--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Jesper Nielsen"
<jesniel@i...> wrote:
> I would also rather stay with the group.
>
> I also think multipointing alone will not last long.
i disagree
but if you lose interest
i agree it wont last so long for you
> I remember sharing the GEEBE tripoints with you, and it took
months before anybody actually responded.
hahaha
i was too busy try pointing myself
tho please dont feel neglected
as there just arent so many responsive try pointers about yet
> I went on full 1864-1920 DEDK expedition few days ago,
including a few highest points of counties and also visited the
shortest and longest palindromic places in Denmark. Are my
photos and stories unwanted?
if you have been multipointing or having any other obvious fun
please dont ask
just post
more below
>
> Jesper
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Doug Murray
> To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 2:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] New Group?
>
>
>
> Personally, I'd hate to see the creation of a new site as it will
split all of us.
> Not only has BP been a great meeting place and source of
information -- the
> archive is a treasure.
>
> However, if the non-multipointing talk has turned into a real
issue we could:
>
> a) vote on the nature of the content on BP and conduct
ourselves within
> guidelines agreed to by all.
again fun is the only real issue as ever
& i disagree with this suggestion
as we already have guidelines agreed to by all
i suppose bill as list owner & sovereign host might change the
rules himself at any time
but your proposal of democracy
if it is not by unanimous consent
would just be a tyranny of the majority
& quite out of place under these circumstances imo
we have all already agreed to the topic by joining the list
if the majority want a new principle
they should just create it for themselves
& not endeavor to impose it on any minority
nor even on a single individual who does remain committed to
our original agreement
>
> b) follow the moderator's wishes and post as per the charter.
>
> c) form a new group, independent of this one, with more of a
border &
> geopolitical focus.
that might be fun & it might also enable you to focus on the kinds
of things you have been focussing on lately
without repeatedly being asked where is the fun in that
because i probably will continue to ask here if i still dont get it
since i actually feel i owe you that much as a fellow try pointer
but i would leave you to enjoy yourself unquestioned in a new
group not devoted to try pointing
for really i would have no interest in asking in that case
but i do & will remain committed here as long as i am here
thanx & cheers
>
> Or, we could continue as we had been with what I had thought
was
> a robust discussion group with (to me) a lot of information a
only a
> little bit of chaff.
>
> I will go with the group!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Doug
>
> On Friday, March 28, 2003, at 02:09 AM, Kevin Meynell wrote:
>
>
> Mike,
>
> >but fortunately there are the other lists & groups devoted to
border
> >discussion & research
>
> Which ones? I know about the University of Durham list, but I
haven't found
> any others so far (although maybe I haven't looked hard
enough).
>
> Should we consider establishing a group for geopolitical
discussion related
> to border, boundary and multipoint(ing)?
>
> Regards,
>
> Kevin Meynell
>
>
>
> <image.tiff>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.