Re: uk.business.agriculture.pig-breeding

In news:NKFiLbdWsBKEFwrP@[127.0.0.1],
Wm... <tcnw71@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said


Weren't you the person that said any group should be created if
someone wanted it? Since it appears *only* one person wants the
group do you still feel the same?

I think I might well have said that in some form, because I tend to
think it right, but I do happen to agree you need enough posters.
One person talking to themselves does not make a group!

You objected quite strongly the last time I pointed out that there
was a uk.* group that was mainly about one person talking to himself.
I dropped the rm group because of you.

You need to make your mind up, kat.

So do you. You said above "created" now you are talking about existing
groups. I don't see that as the same thing at all. A group in existance
already deserves different consideration, if it had posts in it.

Now after this you wrote a whole load of stuff which makes me think that
somehow we have a total misunderstanding between us. So rather than go
through point by point I'll just say what I was trying to express.

The posts prior to today have appeared to be arguing about the principle
that it is, or is not , ok to vote agaianst a group because you haven't seen
sufficient support. I was commenting on that, and on the idea that a person
who doesn't want a group themselves - that is, has no interest in it -
shouldn't vote against it. If enough people do want it they are entitled to
have it without having to find extra supporters to overcome those who prefer
to talk about pudding.

However it is possible for people to have an interest in a proposal and have
valid reasons for objecting to it. I - or anyone else - might not agree, or
might not consider the objection in the least valid, but I see a lot of
difference between somone arguing the group could destroy another, therefore
they will vote against, and someone just saying, they don't want it.

I have never said I was for this group, or for that matter against it. I am
not interested in the subject matter, woudn't read it, wouldn't post, don't
use the current group, and won't vote, should there be a vote. You feel
differently, as you are entitled to do. I haven't any experience where
David Bell is concerned, and have no idea what his taste in music is ( is it
really that bad? :-) ) but his post - up to the last sentence - is a good
one. That last sentence is the one that caused the trouble, - possibly it
wasn't taken quite the right way, but the answers were making the point that
if there was no demand, voting against wasn't necesssary.



--
kat
>^..^<


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Bush-Rumsfeld incompetence or worse
    ... vote for Clinton over the more liberal McCain. ... McCain is more liberal than Clinton. ... hell of a lot better than Obama or Clinton. ... seemed to me that he might have mistaken his posts. ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)
  • Re: Incubus vs. Lord Hatred Final Results
    ... I just wanna make sure its 100% clear that "Lvubun ... Peachychic 1 - Has more then enough posts in RSPW to count, ... Cainman 1 - This vote was verified by Alex Cain himself. ... True but it could be a sock just like SergioP, alex hates Incubus as you well know so this is dubious at the very least. ...
    (rec.sport.pro-wrestling)
  • Re: wereo_SUPREMACY
    ... wereo is a no-life nutcake that lives for posts like yours. ... please educate us on how you 'vote' someone off a Usenet group? ... take advantage of the prevailing winds. ... prevailing westerly winds would carry the sound ...
    (alt.guitar)
  • Re: How I vote
    ... it's true, doesn't really matter. ... Did Bush take a cheap 'jab' at Kerry? ... No, I suppose it doesn't, I just know that I wasn't planning on voting for him to begin with, and this just reinforced my vote for the Rep. candidate. ...
    (microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse)
  • Re: WPA-PSK (Wi-Fi Protected Access with a pre-shared key) - Not as strong as WPA2,
    ... issue apart from the magnificent residences, but don't vote the ... just spiders. ... Who will you matter the disappointed illegal glorys before ...
    (sci.crypt)