|
Home > Archive > UK gardening > November 2006 > Kill filing
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
|
| I had no idea Judith was going to post tonight. But I am very glad she has
because she has exposed the malice directed at the very heart of her life
and career.
And I would like just to say this - while I have every sympathy with those
who kill file persistent cross posting and off topic trolls, I would also
like to point out that many of those who emailed me and Judith about what
was done to her said they didn't know about it because they had kill filed
Puke. I understand their reasons for doing so and I sympathise with their
impatience with her methods but she, Puke, DID come here purporting to give
gardening advice. As a result of that, she should have been read and
watched when it became apparent that much of what she wrote was not good
advice at all. IMO, the group and all those asking advice of it, deserve
the vigilance of everyone posting here. A very few of us adhered to that
and as a result, we received a horrible amount of abuse and Judith was
subjected to a torrent of it.
If you - all of us - want this to be a real group we ALL have to look after
it. We ALL have to make sure it is not abused by *anyone*. I am not
interested in garden machinery or growing leeks but I did, at least, skim
every thread to see what was going on. If people don't do that, they miss
what was being done to Judith and could be done to others. Sorry but that
won't do. A couple of years ago, a very valuable poster to this group
remarked that people were coming here, taking what they wanted and otherwise
contributing nothing. She predicted then that this would damage urg and I
admit freely that I thought she was exaggerating. I was wrong and she was
right and she is another who has gone, as have several other real experts.
That "Pull up the ladder Jack, I'm alright" outlook was why Judith was
treated so appallingly. Afterwards, several people expressed their private
regrets to me in emails but too late. URG has been horribly tainted by this
closing of the eyes to what does not affect the individual and it seems to
me that it should never be allowed to happen again.
IMO, the lesson to be learned from this is that if you kill file over
zealously, you lose the thread - literally - and then, you lose the group.
If you're a member of a group, then I think it is up to you to make sure the
group remains healthy.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/
| |
|
| I disagree. if those involved all kill file the "perpetrator" the nasty
threads die off. if those not involved don't kill file the nasty threads
die off naturally and so the group remains. I am afraid to say that it does
seem as though some people have too much time on their hands. and rather
than letting go of a situation it snow balls.
everyone is different and is able to make the choice themselves.
personally I have nowt against La Puce. if we have words in the future then
that is up to me to take whatever action I feel appropriate. until then all
the retaliatory e-mails backwards and forwards from those concerned and
those butting in are meaningless. I am big enough and old enough to decide
what I post.
I also take what I can from this NG. why? because I have nothing to
contribute to gardening. why? because I am trying to learn and I am not in
a position to provide useful advice.
"Sacha" <sacha@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:C182B137.3CFA9%sacha@privacy.net...
> I had no idea Judith was going to post tonight. But I am very glad she
has
> because she has exposed the malice directed at the very heart of her life
> and career.
> And I would like just to say this - while I have every sympathy with those
> who kill file persistent cross posting and off topic trolls, I would also
> like to point out that many of those who emailed me and Judith about what
> was done to her said they didn't know about it because they had kill filed
> Puke. I understand their reasons for doing so and I sympathise with their
> impatience with her methods but she, Puke, DID come here purporting to
give
> gardening advice. As a result of that, she should have been read and
> watched when it became apparent that much of what she wrote was not good
> advice at all. IMO, the group and all those asking advice of it, deserve
> the vigilance of everyone posting here. A very few of us adhered to that
> and as a result, we received a horrible amount of abuse and Judith was
> subjected to a torrent of it.
> If you - all of us - want this to be a real group we ALL have to look
after
> it. We ALL have to make sure it is not abused by *anyone*. I am not
> interested in garden machinery or growing leeks but I did, at least, skim
> every thread to see what was going on. If people don't do that, they miss
> what was being done to Judith and could be done to others. Sorry but that
> won't do. A couple of years ago, a very valuable poster to this group
> remarked that people were coming here, taking what they wanted and
otherwise
> contributing nothing. She predicted then that this would damage urg and I
> admit freely that I thought she was exaggerating. I was wrong and she was
> right and she is another who has gone, as have several other real experts.
> That "Pull up the ladder Jack, I'm alright" outlook was why Judith was
> treated so appallingly. Afterwards, several people expressed their
private
> regrets to me in emails but too late. URG has been horribly tainted by
this
> closing of the eyes to what does not affect the individual and it seems to
> me that it should never be allowed to happen again.
> IMO, the lesson to be learned from this is that if you kill file over
> zealously, you lose the thread - literally - and then, you lose the group.
> If you're a member of a group, then I think it is up to you to make sure
the
> group remains healthy.
> --
> Sacha
> www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
> South Devon
> http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/
>
| |
| La Puce 2006-11-16, 8:25 pm |
|
Sacha wrote:
> I had no idea Judith was going to post tonight. But I am very glad she has
> because she has exposed the malice directed at the very heart of her life
> and career.
She wrote to my company first. What about my colleagues? What do you
think they thought? Don't you think I was ambarassed? But you led
Judith to this. You encouraged her. And now you are trying to make me
sound evil again.
I will not let you.
Puke, DID come here purporting to give
> gardening advice.
It's Puce, with a 'c'. I'm not purporting anything. You are jealous and
bitter. Why don't you just kill file me?
As a result of that, she should have been read and
> watched when it became apparent that much of what she wrote was not good
> advice at all.
Post your proof.
I am not
> interested in garden machinery or growing leeks
I am and many others do.
> If you're a member of a group, then I think it is up to you to make sure the
> group remains healthy.
Good idea. Just contribute your gardening advices which are respected
and enjoyed by many and stop leading lonely women to battles they can't
fight.
| |
| judith lea 2006-11-16, 8:25 pm |
|
La Puce wrote:
>
> Good idea. Just contribute your gardening advices which are respected
> and enjoyed by many and stop leading lonely women to battles they can't
> fight.
Are you lonely? I have a very full life, one that you can only be
jealous of; and battles,? you mean lies, I can fight these very well -
bring it on!
| |
| michael adams 2006-11-16, 8:25 pm |
|
"Sacha" <sacha@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:C182B137.3CFA9%sacha@privacy.net...
> If you - all of us - want this to be a real group we ALL have to
> look after it. We ALL have to make sure it is not abused by
> *anyone*.
Unfortunately that's simply not possible. Not in the way that you
suggest at least. Anyone is free to post on unmoderated NewsGroups.
And there are countless loonies and malcontents out there in Cyberspace
who are quite capable of being as disruptive as they like, anywhere
they like, just for the sake of it. Given the chance.
These people thrive on generating a response. Which is why its
impossible to argue with them, either singly or collectively
as a group.
The more response they generate, of any kind, the happier they will be.
The first objective of all such people is to get the regulars
arguing among themselves. If only arguing about the best way
to deal with the trolls. Plus different posters taking it in
turn to "take on" the trolls.
This never works. And it is this form of response which floods the
NewsGroup with off-topic material, rather than the trolls themselves
which has totally destroyed certain NewsGroups in the past.
It's by allowing the trolls and malcontents to become established
on NewsGroups, by acknowledging their very existence, which creates
the atmosphere which causes others to leave.
Killfiling or at least not responding to such people, who have
limitless time at their disposal it would seem, coupled with
an ability to wind people up, by telling bare faced lies about
them if necessary, is the only answer IMHO.
michael adams
....
> --
> Sacha
> www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
> South Devon
> http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/
>
| |
|
| "Sacha" <sacha@privacy.net> wrote in message
> And I would like just to say this - while I have every sympathy with
those
> who kill file persistent cross posting and off topic trolls, (snip)
I understand their reasons for doing so and I sympathise with their
> impatience with her methods but she, Puke, DID come here purporting
to give
> gardening advice. As a result of that, she should have been read
and
> watched when it became apparent that much of what she wrote was not
good
> advice at all.
Puke was watched Sacha. Her lack of knowledge became evident fairly
quickly. You know she didn't like it when called to account either,
but what happened - she is STILL here and the best and brightest left.
And that was the worst thing to happen in this ng. The most knowledge
and experienced of UK gardening CHOSE to leave. Deliberately chose!
Puke is/was an irritant and very hard on the blood pressure long term
but killfiling her and remaining here would at least give those who
don't know that she often talks through her hat a chance to get some
correct advice. What use is leaving the field and letting the
inexperienced think that Puke is the peak of UK gardening knowledge?
That's just akin to cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.
And I'm so pleased to see who has posted in this thread. The
frustration for you lot lurking must have been appalling. I'd hoped
you lot were all lurking and hoped too that you'd eventually be
tempted to return. Won't you please all come back now? Pretty, pretty
please?
| |
|
| On 17/11/06 02:06, in article 4s4klnFtqosoU1@mid.individual.net, "michael
adams" <mjadams27@onetel.net.uk> wrote:
>
> "Sacha" <sacha@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:C182B137.3CFA9%sacha@privacy.net...
>
>
> Unfortunately that's simply not possible. Not in the way that you
> suggest at least. Anyone is free to post on unmoderated NewsGroups.
> And there are countless loonies and malcontents out there in Cyberspace
> who are quite capable of being as disruptive as they like, anywhere
> they like, just for the sake of it. Given the chance.
>
> These people thrive on generating a response. Which is why its
> impossible to argue with them, either singly or collectively
> as a group.
>
> The more response they generate, of any kind, the happier they will be.
>
> The first objective of all such people is to get the regulars
> arguing among themselves. If only arguing about the best way
> to deal with the trolls. Plus different posters taking it in
> turn to "take on" the trolls.
>
> This never works. And it is this form of response which floods the
> NewsGroup with off-topic material, rather than the trolls themselves
> which has totally destroyed certain NewsGroups in the past.
>
> It's by allowing the trolls and malcontents to become established
> on NewsGroups, by acknowledging their very existence, which creates
> the atmosphere which causes others to leave.
>
> Killfiling or at least not responding to such people, who have
> limitless time at their disposal it would seem, coupled with
> an ability to wind people up, by telling bare faced lies about
> them if necessary, is the only answer IMHO.
>
>
> michael adams
I appreciate your thoughtful response but obviously, given what I posted
before, do not agree. I have seen another group totally destroyed - and I
do mean *totally* - because its regular members kill filed one person who
was not only trolling but was encouraging trolls. If you have Puke kill
filed, you will not have seen that she is now, for instance, starting to
respond to and encourage another vicious and persistent troll and others who
post here to no purpose other than to be facetious or post almost
exclusively off-topic. Sooner or later, she will have the entire group
reduced to that state and there will no longer be a group. We have been
warned of the damage she did to demon local by someone who posted there
regularly at one time and IMO, that is what she hopes to achieve here. I
have no idea why but it appears to be her idea of fun. If people use kill
files to such an extent as to be unaware of what is going on in a group and
able to express their extreme disapproval of bad behaviour immediately, then
the group disintegrates. In the last few weeks the traffic on urg has
tailed off dismally and seriously good and knowledgeable posters have
disappeared, some of them without saying a word - they're just not here any
more.
In my view, it is absolutely wrong that someone like Judith who is renowned
for her good manners and fairness, has her job threatened by the likes of
Puke who has insulted many people here and specifically targeted Judith for
foul language, too. Now, she is dragging in Judith's work and private life
*again*, using an old post sent by someone who was not posting here while
Puke has been and who would be lividly angry to know that he is being used
to harm Judith.
While I see your pov, I cannot agree with it when that sort of thing is
happening and don't think urg can be described as a group when it is allowed
to happen so persistently.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/
| |
|
| On 17/11/06 06:33, in article
455d5bd8$0$28219$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au, "Farm1"
<please@askifyouwannaknow> wrote:
> "Sacha" <sacha@privacy.net> wrote in message
>
> those
> I understand their reasons for doing so and I sympathise with their
> to give
> and
> good
>
> Puke was watched Sacha. Her lack of knowledge became evident fairly
> quickly. You know she didn't like it when called to account either,
> but what happened - she is STILL here and the best and brightest left.
If everyone who objected to her behaviour - and I do mean *everyone* - had
both sat on her firmly as soon as she started her misleading, lying,
insulting and swearing behaviour, we might not have lost those people. And
if all those who objected to her manner of posting had complained to her
ISP, she might have had a halt put in her gallop at the very least. Puke is
here because two or three people at most are responding to her. The group
is now reduced to a mere handful of posters, so she will take hold of it and
turn it to her own personal tastes and that will be because she is allowed
to do so by those who permit her to do it.
>
> And that was the worst thing to happen in this ng. The most knowledge
> and experienced of UK gardening CHOSE to leave. Deliberately chose!
I chose to leave because I was absolutely disgusted at the treatment meted
out of Judith, the filthy language and insults to someone who never,
herself, behaves that way and the lies told about her by a proven liar. And
a major contributing factor in my decision to leave was the fact that those
who know Judith, like her and have been either RL or cyber friends of hers
for years, described that piece of newsgroup terrorism as a catfight or
nothing to do with them or stupid women who should be kill filed. That was
a disgraceful way to treat Judith and it was cruel and unkind.
>
> Puke is/was an irritant and very hard on the blood pressure long term
> but killfiling her and remaining here would at least give those who
> don't know that she often talks through her hat a chance to get some
> correct advice. What use is leaving the field and letting the
> inexperienced think that Puke is the peak of UK gardening knowledge?
> That's just akin to cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.
As I said when I left, urg will get the group it deserves. If the majority
sit back and allow Puke to post her garbage and loftily dissociate
themselves from it, then they are tacitly encouraging her to believe she
can do it.
>
> And I'm so pleased to see who has posted in this thread. The
> frustration for you lot lurking must have been appalling. I'd hoped
> you lot were all lurking and hoped too that you'd eventually be
> tempted to return. Won't you please all come back now? Pretty, pretty
> please?
>
For myself, I've looked in from time to time but haven't been reading the
group every day. I've had a good deal of email chat with past and some
present members, which is heartening in itself. I'm saddened to see how
quiet urg has become and that the past friendliness and banter has all but
disappeared but as to returning full time, I don't want to post in a group
where people close their eyes to what Puke is doing and pretend her
treatment of Judith and others and her ruination of the group as a whole,
is nothing to do with them.
Thank you for your response and I'd be grateful if you'd email me.
sacha@gardenweeds506.fsnet.co.uk Remove the 'weeds'.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/
| |
| Puffnstuff 2006-11-17, 9:25 am |
| On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 00:22:15 +0000, Sacha <sacha@privacy.net> wrote:
>zealously, you lose the thread - literally - and then, you lose the group.
>If you're a member of a group, then I think it is up to you to make sure the
>group remains healthy.
There are no 'members' of this 'group', fool
| |
| Puffnstuff 2006-11-17, 9:25 am |
| On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 02:06:32 -0000, "michael adams"
<mjadams27@onetel.net.uk> wrote:
>
>"Sacha" <sacha@privacy.net> wrote in message
>news:C182B137.3CFA9%sacha@privacy.net...
>
>
>Unfortunately that's simply not possible. Not in the way that you
>suggest at least. Anyone is free to post on unmoderated NewsGroups.
>And there are countless loonies and malcontents out there in Cyberspace
>who are quite capable of being as disruptive as they like, anywhere
>they like, just for the sake of it. Given the chance.
>
>These people thrive on generating a response. Which is why its
>impossible to argue with them, either singly or collectively
>as a group.
But you try your level best to abuse and scare other off with your
pompous crap don't you Mikey?
>
>The more response they generate, of any kind, the happier they will be.
And you do your level best with your obtuse replies to encourage them
back
| |
| David D Stretch 2006-11-17, 9:25 am |
| On Friday 17 Nov 2006 02:06, michael adams
(<4s4klnFtqosoU1@mid.individual.net> ) wrote:
[lots of good points]
I really do agree with and endorse the points made here. It would be nice if
the alternative strategy could work, but I think it will only hasten the
slide of urg to _unusability_ if this alternative was adopted. better to
ignore and killfile, I think.
--
David D Stretch: Stoke-on-Trent, United Kingdom.
To email me, delete all points (fullstops, or ".") from before
the "@" in the above email addresses, then delete DELETETHIS.
| |
|
| On 17/11/06 11:43, in article
3004618.szY1sdD9z5@ku.oc.nomed.trowgum-hctertsdd, "David D Stretch"
<ddst.r.et.ch.DE.LETE.TH.I.S@mugwort.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On Friday 17 Nov 2006 02:06, michael adams
> (<4s4klnFtqosoU1@mid.individual.net> ) wrote:
>
> [lots of good points]
>
> I really do agree with and endorse the points made here. It would be nice if
> the alternative strategy could work, but I think it will only hasten the
> slide of urg to _unusability_ if this alternative was adopted. better to
> ignore and killfile, I think.
Hasn't worked too well all this kill filing, has it? This group is down to
around ten or so posters, some of whom post only one line "me too" type
msgs., some of whom are just irritatingly facetious ALL the time but rarely
discuss gardening and some of whom don't know which way is up to plant a
bulb. Many bob in from gardenbanter to ask a question and then bob out never
to be seen or contribute again. There are about four people posting who
actually know anything and most of them specialise in one way or another.
There is nobody with the depth and breadth of knowledge of Janet Barraclough
or David Poole and Puke has made sure urg has lost them and all that
killfiling has allowed her to do it, because none of you spoke up and told
her to just shut up. David is a professional plantsman and past nurseryman
and Janet might just as well be. The information and knowledge I was able
to pass on from my third generation husband who has worked in his own
nursery for over 50 years, on a vast range of plants and such things as
biological control, is lost, as are the seeds, cuttings and plants I shared
around the group. But don't worry, your kill files are in place, so you
won't even be aware of what you've lost. And Puke has the lowest possible
level of RHS cert. so *that* will see you all okay.
The strength of the group is vitiated and for those of us who knew how
fabulously valuable it was to all levels of gardener, it has been a tragedy
to watch that happen.
The *enormous* and incalculable value of this group to those wishing to
learn has been stamped out of existence in a few months by the
determination of one poster to rid this group of everyone who will not
butter her up and who knows more than she does - not difficult, admittedly.
And Judith, one of the kindest, nicest, funniest and most genuinely charming
of urg's long-standing members has had her job threatened, has been sworn at
and insulted on a regular basis (as have Janet and I) and has been almost
bullied out of existence by a consummate liar who has echoes of the stalker
about her, visiting our place just to be photographed outside it and
threatening to pay a visit to Janet in Scotland. Not what I'd chalk up as a
major success for a thriving and vibrant newsgroup, personally.
What all you kill filers are refusing to wake up to is that urg is already
almost unusable because you have lost all the wide range experts and are
allowing someone who doesn't know a zillionth of what has been lost, to pass
around largely useless advice, to set herself up as a self-appointed expert
and to harry or bore still more people off the group while she is stealthily
encouraging trolls who are probably also in your kill file. You see none of
this going on so are doing nothing to contribute to the health of the group.
But hey, it's a newsgroup so it will be what its posters make of it. As we
see.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/
| |
| JennyC 2006-11-17, 9:25 am |
|
"Sacha" <sacha@privacy.net> wrote
> There are about four people posting who
> actually know anything and most of them specialise in one way or another.
<snipped>
> Sacha
Right - that's put the rest of us properly in our place hasn't it
?!?!?!?!?!?
Janet thinks I'm an uneducated nitwit..........
You think nobody else has any good gardening advice to offer............
DaveP is wisely keeping his head down.............
So who's the forth font of all URG knowledge ??
Jenny
| |
| David D Stretch 2006-11-17, 9:25 am |
| On Friday 17 Nov 2006 12:45, Sacha (<C1835F4C.3D114%sacha@privacy.net> )
wrote:
>
> Hasn't worked too well all this kill filing, has it?
It hasn't been intensively tried, though, has it? What _has_ been tried is
taking them on and posting responses that are getting increasingloy
heated. Therefore, one could argue that it is more plausible that _this_
has brought about what you complain about.
Look, I don't want to fall out with you, as I've valued your advice and that
of others on this newsgroup for many years. I am only a beginner, and so I
can only ask questions. But I think you risk alienating more posters like
me by making statements like this:
> This group is down
> to around ten or so posters, some of whom post only one line "me too" type
> msgs., some of whom are just irritatingly facetious ALL the time but
> rarely discuss gardening and some of whom don't know which way is up to
> plant a bulb. Many bob in from gardenbanter to ask a question and then bob
> out never
> to be seen or contribute again. There are about four people posting who
> actually know anything and most of them specialise in one way or another.
>[...]
> But don't worry, your kill files are in place, so you
> won't even be aware of what you've lost. And Puke has the lowest possible
> level of RHS cert. so *that* will see you all okay.
Ok, I omitted a portion where you talked about the level of experience in
gardening you and others _undoubtably_ have. In which case, let me tell you
that my use of newsgroups started back in 1989 and I have even studied the
kinds of exchanges that people get engaged in as part of my own
professional and academic research life before I retired. So, _I_ speak
from that experience when I say that the strategy you are suggesting is
very high-risk. As one other poster has said, when it has been tried
before, it has usually led to increasing escalation and disruption. And,
despite what you say, it is _this_ which we have seen on here because of
your actions in taking such people on! Most of the helpful hints that can
be found around the net about Usenet newsgroups all make the same point
about ignoring troublesome posters and developing thicker skins. The only
other option that has a good chance of success and which could be tried is
making URG fully moderated, and I'm not sure anyone would want to take that
on, or even whether it would be permitted.
However, I have now fallen into the trap that such people want, as have you,
in beginning to argue amongst ourselves. Shame on us all for that.
--
David D Stretch: Stoke-on-Trent, United Kingdom.
To email me, delete all points (fullstops, or ".") from before
the "@" in the above email addresses, then delete DELETETHIS.
| |
|
| On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 14:07:39 +0100, "JennyC" <Jenny.squirrel@chello.nl> =
wrote:
>
>"Sacha" <sacha@privacy.net> wrote
another.[color=darkred]
><snipped>
>
>Right - that's put the rest of us properly in our place hasn't it=20
>?!?!?!?!?!?
>
>Janet thinks I'm an uneducated nitwit..........
>You think nobody else has any good gardening advice to offer............
>DaveP is wisely keeping his head down.............
>So who's the forth font of all URG knowledge ??
>Jenny
>
Just a reminder
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.
| |
| Anne Jackson 2006-11-17, 9:25 am |
| The message from Sacha <sacha@privacy.net> contains these words:
> The group is now reduced to a mere handful of posters, so she
> will take hold of it and turn it to her own personal tastes and
> that will be because she is allowed to do so by those who permit
> her to do it.
AND those who chose to leave....the choice was theirs, and they voted
with`their feet! DON'T forget that!
The Puke is only an irritant, and a minor irritant at that, if you
allow her to be. The best thing to do with her, and all the other
trolls, is simply to ignore her.
If you find it impossible to do that, perhaps its best that you all
stay away?
--
AnneJ
(If you don't like it, you can Foscar Oxtrot)
| |
| La Puce 2006-11-17, 9:25 am |
|
Anne Jackson wrote:
> The Puke
I just can't place you at all. Why are you so vile in your responses,
especially all your posts are nothing others than nasty comments to
stir further arguments? Why do you do this? What have I done to you to
deserve this?
And it's 'La puce'.
| |
|
| On 17/11/06 13:30, in article 3130303034323630455DB97C73@zetnet.co.uk, "Anne
Jackson" <amygdala@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
> The message from Sacha <sacha@privacy.net> contains these words:
>
>
> AND those who chose to leave....the choice was theirs, and they voted
> with`their feet! DON'T forget that!
I haven't disputed it. I'm concerned with what has caused it.
>
> The Puke is only an irritant, and a minor irritant at that, if you
> allow her to be. The best thing to do with her, and all the other
> trolls, is simply to ignore her.
A 'minor irritant' does not try to lose someone their career, it does not
'threaten' to visit people in their homes or drive up to them to be
photographed. It does not lie about emails received from or about other
people; it does not lose a newsgroup its most valuable members.
>
> If you find it impossible to do that, perhaps its best that you all
> stay away?
I can't see that my presence or absence has any interest for you, given your
(lack of) gardening input. Others have been kind enough to say otherwise
about the absence of all those who have left. And have you seen me, Judith
or Janet respond to a gardening post in the last 12 hours, despite requests
to stay here and do so? We have posted about Puke's claim that she is not a
liar and the fact that kill filing has allowed her to do the damage she has
done.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/
| |
|
| On 17/11/06 13:37, in article hlerl2dtvep4mgh0fdgdb84vd4ulc01qc5@4ax.com,
"notme" <notme@no.where> wrote:
[color=darkred]
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 14:07:39 +0100, "JennyC" <Jenny.squirrel@chello.nl> wrote:
>
Has it?[color=darkred]
<snip>
I'm sorry to answer Jenny's post on the back of someone else's but I'm not
getting her originals. As you have actively encouraged Puke both by emails
and on group, I think of you as one of those who made a major contribution
to wrecking the place. She said she was leaving until spring and almost
immediately returned, welcomed by you with open arms. And David Poole is
not just keeping his head down, he told urg he was leaving and he has left.
He was absolutely invaluable. Well done, Jenny.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/
| |
| La Puce 2006-11-17, 9:25 am |
|
Sacha wrote:
> I'm sorry
Just keep to this Sacha and carry on living. Please keep breathing.
It's a wonderful world out there. You will simply not gain anything
with doing what you are trying to do.
I have to agree with you that the loss of David is huge - but you are
entirely at fault. If you had refrained from being nasty and just
stopping at launching others into battles in vain, he wouldn't have
left. I am convinced he is as unhappy about the situation as it is
about you.
| |
| DeeM.entor 2006-11-17, 9:25 am |
| On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 17:33:13 +1100, "Farm1" <please@askifyouwannaknow>
wrote:
>And I'm so pleased to see who has posted in this thread. The
>frustration for you lot lurking must have been appalling. I'd hoped
>you lot were all lurking and hoped too that you'd eventually be
>tempted to return. Won't you please all come back now? Pretty, pretty
>please?
Creep.
DM
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
| |
| DeeM.entor 2006-11-17, 9:25 am |
| On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 13:55:46 +0000, Sacha <sacha@privacy.net> wrote:
>I'm sorry to answer Jenny's post on the back of someone else's but I'm not
>getting her originals. As you have actively encouraged Puke both by emails
>and on group, I think of you as one of those who made a major contribution
>to wrecking the place. She said she was leaving until spring and almost
>immediately returned, welcomed by you with open arms.
And you said you were leaving. Was that a lie?
Get a life. Haven't you got anything to do?
If you don't like the news group, stop reading it. It will not die
without a vitriol input.
DM
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
| |
| JennyC 2006-11-17, 1:25 pm |
|
"Sacha" <sacha@privacy.net> wrote
> <snip>
>
> I'm sorry to answer Jenny's post on the back of someone else's but I'm not
> getting her originals.
Wonder how many killfiles I'm in "~)
Jenny
| |
| Mary Fisher 2006-11-17, 1:25 pm |
|
"Anne Jackson" <amygdala@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3130303034323630455DB97C73@zetnet.co.uk...
> The message from Sacha <sacha@privacy.net> contains these words:
>
>
> AND those who chose to leave....the choice was theirs, and they voted
> with`their feet! DON'T forget that!
I didn't see the post which contained a comment about a handful of posters
but there are far more than that!
>
> The Puke is only an irritant, and a minor irritant at that, if you
> allow her to be. The best thing to do with her, and all the other
> trolls, is simply to ignore her.
Quite.
>
> If you find it impossible to do that, perhaps its best that you all
> stay away?
I agree.
Not that my word means anything :-)
Mary
>
> --
> AnneJ
> (If you don't like it, you can Foscar Oxtrot)
| |
| michael adams 2006-11-17, 1:25 pm |
|
"Sacha" <sacha@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:C1835F4C.3D114%sacha@privacy.net...
>
> What all you kill filers are refusing to wake up to is that urg is already
> almost unusable
It's almost unusable, only because some former members have allowed
themselves to be driven off by a troll.
You cannot beat a determined troll on Usenet, except by ignoring
them.
As to people contacting other poster's employers. This situation
isn't unique to this newsgroup. However no employer with any
sense, would ever pay heed to anonymous tittle-tattle from people
they don't even know, about one of their own trusted employees.
It really is as simple as that.
If what is being said amounts to outright lies, then if requested the
employer can be required to make copies of any such correspondence
available for the wronged party to start civil proceedings for libel
if they so wish. If the intention is clearly to cost that person their
job, then this will hardly go down very well with any jury, I'd imagine.
If they persist in this behaviour, but just in the form of non-libellous
tittle-tattle then they can possibly be forced to desist on pains of
the Police being informed, and their being charged with committing
a nuisance.
Private emails aren't Usenet and always leave an unambiguous audit
trail. Something which people can be inclined to forget.
As to trolls posting misleading answers on the group. If sufficient
contributors post the correct answer, ideally with some sort of
external reference which the OP can confirm for themselves, then
the trolls rubbish can be drowned out. Again without any need to
actually address the troll. Arguing with trolls about the content of
their answers, again only gives them a pretext to start further
arguments.
It's coming up to Christmas, and so I'd imagine posts from
new gardeners requesting information might possibly drop off
in any case. Except for frost related and Christmas present
related questions at least.
michael adams
....
> --
> Sacha
> www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
> South Devon
> http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/
>
| |
| Alan Holmes 2006-11-17, 1:25 pm |
|
"judith lea" <lea.judith@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:1163724475.220430.285110@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> La Puce wrote:
>
>
> Are you lonely? I have a very full life, one that you can only be
> jealous of; and battles,? you mean lies, I can fight these very well -
> bring it on!
Judith, please, please, please do not encourage her, she is just bitter and
twisted, it is not worth the bother.
Alan
>
| |
| Alan Holmes 2006-11-17, 1:25 pm |
|
"michael adams" <mjadams27@onetel.net.uk> wrote in message
news:4s4klnFtqosoU1@mid.individual.net...
>
> "Sacha" <sacha@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:C182B137.3CFA9%sacha@privacy.net...
>
>
> Unfortunately that's simply not possible. Not in the way that you
> suggest at least. Anyone is free to post on unmoderated NewsGroups.
> And there are countless loonies and malcontents out there in Cyberspace
> who are quite capable of being as disruptive as they like, anywhere
> they like, just for the sake of it. Given the chance.
But if you killfile them they do not get a responce and go away, it may take
a while, but if you have not read their contributions they will just shut
up.
> These people thrive on generating a response. Which is why its
> impossible to argue with them, either singly or collectively
> as a group.
But, if no one reads their comments, there is no need for an arguement, so
killfile them now!
> The more response they generate, of any kind, the happier they will be.
Exactly, but if you do not bother to read them that will make them go away
to somewhere else and try to drum up squables elsewhere, and we will never,
ever have to read their rubbish again.
> The first objective of all such people is to get the regulars
> arguing among themselves. If only arguing about the best way
> to deal with the trolls. Plus different posters taking it in
> turn to "take on" the trolls.
That is the advantage of killfiles!
>
> This never works. And it is this form of response which floods the
> NewsGroup with off-topic material, rather than the trolls themselves
> which has totally destroyed certain NewsGroups in the past.
>
> It's by allowing the trolls and malcontents to become established
> on NewsGroups, by acknowledging their very existence, which creates
> the atmosphere which causes others to leave.
>
> Killfiling or at least not responding to such people, who have
> limitless time at their disposal it would seem, coupled with
> an ability to wind people up, by telling bare faced lies about
> them if necessary, is the only answer IMHO.
Exactly!
Alan
>
>
> michael adams
>
> ...
>
>
>
| |
| Alan Holmes 2006-11-17, 1:25 pm |
|
"JennyC" <Jenny.squirrel@chello.nl> wrote in message
news:4s62pjFu0ed4U1@mid.individual.net...
>
> "Sacha" <sacha@privacy.net> wrote
>
> Wonder how many killfiles I'm in "~)
Not mine, yet, but I'm thinking about it!(:-)
Alan
> Jenny
>
| |
| Alan Holmes 2006-11-17, 1:25 pm |
|
"Anne Jackson" <amygdala@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3130303034323630455DB97C73@zetnet.co.uk...
> The message from Sacha <sacha@privacy.net> contains these words:
>
>
> AND those who chose to leave....the choice was theirs, and they voted
> with`their feet! DON'T forget that!
>
> The Puke is only an irritant, and a minor irritant at that, if you
> allow her to be. The best thing to do with her, and all the other
> trolls, is simply to ignore her.
Hear, hear, or should that ne here, here!
>
> If you find it impossible to do that, perhaps its best that you all
> stay away?
I don't think she should stay away, but she should killfile those few that
she finds irritating, and keep up the good work she has given in the past.
> (If you don't like it, you can Foscar Oxtrot)
I wish I'd thought of putting it like that!(:-)
Alan
| |
| Alan Holmes 2006-11-17, 1:25 pm |
|
"La Puce" <helene@rudlin.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1163771050.086499.32760@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Anne Jackson wrote:
>
> I just can't place you at all. Why are you so vile in your responses,
> especially all your posts are nothing others than nasty comments to
> stir further arguments? Why do you do this? What have I done to you to
> deserve this?
>
> And it's 'La puce'.
No, it's Puke as in making us sick!
Alan
>
| |
| Alan Holmes 2006-11-17, 1:25 pm |
|
"DeeM.entor" <Demu.n.sys@sust.sw> wrote in message
news:c9jrl2pl7924iojmoji7jn2ngp9tniv18o@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 17:33:13 +1100, "Farm1" <please@askifyouwannaknow>
> wrote:
>
>
> Creep.
!PLONK!
>
>
> DM
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>
| |
| Alan Holmes 2006-11-17, 1:25 pm |
|
"La Puce" <helene@rudlin.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1163771050.086499.32760@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Anne Jackson wrote:
>
> I just can't place you at all. Why are you so vile in your responses,
> especially all your posts are nothing others than nasty comments to
> stir further arguments? Why do you do this? What have I done to you to
> deserve this?
>
> And it's 'La puce'.
And it's !PLONK!
>
| |
| La Puce 2006-11-17, 1:25 pm |
|
Alan Holmes wrote:
> No, it's Puke as in making us sick!
Why do you do this and then try to be friendly with me? Where are your
gardening contributions?
| |
| La Puce 2006-11-17, 1:25 pm |
|
Alan Holmes wrote:
> And it's !PLONK!
Again?! You must have done this 10 times now.
| |
| Anne Jackson 2006-11-17, 1:25 pm |
| The message from Sacha <sacha@privacy.net> contains these words:
[color=darkred]
> A 'minor irritant' does not try to lose someone their career, it does
> not 'threaten' to visit people in their homes or drive up to them to
> be photographed. It does not lie about emails received from or about
> other people; it does not lose a newsgroup its most valuable members.
Well, she hasn't attempted to lose ME my job, nor to visit ME on her way
to Janet's.....so WHY have YOU been the objects of her attention and *I*
haven't?
Could it be that I have, to a greater or lesser degree, ignored her?
You should try it! It might even work....instead of giving her the
prominence and attention that she so obviously craves....
[color=darkred]
> I can't see that my presence or absence has any interest for you,
> given your (lack of) gardening input.
Who needs MY input, with all the 'experts' that abound here? I know
what I want to do in MY garden, and I know how to do it....in other
words, I have little to contribute! IOW 'I'm only here for the
entertainment'!!
> Others have been kind enough to say otherwise about the absence of all
> those who have left. And have you seen me, Judith or Janet respond to
> a gardening post in the last 12 hours, despite requests to stay here and
> do so?
Look, Sacha, I was as dismayed as anyone else when you all left, but you
did, and nothing I could say or do was going to change your mind! Life
is far too short, and 'if only' are the two saddest words there are!
> We have posted about Puke's claim that she is not a liar and the fact
> that kill filing has allowed her to do the damage she has done.
So, basically, you came back to create more hiatus? WHY BOTHER?
As my grannie used to say 'a picked spot never heals', so perhaps
it's high time you stopped picking this particular spot? Move on,
forget all this unpleasantness, or at least put it to the back of
your mind! Who knows, in a couple of months you might be telling
all of uk.f+d exactly _how_ and _what_ to cook....! <G>
--
AnneJ
(If you don't like it, you can Foscar Oxtrot)
| |
|
|
"Alan Holmes" <alan.holmes@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:f3m7h.38394$163.1369@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>
> "La Puce" <helene@rudlin.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1163771050.086499.32760@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> No, it's Puke as in making us sick!
>
Weren't you advocating use of kill files to avoid this sort of intemperate
exchange?
| |
| La Puce 2006-11-17, 1:25 pm |
|
BAC wrote:
> Weren't you advocating use of kill files to avoid this sort of intemperate
> exchange?
<deep sigh> And these are peppered everywhere, and have been for some
months now. Sometimes I feel I need to do something about it. I mean,
it's like a cry for help, don't you think and I'm a good samaritan I am.
| |
|
| On 17/11/06 18:11, in article 3130303034323630455DFB5F22@zetnet.co.uk, "Anne
Jackson" <amygdala@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
> The message from Sacha <sacha@privacy.net> contains these words:
>
>
>
> Well, she hasn't attempted to lose ME my job, nor to visit ME on her way
> to Janet's.....so WHY have YOU been the objects of her attention and *I*
> haven't?
>
> Could it be that I have, to a greater or lesser degree, ignored her?
I think what is overlooked here is that at varying times and in varying
degrees, we - that is Judith, Janet and I - have ignored her, too. But, not
unreasonably, I think, we objected to someone not only giving bad or dodgy
gardening advice but then resorting to horrible language and personal insult
on a tiresomely regular basis, when that advice was queried or corrected.
Everyone has a breaking point in terms of that kind of abuse, Anne and we
were getting that kind of flak on a daily basis with nobody else standing u
and saying 'enough'.
I don't know if Puke knows what your job is but she did know what Judith's
is. I am not assailable through a job and neither is Janet, so IMO, Puke
decided to 'go for' Judith, whose job is of a very high calibre. IMO, that
argues a wicked turn of mind and a viciously spiteful one, too.
>
> You should try it! It might even work....instead of giving her the
> prominence and attention that she so obviously craves....
>
>
>
> Who needs MY input, with all the 'experts' that abound here? I know
> what I want to do in MY garden, and I know how to do it....in other
> words, I have little to contribute! IOW 'I'm only here for the
> entertainment'!!
Stick around......... ;-)) May I say at this point that - again IMO -
everyone has something to contribute, even if they're right at the beginning
of their gardening lives, faced with a pile of mud. They can tell us what
they want from their garden, how they're enjoying the garden, how urg
contributes to that enjoyment, how things turned out for good or ill etc.
and that way they encourage the newbies and the oldtimers to feel genuinely
involved in the message the group is spreading.
And I think too, like a lot of others, that personal gardens, designed and
planted for the pleasure of the owner and not the admiration or envy of
others, are the most interesting gardens there are. I'd rather see 6 tiny
but lovingly planted cottage gardens that some great big thing stiff with
running hot and cold parterres.
>
>
> Look, Sacha, I was as dismayed as anyone else when you all left, but you
> did, and nothing I could say or do was going to change your mind! Life
> is far too short, and 'if only' are the two saddest words there are!
That's kind of you and thank you.
>
>
> So, basically, you came back to create more hiatus? WHY BOTHER?
> As my grannie used to say 'a picked spot never heals', so perhaps
> it's high time you stopped picking this particular spot? Move on,
> forget all this unpleasantness, or at least put it to the back of
> your mind!
I can't speak for Judith or Janet but I can say for myself that I loathe and
detest lies and liars. It is something so fundamental to me that it is
extremely hard (for which read just about impossible) to let such behaviour
pass. In addition to that, I have a genuine affection for Judith and a very
high regard for her. I've met her in RL, we have corresponded over the
years, she was incredibly kind to my husband's sister when she was suddenly
put into Judith's hospital and I know of other generosity and kindnesses she
has shown to others. Judith is a genuinely good person.
I am utterly horrified at the attempts that have been made to lose her job
for her and the awful way she has been spoken to here. Judith is worth
thousands of Pukes but she was abused, insulted and sworn at and very few
urglers stood up and said 'enough'. I think that Judith's return yesterday
to make clear what had been done to her and my and Janet's support of her is
absolutely justified, considering what filth she was battling and I really
could not possibly have done anything else. I mean that most genuinely. I
had no idea Judith was going to write to urg last night but given the
opinion I have of her and have given above, there was no way I could allow
her to face the Puke barrage again and alone.
>Who knows, in a couple of months you might be telling
> all of uk.f+d exactly _how_ and _what_ to cook....! <G>
Never going to happen! I couldn't afford the legal fees for the food
poisoning..... I love reading that group but I swear I put on weight just
doing so and there's little I can contribute to it. But Umbria's Italian
food posts and others - but those especially - have me drooling. That's my
favourite kind of food and if I hadn't met Ray, I was going to go to Italy
to do a course such as the ones she runs. What can you do if you marry a
man who thinks risotto is the work of the devil? ;-))
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/
| |
| Anne Jackson 2006-11-17, 1:25 pm |
| The message from "Alan Holmes" <alan.holmes@nowhere.com> contains these words:
> And it's !PLONK!
Oh, the power, the power!
--
AnneJ
(If you don't like it, you can Foscar Oxtrot)
| |
| Anne Jackson 2006-11-17, 1:25 pm |
| The message from Sacha <sacha@privacy.net> contains these words:
> And David Poole is not just keeping his head down, he told urg
> he was leaving and he has left.
.....and you know that's not worth a fig!
YOU said you were leaving....and here you are!
--
AnneJ
(If you don't like it, you can Foscar Oxtrot)
| |
| June Hughes 2006-11-17, 5:25 pm |
| In message <3130303034323630455DFB5F22@zetnet.co.uk>, Anne Jackson
<amygdala@zetnet.co.uk> writes
>The message from Sacha <sacha@privacy.net> contains these words:
>
>
>
>So, basically, you came back to create more hiatus? WHY BOTHER?
>As my grannie used to say 'a picked spot never heals', so perhaps
>it's high time you stopped picking this particular spot? Move on,
>forget all this unpleasantness, or at least put it to the back of
>your mind! Who knows, in a couple of months you might be telling
>all of uk.f+d exactly _how_ and _what_ to cook....! <G>
>
No way!!
--
June Hughes
| |
| La Puce 2006-11-17, 5:25 pm |
|
Anne Jackson wrote:
> The message from "Alan Holmes" <alan.holmes@nowhere.com> contains these words:
>
> Oh, the power, the power!
:o))))
| |
| Alan Holmes 2006-11-17, 5:25 pm |
|
"Sacha" <sacha@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:C183BA07.3D189%sacha@privacy.net...
> On 17/11/06 18:11, in article 3130303034323630455DFB5F22@zetnet.co.uk,
> "Anne
> Jackson" <amygdala@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> I think what is overlooked here is that at varying times and in varying
> degrees, we - that is Judith, Janet and I - have ignored her, too.
But you are now taking it up again, it would have been far better if you,
and Judith and Janet had just ignored her, the trolls always rely upon
people responding to them, I'm sure that most of us would prefer that all of
you were just to come back and answer sensible posts, and ignore the idiotic
ones.
But, not
> unreasonably, I think, we objected to someone not only giving bad or dodgy
> gardening advice but then resorting to horrible language and personal
> insult
> on a tiresomely regular basis, when that advice was queried or corrected.
If we are given bad advise, most of us would not tkae any notice of any
further 'advice' from that source.
> Everyone has a breaking point in terms of that kind of abuse, Anne and we
> were getting that kind of flak on a daily basis with nobody else standing
> u
> and saying 'enough'.
But you are not ignoring it, you are just encouraging her to continue to
irritate you.
> I can't speak for Judith or Janet but I can say for myself that I loathe
> and
> detest lies and liars.
We all feel like that, but there comes a time where we have to ignore that
sort of post, so please just ignore her posts and concentrate on helping
those of us who value your input.
Alan
| |
| Alan Holmes 2006-11-17, 5:25 pm |
|
"Anne Jackson" <amygdala@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3130303034323630455E069319@zetnet.co.uk...
> The message from "Alan Holmes" <alan.holmes@nowhere.com> contains these
> words:
>
>
> Oh, the power, the power!
Gives my ego a terrific boost!
Alan
| |
| Alan Holmes 2006-11-17, 5:25 pm |
|
"Anne Jackson" <amygdala@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3130303034323630455E077541@zetnet.co.uk...
> The message from Sacha <sacha@privacy.net> contains these words:
>
>
> ....and you know that's not worth a fig!
> YOU said you were leaving....and here you are!
And, hopefully, you will stay.
Alan
| |
|
| "Anne Jackson" <amygdala@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> The message from "Alan Holmes" <alan.holmes@nowhere.com> contains
these words:
>
>
> Oh, the power, the power!
I recall reading somewhere that in a home computer, there was more
computer capacity than was used to send Man to the moon.
So, thanks to Mr Microsoft, I can now killfile people such as Puke and
her encouragers like Uncle Marvo and Dementor and Nasty Mike etc. And
I can do so till the cows come home because I have so much bang for my
buck on this wee machine. Life is grand, or would be if the frosts
would stop.
| |
| La Puce 2006-11-17, 5:25 pm |
|
Farm1 wrote:
> So, thanks to Mr Microsoft, I can now killfile people such as Puke
It's La Puce, Fran, try to understand that if you can't understand the
rest.
| |
| Anne Jackson 2006-11-17, 8:25 pm |
| The message from "Farm1" <please@askifyouwannaknow> contains these words:
> "Anne Jackson" <amygdala@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> these words:
[color=darkred]
> I recall reading somewhere that in a home computer, there was more
> computer capacity than was used to send Man to the moon.
> So, thanks to Mr Microsoft, I can now killfile people such as Puke and
> her encouragers like Uncle Marvo and Dementor and Nasty Mike etc. And
> I can do so till the cows come home because I have so much bang for my
> buck on this wee machine. Life is grand, or would be if the frosts
> would stop.
Oh, hang on to them for a wee while, huh? I've still got some bulbs
to plant in the new beds...which the local cats have now discovered. 8-(
How easy would it be to put an airgun pellet in the rear quarters
of a moggie, from 15 yards, d'you reckon? (I'm more used to shooting
arrows!) <g>
I wouldn't normally mind so much, but that 20' cypressus took two
whole weekends of damned hard work to clear out, and I didn't plan
on having a feline toilet in its place.... 8-(
--
AnneJ
| |
| Rupert \(W.Yorkshire\) 2006-11-17, 8:25 pm |
|
"Alan Holmes" <alan.holmes@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:ILo7h.33252$TH3.17442@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
>
> "Sacha" <sacha@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:C183BA07.3D189%sacha@privacy.net...
>
> But you are now taking it up again, it would have been far better if you,
> and Judith and Janet had just ignored her, the trolls always rely upon
> people responding to them, I'm sure that most of us would prefer that all
> of you were just to come back and answer sensible posts, and ignore the
> idiotic ones.
>
> But, not
>
> If we are given bad advise, most of us would not tkae any notice of any
> further 'advice' from that source.
>
>
> But you are not ignoring it, you are just encouraging her to continue to
> irritate you.
>
>
> We all feel like that, but there comes a time where we have to ignore that
> sort of post, so please just ignore her posts and concentrate on helping
> those of us who value your input.
>
> Alan
>
Alan -novice gardeners and newbies to the group need to be made aware of
things like Puke and the bad advice that she dishes out. If everyone bunged
her in a killfile how could anyone warn folk about her, and as Sacha has
pointed out if you killfile Puke then you do not see the vitriolic crap she
spews out against innocent posters.
I agree, not replying to her posts is the best course of action (usually).
| |
|
| On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 23:57:28 -0000, "Rupert \(W.Yorkshire\)" wrote:
>Alan -novice gardeners and newbies to the group need to be made aware of
>things like Puke and the bad advice that she dishes out. If everyone bunged
>her in a killfile how could anyone warn folk about her, and as Sacha has
>pointed out if you killfile Puke then you do not see the vitriolic crap she
>spews out against innocent posters.
>I agree, not replying to her posts is the best course of action (usually).
I'm sorry, I can resist no longer !
Rupert >>Alan -novice gardeners and newbies to the group need to be
made aware
"newbies" in any usenet newsgroup have no business being there if they
cannot distinguish sensible posters from 'the rest'.
Unmoderated usenet newsgroups are an anarchy, not a democracy nor an
autocracy.
I hold no particular candle for La Puce, but did anyone notice how
calm and collected the newsgroup became when 'the usual suspects'
gathered up their toys and left ? ( well, didnt actually leave, but
hung around awhile to see how their denial of service would deprive us
all,, and how many regretful posthumous adulations would result,,,
vanity is a word that comes to mind )
The group who left in high dudgeon do the group no respect if they all
rush back in with this interminable nonsense.
Now that 'they' have 'returned' it is to further disrespect the group
by continuing their vendetta, not to benifit the group with their
(reputed) gardening wisdom !
PS. it is childish as well as lacking in intellect to continue
renaming a person as Puke instead of La Puce.
| |
| michael adams 2006-11-17, 8:25 pm |
|
"Rupert (W.Yorkshire)" <reply@newsgroups.com> wrote in message
news:455e4c6c@212.67.96.135...
> If everyone bunged her in a killfile how could anyone warn folk
> about her,
Why should these "folk" believe you, and not her ?
Supposing you try and "warn" people about Puce, and she replies by
claiming that its you who's the liar and the troll.
How exactly do you intend to get around that little difficulty ?
With a 100 post slanging match every time the two of you fall
out ? With piles of quotes from other posts which nobody will
bother to read ?
Following which, you eventually decide to leave the Group as well,
owning to lack of support from the other posters.
Sound familiar ?
So how exactly is this all going to work ?
> and as Sacha has pointed out if you killfile Puke then you do
> not see the vitriolic crap she spews out against innocent posters.
Same as before. So what exactly do you intend to do, if Puce
responds by posting "vitriolic crap" against you, as well ?
Ask her very nicely if she'll go away? Do you really think that
will work?
And do you think constantly referring to her as Puke, is the best way
to go about achieving that objective ?
michael adams
....
| |
| michael adams 2006-11-17, 9:25 pm |
|
"WaltA" <please@dontspam.nothere.com> wrote in message
news:455e6894.3772533@news.ntlworld.com...
>
> The group who left in high dudgeon do the group no respect if they all
> rush back in with this interminable nonsense.
> Now that 'they' have 'returned'
Who exactly do you mean by "they" ?
Because very few people who left this NewsGroup have returned.
At any point since their departure weeks ago.
And this Newsgroup is the poorer for their loss, IMO.
michael adams
....
| |
|
| On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 02:22:40 -0000, "michael adams" wrote:
>"WaltA" wrote in message
>
>Who exactly do you mean by "they" ?
Now you are just being provocative,
or you have not been paying attention !
>Because very few people who left this NewsGroup have returned.
True !
But the ones who did (it seems to me), only did so to continue ,,
Oh forget it ! Why did I bother (especially as I agree with your
recent reply to Rupert ! )
| |
|
| On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 02:22:40 -0000, "michael adams" wrote:
>And this Newsgroup is the poorer for their loss, IMO.
That is by-the-by to what I (thought I) raised,
it may also be that your opinion is my opinion also, _IF_ they could
stay focussed on gardening matters,
If all they want to do is debate who said what to whom and who tried
to do what to their employers or others and who may (or may not) be
the most authoritative and
ohhhhhh groan, I care not !
and it says more about their self-perceived status as divas (or
harridans) that they think we are remotely concerened.
Like I said previously, they disrispect the rest of us by continuing
their grandstanding.
Cant they just realise that it tars them all and that ( usually) we
care not a fig ! ?
| |
|
| "WaltA" <please@dontspam.nothere.com> wrote in message
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 23:57:28 -0000, "Rupert \(W.Yorkshire\)" wrote:
>
aware of[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
> Unmoderated usenet newsgroups are an anarchy, not a democracy nor an
> autocracy.
> I hold no particular candle for La Puce, but did anyone notice how
> calm and collected the newsgroup became when 'the usual suspects'
> gathered up their toys and left ?
Eh? I think you've got a short memory. Idiot nymshifters like
Dementor and Nasty Mike never stopped posting and sodding Puke
returned far too quickly despite her promises. And to add insult to
the leaver's injury, she was greeted by people who should know better.
> The group who left in high dudgeon do the group no respect if they
all
> rush back in with this interminable nonsense.
> Now that 'they' have 'returned' it is to further disrespect the
group
> by continuing their vendetta, not to benifit the group with their
> (reputed) gardening wisdom !
The group who left in high dudgeon were and are quite entitled to
feel aggrieved by Puke's behaviour. It is totally illogical of you to
state that newsgroups are an "anarchy" and to then witter on about the
group being deserving of "respect" from those who left. The leavers
got no respect from Puke and her posts and behaviour have always
caused anarchy here (and not only in htis ng as I know from
experience).
> PS. it is childish as well as lacking in intellect to continue
> renaming a person as Puke instead of La Puce.
Personally I think that view is a load of bollocks. Puke's behaviour
is far more irritating than that of a mere flea: it's sick making.
Puke complained to someone's employer and she went stalking someone!
This is not sane or reasonable behaviour and deserves no respect from
anyone - only condemnation.
| |
|
|
"Anne Jackson" <amygdala@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3130303034323630455E49CE88@zetnet.co.uk...
> The message from "Farm1" <please@askifyouwannaknow> contains these
words:
contains[color=darkred]
>
>
and[color=darkred]
And[color=darkred]
for my[color=darkred]
frosts[color=darkred]
>
> Oh, hang on to them for a wee while, huh? I've still got some bulbs
> to plant in the new beds...which the local cats have now discovered.
8-(
>
> How easy would it be to put an airgun pellet in the rear quarters
> of a moggie, from 15 yards, d'you reckon? (I'm more used to
shooting
> arrows!) <g>
>
> I wouldn't normally mind so much, but that 20' cypressus took two
> whole weekends of damned hard work to clear out, and I didn't plan
> on having a feline toilet in its place.... 8-(
>
> --
> AnneJ
| |
|
| "michael adams" <mjadams27@onetel.net.uk> wrote in message
> And do you think constantly referring to her as Puke, is the best
way
> to go about achieving that objective ?
Michael, I think you are being disingenuous. Puke has been asked
nicely and she has been asked nastily to disappear or to modify her
behaviour. And this has been done a number of times. Nothing works
so whatever she is called is irrelevant.
I could see some point to your comment about not calling her Puke, IF
Puce was her real name. It isn't. No one is playing with her sense
of self identity except for herself. As you also probably know the
history, she's changed that identity a number of times.
| |
|
| "Sacha" <sacha@privacy.net> wrote in message
> "Farm1" <please@askifyouwannaknow> wrote:
with[color=darkred]
(snip)[color=darkred]
their[color=darkred]
purporting[color=darkred]
read[color=darkred]
not[color=darkred]
fairly[color=darkred]
either,[color=darkred]
left.[color=darkred]
>
> If everyone who objected to her behaviour - and I do mean
*everyone* - had
> both sat on her firmly as soon as she started her misleading, lying,
> insulting and swearing behaviour, we might not have lost those
people.
I disagree. A lot of people cannot stomach any form of disagreement
or what they see as disagreement/unpleasantness and there are also
many who also do not feel up to stating their views strongly and
clearly. I'm not one of them but they are VERY numerous. If you
expect everyone to get on their hind legs to provide support then I
can tell you that such an expectation will be just as devisive as
Puke's behaviour.
knowledge[color=darkred]
chose![color=darkred]
>
> I chose to leave because I was absolutely disgusted at the treatment
meted
> out of Judith, the filthy language and insults to someone who never,
> herself, behaves that way and the lies told about her by a proven
liar. And
> a major contributing factor in my decision to leave was the fact
that those
> who know Judith, like her and have been either RL or cyber friends
of hers
> for years, described that piece of newsgroup terrorism as a
catfight or
> nothing to do with them or stupid women who should be kill filed.
That was
> a disgraceful way to treat Judith and it was cruel and unkind.
I agreee that the behaviour of Puke to Judith was nothing short of
disgusting, and some idiots wrote some ridiculous things. BUT, to
blame the whole group, many of whom had their killfile in operation
and many of whom weren't even reading all the threads is simply
unrealistic.
Puke just isn't worth it. Judith must know from her own inbox and
from the people who she did value here, just how those who are "worth
it" viewed her and thought of her. The rest just don't matter. It's
about "hearth dwellers" and "fringe dwellers" (really just knowing how
to sort the trees from the wood).
| |
| JennyC 2006-11-18, 3:25 am |
|
"WaltA" <please@dontspam.nothere.com> wrote
> I'm sorry, I can resist no longer !
> Rupert >>Alan -novice gardeners and newbies to the group need to be
> made aware
>
> "newbies" in any usenet newsgroup have no business being there if they
> cannot distinguish sensible posters from 'the rest'.
> Unmoderated usenet newsgroups are an anarchy, not a democracy nor an
> autocracy.
>
> I hold no particular candle for La Puce, but did anyone notice how
> calm and collected the newsgroup became when 'the usual suspects'
> gathered up their toys and left ? ( well, didnt actually leave, but
> hung around awhile to see how their denial of service would deprive us
> all,, and how many regretful posthumous adulations would result,,,
> vanity is a word that comes to mind )
>
> The group who left in high dudgeon do the group no respect if they all
> rush back in with this interminable nonsense.
> Now that 'they' have 'returned' it is to further disrespect the group
> by continuing their vendetta, not to benifit the group with their
> (reputed) gardening wisdom !
>
> PS. it is childish as well as lacking in intellect to continue
> renaming a person as Puke instead of La Puce.
Very wisely and succinctly put WaltA!
I totally agree with every word.
Jenny
| |
| Mary Fisher 2006-11-18, 9:25 am |
|
"WaltA" <please@dontspam.nothere.com> wrote in message
news:455e6894.3772533@news.ntlworld.com...
>... but did anyone notice how
> calm and collected the newsgroup became when 'the usual suspects'
> gathered up their toys and left ?
I did,what's more I didn't suffer from lack of expertise.
>
> The group who left in high dudgeon do the group no respect if they all
> rush back in with this interminable nonsense.
> Now that 'they' have 'returned' it is to further disrespect the group
> by continuing their vendetta, not to benifit the group with their
> (reputed) gardening wisdom !
Yes, I've done some blocking to keep it sweet. It's been a pleasure reading
posts in the last few weeks.
>
> PS. it is childish as well as lacking in intellect to continue
> renaming a person as Puke instead of La Puce.
>
I agree.
Now, about my asparagus, can an experienced grower tell me what I should do
with it in the winter? We had a very hard frost last night and while it
seems to have survived well the stalks and fronds might break under snow.
Mary
>
| |
| Mary Fisher 2006-11-18, 9:25 am |
|
"Anne Jackson" <amygdala@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3130303034323630455E49CE88@zetnet.co.uk...
>
> (I'm more used to shooting
> arrows!) <g>
Are you? I didn't know that ... but would like to know more. Mail might be
better.
>
Mary
| |
| June Hughes 2006-11-18, 9:25 am |
| In message <455ed97d$0$758$4c56ba96@master.news.zetnet.net>, Mary Fisher
<mary.fisher@zetnet.co.uk> writes[color=darkred]
>
>"Anne Jackson" <amygdala@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:3130303034323630455E49CE88@zetnet.co.uk...
>
>Are you? I didn't know that ... but would like to know more. Mail might be
>better.
As I would like to know more too, perhaps it had better be here. A good
friend of mine teaches archery.
--
June Hughes
| |
| June Hughes 2006-11-18, 9:25 am |
| In message <455ed897$0$757$4c56ba96@master.news.zetnet.net>, Mary Fisher
<mary.fisher@zetnet.co.uk> writes
>
>
>Now, about my asparagus, can an experienced grower tell me what I should do
>with it in the winter? We had a very hard frost last night and while it
>seems to have survived well the stalks and fronds might break under snow.
>
Have you tried a bit of fleece, Mary?
We haven't had snow but I have looked at my asparagus this morning and
it is OK. I planted it from seed some 16 years ago and as I have
neglected it, the stalks are generally very thin and weedy. If you
blink, you miss them.
--
June Hughes
| |
| La Puce 2006-11-18, 9:25 am |
|
Farm1 wrote:
> Puke complained to someone's employer and she went stalking someone!
Not true. Judith Lea rang my office asking for my husband. I off course
told her to go and fry herself an egg. She rang again and I put the
phone down. She admitted it herself. Then when I thought it was over my
colleague in London forwarded me an email she had wrote to him. This
man is my friend for over 20 years. We have built a company togehter.
What on earth did she think that he would tell me to stop posting to
urg?
Then I wrote to Judith Lea's employer because you see I am the director
of my company and she can't do nothing about that.
As for visiting Sacha in Devon, we were working in St Ives and we went
with the kids to the lost gardens of heligan. From the A38 it is not
even a detour to to to Sacha's nursery. We went there and my kids
didn't want me to meet 'the horrible lady from usenet'.
> This is not sane or reasonable behaviour and deserves no respect from
> anyone - only condemnation.
Just try to see the whole picture and stop taking sides.
| |
| June Hughes 2006-11-18, 9:25 am |
| In message <3130303034323630455E49CE88@zetnet.co.uk>, Anne Jackson
<amygdala@zetnet.co.uk> writes
>
>Oh, hang on to them for a wee while, huh? I've still got some bulbs
>to plant in the new beds...which the local cats have now discovered. 8-(
>
>How easy would it be to put an airgun pellet in the rear quarters
>of a moggie, from 15 yards, d'you reckon? (I'm more used to shooting
>arrows!) <g>
>
As it archery? I am impressed. Why don't you just use arrows instead?
Alternatively, a seriously strong water pistol would probably work well
if you can catch them at it.
>I wouldn't normally mind so much, but that 20' cypressus took two
>whole weekends of damned hard work to clear out, and I didn't plan
>on having a feline toilet in its place.... 8-(
>
That is a shame. Cats can be a real pain sometimes. I sympathise.
--
June Hughes
| |
| La Puce 2006-11-18, 9:25 am |
|
Farm1 wrote:
Puke has been asked
> nicely and she has been asked nastily to disappear or to modify her
> behaviour.
Not true. You have crossed me a few times but I have ignored you. Then
you have been pleasant and out of the blue you are aggressive again and
call me by other names than my name. And what behaviour are you talking
about? If you cross someone do you expect them to be nice to you? What
a strange world you live in.
And this has been done a number of times. Nothing works
> so whatever she is called is irrelevant.
What can I say other than you seem to enjoy this.
> I could see some point to your comment about not calling her Puke, IF
> Puce was her real name. It isn't.
Farm1 is this your name or is it Fran? I've had my nickname since I'm a
child because I'm little, very little. On usenet it has been my name
for over 15 years. I am what I am.
No one is playing with her sense
> of self identity except for herself. As you also probably know the
> history, she's changed that identity a number of times.
That is simply not true. When I changed server I had problems with my
address. It had been picked up by spam something cronic. So for a
couple of weeks I used another tatadangleterre which I use with my
family as an address. My name is above, my surname is above. I have
nothing to hide, but you seem to have, Fran.
| |
| michael adams 2006-11-18, 9:25 am |
|
"Farm1" <please@askifyouwannaknow> wrote in message
news:455ead53$0$28170$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> "michael adams" <mjadams27@onetel.net.uk> wrote in message
>
> way
>
> Michael, I think you are being disingenuous.
May I suggest you try looking in a dictionary, before you start using
long words whose actual you maybe unaware of ?
disingenouous - insincere, lacking in frankness, or honesty
fraudulent
> Puke has been asked
> nicely and she has been asked nastily to disappear or to modify her
> behaviour. And this has been done a number of times. Nothing works
> so whatever she is called is irrelevant.
>
> I could see some point to your comment about not calling her Puke, IF
> Puce was her real name. It isn't. No one is playing with her sense
> of self identity except for herself. As you also probably know the
> history, she's changed that identity a number of times.
I also suggest you get a clue about Usenet, and the way it actually works.
Trolls like nothing better than to see other posters expressing their
displeasure. She must really "hate" being called Puke. Oh yes of course
she does ! Puce would never act in such a way as to cause people
to call her rude names now would she ? Oh no of course she wouldn't!
Which then gives her yet another pretext to whinge and adopt a pose
of injured self righteosness. The penny might finally drop with some
people eventually. But somehow I doubt it.
Much of that last paragraph is supposed to be ironical BTW. Just
in case.
One thing you can be sure of, is that trolls don't operate
kill files. And so yet again, she can witness other posters arguing
among themselves
Well you can argue with yourself on this one. I can only suggest you
try and persuade someone to buy you a dictionary for Christmas.
And in the meantime, so as not to give further succour to the troll,
you too can go in the cupboard.
Byeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
michael adams
....
| |
| Mary Fisher 2006-11-18, 9:25 am |
|
"June Hughes" <junehughes@theacct.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:baWp3sJEztXFFwke@theacct.demon.co.uk...
> In message <455ed897$0$757$4c56ba96@master.news.zetnet.net>, Mary Fisher
> <mary.fisher@zetnet.co.uk> writes
> Have you tried a bit of fleece, Mary?
No, but I have lots, I'll give it a go, thanks.
> We haven't had snow but I have looked at my asparagus this morning and it
> is OK. I planted it from seed some 16 years ago and as I have neglected
> it, the stalks are generally very thin and weedy. If you blink, you miss
> them.
Mine's due for its first (limited) cropping next year, I'll have to exercise
a lot of self restraint :-) But as you know I have lots of that.
Mary
she of the long nose ...
| |
|
| On 18/11/06 10:24, in article
1163845474.321134.153940@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com, "La Puce"
<helene@rudlin.co.uk> wrote:
<snip>
>
> As for visiting Sacha in Devon, we were working in St Ives and we went
> with the kids to the lost gardens of heligan. From the A38 it is not
> even a detour to to to Sacha's nursery. We went there and my kids
> didn't want me to meet 'the horrible lady from usenet'.
>
More lies. It is 2.5 miles of narrow twisting lanes off the A38 to reach
our nursery. What is more you have to found out how to get here before you
left the A38 because it is not signposted from the route you took. On top
of that, no normal person would drive from St Austell in Cornwall home to
Manchester, via the road to Ashburton!
So in every sense, you went out of your way to get here. On top of that,
having your photograph taken in front of the entry signs is exceedingly
peculiar behaviour, especially as you posted a link to it on here. And
finally, I have never heard boys refer to people in that fashion past the
age of about 6. You say they're 17 and 11.
You did what you did to try to intimidate me - failed - and to show the
group what a 'big woman' you are. Failed again. As has become clear here
on the last few days, the majority of people other than your shape-shifting
troll friend, have no time for you and have the measure of you. If nothing
else, that is one good thing that has come out of this sorry mess.
Oh and one last thing - you are lying about the swearing you did to Judith
and give yourself away every time you refer to it. The expression 'va te
faire cuire un oeuf' is indeed a piece of filthy language in French and
yesterday, another urgler who speaks French emailed me saying the same thing
and saying they knew what you are as soon as they saw you had posted in that
way. I gave the colloquial meaning of that phrase at the time and I posted
a link to the information. At the time, you stated that your husband had
told you to say that to Judith. Now you have changed your story and tell us
that YOU said that to Judith on the phone. Liars always trips themselves up
eventually.
Now, Helene Rudlin, that is the end of you. Like Judith, I'll come back to
urg when I'm ready to and unless you give bad information to newbies, I will
ignore you. And if you start swearing and ranting at me again, I too, like
Judith, will deal with the matter privately and directly.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/
| |
| michael adams 2006-11-18, 9:25 am |
|
"WaltA" <please@dontspam.nothere.com> wrote in message
news:455e85ac.334862@news.ntlworld.com...
> and it says more about their self-perceived status as divas (or
> harridans) that they think we are remotely concerened.
>
> Like I said previously, they disrispect the rest of us by continuing
> their grandstanding.
And you're going to show your respect for the group by actually
naming names, rather than engaging in innuendos aren't you ?
So who exactly are these divas and harridans ?
All I do know is that some people do have a very dry sense of
humour, whilst other poor souls aren't exactly the sharpest
knives in the box.
So come on! Name names ! Wimp !
michael adams
....
| |
|
| "michael adams" <mjadams27@onetel.net.uk> wrote in message
> "Farm1" <please@askifyouwannaknow> wrote in message
best[color=darkred]
>
> May I suggest you try looking in a dictionary, before you start
using
> long words whose actual you maybe unaware of ?
Never fear Michael, I own the full 20 volume OED. Pity you need to
have a smiley face inserted before you can recognise a tongue firmly
in cheek.
> disingenouous -
That is not how you spell it. Try getting a dictionary.
insincere, lacking in frankness, or honesty
> fraudulent
>
her[color=darkred]
works[color=darkred]
IF[color=darkred]
sense[color=darkred]
the[color=darkred]
>
> I also suggest you get a clue about Usenet, and the way it actually
works.
> Trolls like nothing better than to see other posters expressing
their
> displeasure. She must really "hate" being called Puke. Oh yes of
course
> she does ! Puce would never act in such a way as to cause people
> to call her rude names now would she ? Oh no of course she
wouldn't!
> Which then gives her yet another pretext to whinge and adopt a pose
> of injured self righteosness. The penny might finally drop with some
> people eventually. But somehow I doubt it.
>
> Much of that last paragraph is supposed to be ironical BTW. Just
> in case.
Gosh you're quick aren't you? You miss the point entirely because I
didn't put in a ":-))))" for you to focus on! I was agreeing with
you, you idiot! Puke is a troll and nothing will change her! What a
disappointment you turned out to be.
> One thing you can be sure of, is that trolls don't operate
> kill files. And so yet again, she can witness other posters arguing
> among themselves
>
> Well you can argue with yourself on this one. I can only suggest you
> try and persuade someone to buy you a dictionary for Christmas.
> And in the meantime, so as not to give further succour to the troll,
> you too can go in the cupboard.
Gutless wonder!
| |
| Alan Holmes 2006-11-18, 1:25 pm |
|
"Sacha" <sacha@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:C18499CC.3D225%sacha@privacy.net...
> On 18/11/06 10:24, in article
> 1163845474.321134.153940@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com, "La Puce"
> <helene@rudlin.co.uk> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> More lies. It is 2.5 miles of narrow twisting lanes off the A38 to reach
> our nursery. What is more you have to found out how to get here before
> you
> left the A38 because it is not signposted from the route you took. On top
> of that, no normal person would drive from St Austell in Cornwall home to
> Manchester, via the road to Ashburton!
Oh god, I've already killfiled her and now you are making me read some of
her posts, please, please, please stop replying to her inane drivel!
Alan
| |
|
| |