I guess I simply don't agree with your point that the purpose of BP is
exclusively multi-points on boundaries. The home page clearly does not make
this limitation, and much of the discussion is not multi-point but
boundary-oddity related. What's wrong with that?
The purpose as stated on the home page is for "those slightly strange
individuals who are interested in finding, researching, photographing and
discussing geopolitical boundary points, especially those of a tri-state or
multipoint nature."
See? It is not exclusive to tri-state or multiple point nature, that is
simply as special focus that is frequently discussed -- frankly, because
they typically make for a great part of the potential conflicts.
Now I don't know who you are, if you are the founder of the group or what. I
am a relative newcomer. Perhaps if the intent of the founder was that simple
boundary discussions that are not multi-points would be off-topic, then I
and others here would have to conclude that this was poorly stated. For the
statement of purpose clearly is broader than that. You say below it "doesn't
follow" that because IBRG isn't appropriate to simply boundary discussions,
that BP is. But as I "point" out above, the BP "charter" expressly says that
these discussions are "on point" even if they are not multi-points.
I also have to ask where you are from, for my own understanding, because the
way you write is very confusing to me. Your use of language is rambling and
very difficult to follow. They twist and turn (like OKTX, although in
conformance with what I maintained then, your postings also are not of
infinite length!) So I was wondering if you are from the US or are you from
elsewhere? Just a friendly inquiry.
-----Original Message-----
From: acroorca2002 [mailto:
orc@...]
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 11:11 PM
To:
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: BoundaryPoint and borders
kevin i trust i have answered your earlier post in responding to
similar questions & points made by others
except for the question you raised of what to make of the
coincidence of our group name boundarypoint
with the fact that there are nonmultipoint points on boundaries
that can also technically be called boundary points
in fact every point on a boundary is a boundary point
& not just some of them
as you may recall from our oktx discussion
so right you are in counting every point a boundary point
but as i thought our charter makes clear
the existence of such other boundary points than the multipoints
we expressly intend is just a happenchance of language
& not even a completely coincident one by our exacting
standards
& is thus without any especial significance for us here
& as to your following afterthought
you are of course right again
as ibrg is no longer available for this function
if indeed it ever was
but to answer your subsequent question
ibrg & ibru are the 2 boundary discussion groups i meant
& a few specific answers follow here too
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Flynn, Kevin"
<flynnk@r...> wrote:
> I guess a reason that might not be a solution is that, as
someone else
> mentioned here, IBRG is more highly specialized than the
types of border
> discussions some of us have wanted to have. Here is the intro
from
> intborder's home page:
>
> "The International Border Research Group (IBRG) is studying
international
> borders and publishing the results. Membership is available
for researchers,
> writers and other professionals especially interested in border
expeditions.
> Every year the IBRG is arranging an international border
expedition. From
> 9th - 21st July 2003 The Great Baltic Border Expedition (GBBE)
was taking
> place."
>
> What if we are not "especially interested" in making actual
expeditions to
> international borders?
ok i agree thats kaput now
but even so
do you then assume bp ought to go out of its way to specially
accommodate your interest
that doesnt follow either
i dont understand what you expect of us & why
you are more than welcome here of course
but if you are off point you are off point
& therefore perhaps subject to more than the usual degree of
potential improvement
for as a group
willfully disregardful readings to the contrary notwithstanding
we not only have a true topic
multipoints
but a true function also
multipointing
Or have desire to discuss non-international borders
> (states, provinces, others?) of the type more appropriate to
boundary
> points?
thats ok
enjoy them virtually with us
thats one big reason why we are here
Some of us cannot make such expeditions for many reasonable
> circumstances.