Subject: Re: BYUARU<br/>
Date: Mar 04, 2004 @ 12:50<br/>
Author: m06079 (&quot;m06079&quot; &lt;barbaria_longa@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="13405.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Next&emsp;[<a href="topic13390.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="13406.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="13408.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-1172667956">--- In <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com">BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com</a>, &quot;Peter Smaardijk&quot; <br/>
&lt;smaardijk@y...&gt; wrote:<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; --- In <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com">BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com</a>, &quot;acroorca2002&quot; <br/>
 </span></blockquote>&lt;orc@o...&gt; wrote:<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; &gt; also message 9854 <br/>
&gt; &gt; for excellent pix <br/>
&gt; &gt; plus a link to background info on ruua in general <br/>
&gt; &gt; which effectively confirms what this map shows<br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
&gt; &gt; for it indicates that the former soviet administrative borders <br/>
 </span></blockquote>have <br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; &gt; neither been changed nor upgraded<br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
&gt; &gt; & thus this monument <br/>
&gt; &gt; unlike some other soviet ceremonial tripoint monuments <br/>
&gt; &gt; must be considered the actual tripoint marker <br/>
&gt; &gt; unless & until there are further developments &or clarification<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; I am still not convinced, since I&#39;ve read a decree issued by the <br/>
&gt; Byelorussian government on the talks to be held between BY, <br/>
 </span></blockquote>RU, and <br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; UA about the tripoint ( <br/>
 </span></blockquote><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://pravo2000.by.ru/baza10/d09206.htm">http://pravo2000.by.ru/baza10/d09206.htm</a> ). <br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; It states explicitely that a tripoint marker will be placed. How <br/>
&gt; then? On top of the monument?<br/>
<br/>
 </span></blockquote>looking forward to hearing anything further you may learn about <br/>
this placement <br/>
or eventual placement<br/>
but for now <br/>
my best guessed answers to your questions are essentially <br/>
unchanged from the part of message 13400 that was deleted<br/>
<br/>
which is to say<br/>
until contradicted by some more plausible idea or harder fact <br/>
the exact tripoint location <br/>
whether actually marked in detail yet or not<br/>
is most putatively in the pavement of the pedestal<br/>
centered among the 3 monumental uprights<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
also a comment i have been wanting to make<br/>
<br/>
& it is not directed toward you peter but offered in general<br/>
& only since it has come up in just this way<br/>
<br/>
could i suggest to everyone responding to earlier messages that <br/>
they leave the original text entire<br/>
on principle <br/>
& merely insert their responses or add them above or below it <br/>
<br/>
it is easy enough for readers to distinguish the old from the new <br/>
text & to know who is saying what<br/>
<br/>
but since our pursuit is so technical & our necessary data so <br/>
fugitive & our ability to restore lost data so limited <br/>
i dont see much gain in clipping <br/>
<br/>
especially if anything of any technical significance is involved<br/>
<br/>
which it usually is<br/>
<br/>
& is so frequently lost <br/>
<br/>
by well meaning people <br/>
<br/>
who simply want to focus better <br/>
<br/>
& assume uncluttering is the best way to do it<br/>
<br/>
which it normally is<br/>
<br/>
except here<br/>
<br/>
for here the fullest possible access to detail & context is far more <br/>
a plus than a minus</div>