Attention: uk.rec.sheds now replaced by uk.tech.digital-tv forgeneral grumping

Actually, no it isn't. Sod off.

No its as well as not instead of.
Mind you, I can remember a time.. oh sorry wrong group.
Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"Steve Niven" wrote in message
...
Actually, no it isn't. Sod off.

On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 10:46:45 +0000 (UTC), Steve Niven
wrote:

Actually, no it isn't. Sod off.
Looking at this week's posts, this group would be pretty dead without
the OT stuff.

I don't mind what is posted here as long as the people posting have
some sort of interest in the proper topic, and can contribute once in
a while.

After all, if we all met up in a pub, the conversation wouldn't
exclusively be "shop" would it?



Clearly in a thriving group like uk.d-i-y one would have to think much
more carefully about posting OT, but a well chosen one can still be
welcome.

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 14:29:26 +0100, Graham. wrote:

Looking at this week's posts, this group would be pretty dead without
the OT stuff.

I don't mind what is posted here as long as the people posting have some
sort of interest in the proper topic, and can contribute once in a
while.

After all, if we all met up in a pub, the conversation wouldn't
exclusively be "shop" would it?

Clearly in a thriving group like uk.d-i-y one would have to think much
more carefully about posting OT, but a well chosen one can still be
welcome.

Yes -- it's the qualifications that you've put into the above that are
kind of the point really.

In message , Graham.
writes
On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 10:46:45 +0000 (UTC), Steve Niven
wrote:

Actually, no it isn't. Sod off.
Looking at this week's posts, this group would be pretty dead without
the OT stuff.

I don't mind what is posted here as long as the people posting have
some sort of interest in the proper topic, and can contribute once in
a while.

After all, if we all met up in a pub, the conversation wouldn't
exclusively be "shop" would it?



Clearly in a thriving group like uk.d-i-y one would have to think much
more carefully about posting OT, but a well chosen one can still be
welcome.

Now that the analogue-to-digital changeover has been completed, and all
the transmitters have been wound up to their full power, there are
nowhere as near as many problems to solve, and consequently not as much
to discuss.
--
Ian

On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 17:10:19 +0100, Ian Jackson
wrote:

In message , Graham.
writes
On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 10:46:45 +0000 (UTC), Steve Niven
wrote:

Actually, no it isn't. Sod off.
Looking at this week's posts, this group would be pretty dead without
the OT stuff.

I don't mind what is posted here as long as the people posting have
some sort of interest in the proper topic, and can contribute once in
a while.

After all, if we all met up in a pub, the conversation wouldn't
exclusively be "shop" would it?



Clearly in a thriving group like uk.d-i-y one would have to think much
more carefully about posting OT, but a well chosen one can still be
welcome.

Now that the analogue-to-digital changeover has been completed, and all
the transmitters have been wound up to their full power, there are
nowhere as near as many problems to solve, and consequently not as much
to discuss.

We have to keep ourselves amused until 4G really screws up terrestrial
TV. :-)

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

Graham. wrote:

After all, if we all met up in a pub, the conversation wouldn't
exclusively be "shop" would it?
No, we'd be giving the barmaids marks out of ten for one thing.

Clearly in a thriving group like uk.d-i-y one would have to think much
more carefully about posting OT,
I don't!

Bill

Bill Wright wrote:

-----------------
After all, if we all met up in a pub, the conversation wouldn't
exclusively be "shop" would it?
No, we'd be giving the barmaids marks out of ten for one thing.

Clearly in a thriving group like uk.d-i-y one would have to think
much more carefully about posting OT,
I don't!
----------------

Bill, I wonder if I might make a respectful request. Your replies are
always worth reading, but would it be possible for you to insert a
blank line above them? It's just that they can be quite difficult to
pick out when scanning through a conversation. I've included a couple
of examples above, which aren't too bad, but when the previous
paragraph is longer and/or has line-wrap it gets somewhat harder.
Here's what I mean:

-----------------
After all, if we all met up in a pub, the conversation wouldn't
exclusively be "shop" would it?

No, we'd be giving the barmaids marks out of ten for one thing.

Clearly in a thriving group like uk.d-i-y one would have to think
much more carefully about posting OT,

I don't!
----------------

Just a thought - I'm not sure what you use to access these newsgroups,
and if it isn't easy/possible then that's cool.

--
SteveT

"Steve Thackery" wrote in message
...
Bill Wright wrote:

-----------------
After all, if we all met up in a pub, the conversation wouldn't
exclusively be "shop" would it?
No, we'd be giving the barmaids marks out of ten for one thing.

Clearly in a thriving group like uk.d-i-y one would have to think
much more carefully about posting OT,
I don't!
----------------

Bill, I wonder if I might make a respectful request. Your replies are
always worth reading, but would it be possible for you to insert a
blank line above them? It's just that they can be quite difficult to
pick out when scanning through a conversation. I've included a couple
of examples above, which aren't too bad, but when the previous
paragraph is longer and/or has line-wrap it gets somewhat harder.

+1 (Whatever that means)

--
Max Demian

On Sat, 28 Sep 2013 02:53:00 -0500, "Steve Thackery"
wrote:

Bill Wright wrote:

-----------------
After all, if we all met up in a pub, the conversation wouldn't
exclusively be "shop" would it?
No, we'd be giving the barmaids marks out of ten for one thing.

Clearly in a thriving group like uk.d-i-y one would have to think
much more carefully about posting OT,
I don't!
----------------

Bill, I wonder if I might make a respectful request. Your replies are
always worth reading, but would it be possible for you to insert a
blank line above them? It's just that they can be quite difficult to
pick out when scanning through a conversation. I've included a couple
of examples above, which aren't too bad, but when the previous
paragraph is longer and/or has line-wrap it gets somewhat harder.
Here's what I mean:

-----------------
After all, if we all met up in a pub, the conversation wouldn't
exclusively be "shop" would it?

No, we'd be giving the barmaids marks out of ten for one thing.

Clearly in a thriving group like uk.d-i-y one would have to think
much more carefully about posting OT,

I don't!
----------------

Just a thought - I'm not sure what you use to access these newsgroups,
and if it isn't easy/possible then that's cool.

+1

Sound advice. I, like everyone except Bill (istm), observe the common
courtesy of prepending our responses with a blank line to make our
replies that little bit more readable whenever they include quoted
text.
--
Regards, J B Good