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

In article , says...


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

The downside is that post came uncomfortably close to being filtered out
by my news server and the one at work. Gardenbanter posts just don't
appear on those servers since we consider the repositioning of publicly
available inforamation in a free forum with rebadging as copyright
theft. Now we just need to come up with a way of preventing our own
posts showing up on their site.

Auto sigs such as "In our opinion Gardenbanter are stealing our ideas"
seem to be the preferred option.

I can't imagine they'll continue copying our posts if we continue to
publish our opinions about them in usenet.

Warwick

This is weird... I have just joined "Gardenbanter" on someone's recommendation and having read the above, I am totally confused.
I am a member of other forums on Palms and exotic plants and was looking for orchid forums so registered with Gardenbanter. I followed through to the U.K. section as I was interested, living in the south west.
There seem to be a lot of useful topics here too, but it appears that I am the poor relation or something?
Showing my total ignorance now......... what is Usenet???

Thanks
Laury

Torbay, Devon

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.