fact it lifts our discussions clean out of their roots and transplants the as their own cuttings on their web site. Damn cheek..... Janet Maybe we should all add a bit to our sig.......... "This post is coming to you via Uk.Rec.Gardening and is NOT a part of gardenbanter. Please join a proper newsgroup!" Or words to that effect:~) If we ALL did it then it would be on public display Jenny |
JennyC wrote:
"Janet Tweedy" wrote in message ... In article , Janet Baraclough writes You have been misled by gardenbanter. This is not an in-house service-on-demand advice bureau, so banging on the desk and bawling won't get you far. You are reading a usenet discussion group which has nothing to do with gardenbanter. Gardenbanter is something akin to a streetcorner newspaper vendor pretending to be the publisher of the newspapers he arranged on his stall. Janet. AND what's more, Garden Answers had the cheek to mention it as a great site on the Internet for gardening advice, when in actual fact it lifts our discussions clean out of their roots and transplants the as their own cuttings on their web site. Damn cheek..... Janet Maybe we should all add a bit to our sig.......... "This post is coming to you via Uk.Rec.Gardening and is NOT a part of gardenbanter. Please join a proper newsgroup!" Or words to that effect:~) If we ALL did it then it would be on public display Jenny I don't actually know what Mary was desk-banging about, as she got quite a few replies. But y'know, I've just been over to have a look at the dreaded Garden Banter. To me it seems a clumsy way to access gardening newsgroups, but all it claims to do is act as a gateway to groups, and I can imagine it might feel rather convenient to people who aren't interested in Usenet as a whole, or who don't like raw text on their screens. "A web gateway to the finest gardening newsgroups" is what it says on the tin, and that's what it is. It doesn't appear to claim ownership or anything like that, and it hasn't censored out these anti-Garden Banter messages. I think there's a bit of paranoia going on here. -- Mike. |
Janet Baraclough wrote:
The message from "Mike Lyle" contains these words: "A web gateway to the finest gardening newsgroups" is what it says on the tin, and that's what it is. It doesn't appear to claim ownership or anything like that, That's new, following an update of the website (see front page). The original version carefully concealed the truth about urg and usenet. Just like the original version, other pages of the new version refer to urg as a forum and bulletin board , which imply it's part of the website. From Kevin the webmaster's current welcome page, "This site is a mirror of 'usenet' newsgroups on gardening, brought together in one place to discuss all aspects of gardening.To found out more about newsgroups and usenet, a good place to start is http://www.faqs.org/usenet/index.html. Normally you would not see these newsgroups replicated on the web as the protocols for each are very different (google groups being the exception), however, with the help of many people this has been replicated into a high quality bulletin board." That is misleading, I admit. Certainly not all news servers carry all groups; but it isn't as much of a hassle as he suggests. A pity, since I see great merit in a "mini-server" approach pulling together groups on a common theme. I've talked to a lot of people about Usenet, and it's disappointing how few regular computer users have the first idea of what it is. ISPs could do more to publicize this essential third arm of the Internet: I rather suspect they themselves don't always know what it's all about -- AOL's withdrawal of their news server suggests a lack of commercial vision. -- Mike. |
Janet Baraclough wrote:
The message from "Mike Lyle" [...] A pity, since I see great merit in a "mini-server" approach pulling together groups on a common theme. I can't see any advantage..anybody with a good isp can so easily choose their own "newsgroup theme" from the zillions available. One must never underestimate how very daunting most people find computing tasks which seem simple to those with some training or experience. And in this case that's _after_ they've been told what a news server is. To describe a simple task like setting up, e.g., the German server and OE needs two pages (it threw me the first time); just say "NNTP" and most people will recoil with their heads gently spinning. This mini-"server" approach only requires a user to know the address of a website, and they're off. You know why a client-based newsreader is better than a web-based one, but few others know or care. I've talked to a lot of people about Usenet, and it's disappointing how few regular computer users have the first idea of what it is. I agree ISPs could do more to publicize this essential third arm of the Internet: I rather suspect they themselves don't always know what it's all about -- AOL's withdrawal of their news server suggests a lack of commercial vision. My isp certainly does publicise usenet to its clients, and gives every encouragement and support to those who take up their excellent free newsreader. Including technical help and a raft of newsgroups restricted to its own clients. And Zetnet charge a lot. I think the majority use a typical junk ISP like AOL (hell, I use it myself, even though I know what's wrong with it!). I suspect that AOL's lack of interest in Usenet isn't so much because they don't understand it, but that they understand only too well that it has no direct commercial value to them: short-sighted, but established business often is. -- Mike. |
In article , Mike Lyle
writes And Zetnet charge a lot. I think the majority use a typical junk ISP like AOL (hell, I use it myself, even though I know what's wrong with it!). I suspect that AOL's lack of interest in Usenet isn't so much because they don't understand it, but that they understand only too well that it has no direct commercial value to them: short-sighted, but established business often is. Creating and maintaining web sites for people on AOL is very stressful as they don't seem to be able to refresh their pages in their browsers, so think changes haven't been made! Changes we make to web sites aren't seen by AOL people unless they actually go on the Internet with OE rather than through AOL. Not sure why they are denied being up to date! Janet -- Janet Tweedy Amersham Gardening Association http://www.lancedal.net/aga/ |
In article , Janet Baraclough
writes I don't think a fiver a month is a lot for high-quality personal technical assistance, internet access, email service, almost perfect spam and virus filtering, and an excellent news-server. I'd be paying the same amount whether or not I used the free news-server. Janet We pay a lot more for Demon, Turnpike and broadband. -- Janet Tweedy Dalmatian Telegraph http://www.lancedal.demon.co.uk |
Janet Tweedy wrote in message ...
In article , Mike Lyle writes And Zetnet charge a lot. I think the majority use a typical junk ISP like AOL (hell, I use it myself, even though I know what's wrong with it!). I suspect that AOL's lack of interest in Usenet isn't so much because they don't understand it, but that they understand only too well that it has no direct commercial value to them: short-sighted, but established business often is. Creating and maintaining web sites for people on AOL is very stressful as they don't seem to be able to refresh their pages in their browsers, so think changes haven't been made! Changes we make to web sites aren't seen by AOL people unless they actually go on the Internet with OE rather than through AOL. Not sure why they are denied being up to date! Janet This is because of the way AOL proxy servers work they cache the website in essence to save people downloading directly from the site thus speeding the download time. They are meant to check to see if the pages have changed but doesn't always happen. David Shorthouse Website Manager http://www.queenswood.co.uk Tel: 01568 611281 Fax: 01568 614143 |
|
lauryc wrote:
[...] Showing my total ignorance now......... what is Usenet??? It's one of the three things making up the real public Internet (the one I spell with a capital I): websites, email, Usenet. It's used for newsgroups such as this one, and you can get an idea of its staggering scope by looking at: http://www.google.co.uk/grphp?hl=en&tab=wg&ie=UTF-8 and clicking some of the blue words. Anybody here will be delighted to let you know anything you don't find out from there. We cherish it because it's virtually uncontrolled person-to-people communication on any topic you like. I think the name means "users' network", the idea being that it can't belong to any individual or organisation. and any user can "talk" direct to everybody. -- Mike. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:08 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter