[ First Message Last
| Table of Contents
| <- Digest ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ Message 1 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: Brian Lewis <brian@limb.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 10:55:22 +0000
Subject: Re: HA80 s36
In message <bulk.19830.19990128131227@Land-Rover.Team.Net>, Bod
>Generally though it will be accompanied by a map which is drawn up for
>the council's own internal use - it should not be treated as
>authoritative in the same way as the Definitive Map is.
Hi All
North Yorkshire CC charge you 10 Pounds to look at the Highway Maps then
tell you that they are not accurate.
Does anyone know of any other Council that charge?
Brian
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 2 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: "Dave Tilbury" <Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 20:10:38 -0000
Subject: Re: Sorted
Why is that dear Bod? Have you been having the same problems?
;-)
Dave Tilbury
Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
http://www.hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 3 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 07:26:17 EST
Subject: Re: HA80 s36
In a message dated 29 : 01 : 99 11:01 GMT Standard Time,
brian@limb.demon.co.uk writes:
<< Does anyone know of any other Council that charge? >>
A good question.
HA80 says they must have a List of Streets, and it must be available at all
reasonable hours, free. They also need to keep copies at District offices.
But, some councils cannot meet this requirement. Which ones? (I know about
Shropshire)
There is no requirement to have, or to show, a map of streets. So, it is not
illegal, (however silly it might be) to charge the public to know where they
can drive. Except, of course, that if the map is inaccurate, it is not clear
if you are getting a bargain, and in any case, just because its on a map,
sonny, doesn't mean much status-wise. It says here.
Can anyone with info from their own are please let us all know? It might make
a useful campaign to get a better system, but we cannot do that without
examples of failures from several counties.
Dunnit Makyer Wannner Spit?
Cheers, tim
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 4 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:29:44 -0500
Subject: Re: HA80 s36
> << Does anyone know of any other Council that charge? >>
> A good question.
Some questions you might consider:-
Do they allow a copy to be taken?
Do they allow copies of the LoS to me made.
Can you photograph the map
When you see the map, mark up your map, with a witness, double check it,
then sell the marked up info (not the map) to others for £ 9-99 or less, to
club funds.
Can you commence legal proceeding on ANY road that is on the map (say s56)
on any discrepancy between the LoS and the map, and then ask for a full
copy of the whole map for legal proceedings "The disclosure" stage? (Seek
advice from a tame solicitor)
Do they charge the BDS or RA the same
What do other groups think about it
What are the RoW forum doing about it
Is there any RoW that terminates on a road not shown as yellow on OS, if so
RoW should be able to supply details to make sense of the network
Have you complained to the District auditors AND the audit commission yet?
Have you complained to the HoD, Chief Exec, Monitoring officer, AND the
Ombudsman yet
If not have you told them that you will if they don't play ball.
Do they have a few comments you could quote to BBT, most of them hate being
featured in there.
Are there not contacts in the office that would like to see the public
information ion the public domain
Haven't they heard of the freedom of information Act effective about 1975 I
think?
Are all your green lanes in perfect repair? No? Well without a map, you
might find some difficulty planning an alternative route without the
benefit of the map, a LoS is not much use. So go in with 20 or more s56
filled in, slap them down on the counter and say, without copy of map to
plan my alternative route, fix these!
You may have to fight indifference with ingenuity.
Have you asked in the records office for the earlier copies, and the
handover maps? The HA can't muck you about getting info from there. It is
also highly likely that less tippex was used on those maps. You never know
what they do these days with maps they admit might not be accurate. I hear
they buy it by the tanker these days. I saw a cartoon in LARA news, so it
must be true. ;-)
I asked for a copy of the TRO for Roman Road Hereford, they said don't know
if we can, then they said it will be £ 4 for the 4 A4 copies. A "direct,
and frank" letter to the Chief Exec worked wonders, a free gratis copy by
return!!!!!!!!
You have to be very polite and VERY firm with these people. You pay them
to serve you, you don't want to let them think they can walk all over you,
do you?
Chris
ps sorry if this sounds slightly abrupt, but I've been reading through a
load of bushnonsense, and if you don't do the sensible thing, these
imbeciles can get you down :-)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 5 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: "Dave Tilbury" <Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 12:57:20 -0000
Subject: Re: HA80 s36
<<Does anyone know of any other Council that charge?
Tiz free in Hampshire.
Dave Tilbury
Dave@hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
http://www.hants-lanes.demon.co.uk
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 6 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: alan kind <alan@highwayman.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 12:52:21 +0000
Subject: Re: HA80 s36
In message <bulk.4200.19990129030039@Land-Rover.Team.Net>, Brian Lewis
<brian@limb.demon.co.uk> writes
>In message <bulk.19830.19990128131227@Land-Rover.Team.Net>, Bod
><bod@bod1.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>>Generally though it will be accompanied by a map which is drawn up for
>>the council's own internal use - it should not be treated as
>>authoritative in the same way as the Definitive Map is.
>Hi All
[ truncated by list-digester (was 13 lines)]
>tell you that they are not accurate.
>Does anyone know of any other Council that charge?
I'd ask straight out by what authority do they charge this?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 7 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: Susan Jeggo <derek.sue@virgin.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 16:48:40 +0000
Subject: Maps in District Councils
Tim said
"HA80 says they must have a List of Streets, and it must be available at
all
reasonable hours, free. They also need to keep copies at District
offices.
But, some councils cannot meet this requirement. Which ones? (I know
about
Shropshire)"
Don't know about the LoS, but I became suspicious that a District in
Cambs did not have or was not using a Def Map, when determining planning
apps affecting RoW. So, one sunny May morning last year I called in
asked to see the Definitive Map.
You mean the local plan, they said.
No, the Definitive Map, I said.
Oh, whats that, they said.
The map of recorded public rights of way in your District, I
said.
Oh.
Is the District Solicitor in? I asked.
No, but we'll try the local plan officer for you, they offered.
The local plan officer told them to tell me to go to County.
No, I want to check the Def map against some planning apps, I
said.
Anyway, to cut a long story short, 40 mins and 6 Officers later,
appeared 2 bundles of Def Statment. But No Map.
I sighed, and went home to consult the blue bible.
Then I wrote (nicely) to the District Chief Exec, drawing his attention
to "WCA81 S57(5), and Circ 2/93 Doe". He acknowledged receipt and passed
my query to Development Control.
Some weeks passed - no reply. I copied my letter and the C Ex reply and
sent to the Chair of the Planning Committee, asking for clarification.
Developemtn Control replied to say they did not believe they have to
have a D Map, and use constraint maps.
Discussed with other BHS collegeaus.
By now its November.
Wrote to County legal dept (and sent copies of all letters).
County Legal dept have sent it all to the Def Map Officer.
Bless her, she has just written to say that she will be visiting the
District soon to sort it out.
I dare not even ask about backlog of legal events, let alone the LoS
Sue
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 8 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: howard.neal@which.net
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 22:14:12 +0000
Subject: Re: Chris' Neighbours
> Compared with the same bullet into a full petrol tank (next sequence shown)
> I think I'd rather sit on hydrogen
It must be tough up North!
The worst we have to put up with down here in Berks is an (in)voluntary
restraint or a TRO. They don't shoot at us!
Regards,
Howard
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 9 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: howard.neal@which.net
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 17:54:09 +0000
Subject: West Berks Vindictive TRO (Somme)
GLASS & RoW
This is what happens when you complain about poor maintenance or
obstructions in West Berks. Note the use of the Berks favourite reason
- public safety. The damage to this route has been done entirely by
large agricultural vehicles. The TRO bans ALL vehicles so I suppose
this means agricultural as well. I will be watching to see if this ban
is observed by ALL vehicles.
Regards,
Howard
ROAD TRAFFIC REGULATION ACT 1984 WEST BERKSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL
(ROAD USED AS A PUBLIC PATH (RUPP) NO 13 & 18 CHIEVELEY)
(TEMPORARY PROHIBITION OF DRIVING) ORDER 1999
West Berkshire District Council INTENDS, not less than seven days from
the date of this notice to make an order in accordance with Section
14(1) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 the effect of which wi1l
be to prohibit any vehicle from proceeding in any direction along:
RUPP 13 (Oareborough Lane (Part)) From it junction with Chieveley
Footpath 40 to its junction with Chieveley RUPP18(SU493751 to 500747)
RUPP 18 (Old Street 9(Part))/Sandy Lane From its southern end at
Bradley Court Cottages to its northern junction with the old A34 at
Beedon.(SU494746 to 484761)
The alternative route for all vehicles affected by the order is via:
For RUPP 13 Oareborough Lane, Old Street, Priors Court Road and the old
A34 or by this route reversed.
For RUPP 18 Old Street, Priors Court Road and the old A34 or by this
route reversed.
The purpose of this Order is to ensure the safety of users on these
RUPPs due to surface damage.
The proposed Order will come into operation on 15 February1999. Its
maximum duration will be six months.
Dated. 28 January1999
D D CORRY
Head of Legal and Administrative services
West Berkshire Council
Council Offices, Market Street, NEWBURY
Berkshire, RGI4 5LD
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 10 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
[spamkill: [^d][^2][0-9][0-9][0-9]*\.com[^a-z] input: %s] Received: from
dub-img-11.compuserve.com (dub-img-11.compuserve.com [149.174.206.141])
[spamkill: [^d][^2][0-9][0-9][0-9]*\.com[^a-z] input: %s] by
dub-img-11.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.17) id OAA09016
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 11 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: Susan Jeggo <derek.sue@virgin.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 19:04:34 +0000
Subject: Berks TRO
his is what happens when you complain about poor maintenance or
obstructions in West Berks. Note the use of the Berks favourite reason
- public safety. The damage to this route has been done entirely by
large agricultural vehicles. The TRO bans ALL vehicles so I suppose
this means agricultural as well. I will be watching to see if this ban
is observed by ALL vehicles.
Presumably there is a designated parking area where carriage drivers can
unhitch their trap/carriage, then ride the horse up and down the RUPP
and pick up the carriage on the return journey?
Sorry - been one of those days!
Sue
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 12 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: Susan Jeggo <derek.sue@virgin.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 19:11:13 +0000
Subject: Mud, Mud, Glorius Mud!!
Just to add to the debate about vehicular damage to PRoW, I found this
in a walking newsgroup.
"Hello all,
I accept rights of way are privately owned but can the owner of a
footpath / bridle way drive vehicles down them on what seems to be a
regular basis? The reason I ask is that I was out walking around my
local area (Essex/Suffolk border) and the bridleways were completely
churned up. My gaiters did a great job of keeping my lower legs clean
whilst the area above my knees were absolutely caked in mud - why bother
wearing them?
Many thanks for any info.
Mark"
Sue
Cambridge
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 13 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: Chris Marsden <Byway@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 17:08:35 -0500
Subject: West Berks Vindictive TRO (Somme)
The question must be asked,
Did you make enough of a nuisance of yourself last time?
Is it justified? If not stop them. If it is sort out the hooligans.
Are all th signs still securely in place on any unjustified TROs? when are
they reviewing them?
Have they signed to accept MBB, what are there policies, have they
consulted as 6.2, where do they get the evidence to show there is a risk to
safety, What exactly is that evidence?
Are the Auditors interested in the wasted public money on any unnecesary
TRO?
What is the CoCo view on jacking you out of the countryside, first on one
lane then another? You will soon have to go down to Hampshire. Have you
asked Mr Tilbury if you may, when you have no lanes left? ;-)
Have they tried alternative measure, what when how did they fail. How many
accidents have ther been, what do the Police investigations show as the
cause of them?
Issue a s56 for the agri damage regardless of the TRO.
[spamkill: [Mm]erchant input: %s] Does any councillor or gloom merchant
live along side the lanes? (Perhaps
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 14 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: "hawker" <hawker@poverty.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 20:26:52 -0000
Subject: Re: HA80 s36
Brian writes
>>North Yorkshire CC charge you 10 Pounds to look at the Highway Maps then
tell you that they are not accurate.<<
What do you mean by Highway Maps. Are there any such things in the legal
sense, or are the items you are being shown, merely administrative records
which they choose to create of their own volition to help them carry out
their function? If it is the latter, I think you are looking at something
which has no status at law, and that you are being ripped off. They are, I
think, allowed to rip you off under Maggies idea of Law from the 80s, if you
are mug enough to go along with their game!
What you should be asking to see, for free, are the records of DM&S or List
Of Streets(which does not necessarily mean/include maps, so far as I am
aware). There is a difference!
Susan later writes
>>By now its November.
Wrote to County legal dept (and sent copies of all letters).
County Legal dept have sent it all to the Def Map Officer.
Bless her, she has just written to say that she will be visiting the
District soon to sort it out.
I dare not even ask about backlog of legal events, let alone the LoS<<
This is just one of the many ways in which all rights of way are being
steadily lost from the records. As a former local govt officer of over 30
years service, I can vouch for the fact that stuff gets lost, if not on
purpose then at least on a regular basis, because of changes at national and
local level in the regime at large. I also know firsthand where info which
has re-emerged after many years, has been too embarrassing to contemplate,
because the council(maybe even central govt.) has taken a different approach
to such items in the meantime. The result has been to generally cover it
back up again, as though it had never been rediscovered, just like the
dog/cat dirt you uncover with your bare hands in the flower beds in Spring!
This is aided and abetted by an understanding public who are only too
willing to see the strains the staff are working under, and willing to adopt
a lenient approach when perhaps they may do themselves and others more
service by being more forthright in their demands for a proper service. The
backlog will be beyond redemption, unless you are there, on their backs all
the time and making a nuisance of yourself.
Richard Hawker
-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 15 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: "Chris Marsden" <byway@northhereford.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 23:35:24 -0000
Subject: Re: HA80 s36
.....beyond redemption, unless you are there, on their backs all
the time and making a nuisance of yourself.
Surely some mistook? nuisance? Never. Help them to see their job from a
different perspective!
That's all.
;-)
cj
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 16 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: "Rebecca Dorterov" <Rebecca@northhereford.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 23:18:53 -0000
Subject: TRO signs
Some jolly old wag once suggested changing the red to a black border round
the white TRO sign on an incorrectly applied / consulted / unnecessary TRO.
Would that then be a valid sign?
Becky.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 17 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 18:34:28 EST
Subject: Re:
In a message dated 29 : 01 : 99 07:01 GMT Standard Time, owner-
row@playground.sun.com writes:
<< Do the OS have any map discount schemes? what discount do retailers get?
and is there a minimum quantity, could various clubs have a buying group to
get the new maps (LR & Explorer) at a discount? >>
The TRF ran such a scheme when I was Nat RoW officer (10 yrs ago +/-)
The take up was so small that it was not possible to make up a worthwhile
quantity and so qualify for a discount. The TRF then had 1400 members, say, so
do not regard this as a wonderful investment opportunity. However, if an OS
seller (in Kington, say?) was to offer us a discount, he might be able to
increase his sales. But postage is always a problem. Perhaps 10% off and post
free in UK?
People buy maps on the day they need them, mostly.
Cheers, tim
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 18 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 18:34:14 EST
Subject: Re: Maps in District Councils
In a message dated 29 : 01 : 99 04:50 GMT Standard Time, derek.sue@virgin.net
writes:
<< Then I wrote (nicely) to the District Chief Exec >>
When I got this far in your note I thought 'Aha, that's where we have been
going wrong, nicely, must remember that'. But it seems you get the run around,
too.
Does it concern you that this incompetence and bungling is being done with
your money, as well as your rights?
Cheers, tim
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 19 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 18:34:29 EST
Subject: Re: Berks TRO
In a message dated 29 : 01 : 99 07:04 GMT Standard Time, derek.sue@virgin.net
writes:
<< Presumably there is a designated parking area where carriage drivers can
unhitch their trap/carriage, then ride the horse up and down the RUPP
and pick up the carriage on the return journey?
Sorry - been one of those days! >>
Do you mean they actually come apart, like artics? Well I never. Fancy that.
It has indeed been one of those days, but how did you know?
Cheers, tim
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 20 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: TimLARA@aol.com
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 18:34:26 EST
Subject: Re: West Berks Vindictive TRO (Somme) Glass & RoW
In a message dated 29 : 01 : 99 06:04 GMT Standard Time, howard.neal@which.net
writes:
<< I will be watching to see if this ban
is observed by ALL vehicles. >>
Remember that bicycles and prams are vehicles too.
Who feels a s56 might be appropriate?
What about the extra traffic along Old Street - isn't that subject to Rhoda
Dendron Voluntary Raspberries?
Cheers, tim
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 21 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: "Peter BRADLEY" <pbrad@dial.pipex.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 00:18:18 -0000
Subject: Re: TRO signs
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 22 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: doghouse@cix.compulink.co.uk (Michael Dyer)
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 99 04:49 GMT0
Subject: Re: Mud, Mud, Glorius Mud!!
<<<I accept rights of way are privately owned but can the owner of a
footpath / bridle way drive vehicles down them on what seems to be a
regular basis? >>>
Yes.
:-) Mick Dyer (doghouse@cix)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 23 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: doghouse@cix.compulink.co.uk (Michael Dyer)
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 99 04:49 GMT0
Subject: Re: West Berks Vindictive TRO (Somme)
So much for LARA, co-operation, Babtie working for the rights of ALL
users, etc.
So does the existence of a TRO on a route precludes the application for
S56? if not, I think its time that we applied for TROs on every last foot
of damaged suurface in Babties area.
Suggestions for any alternative would be welcome...so long as they do not
include co-operation, consultation, impartiality, money-saving measures,
common-sense, etc.
:-) Mick Dyer (doghouse@cix)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 24 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: doghouse@cix.compulink.co.uk (Michael Dyer)
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 99 05:28 GMT0
Subject: Re: Tech stuff (was part of Berks TRO)
<<<Do you mean they actually come apart, like artics? Well I never. Fancy
that.>>>
Yes tim you have to find some way of temporarily removing the wooden bits
or you'd never get the Tractive Unit into the vets surgery when it needed
its shots.
:-) Mick Dyer (doghouse@cix)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 25 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
From: doghouse@cix.compulink.co.uk (Michael Dyer)
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 99 05:28 GMT0
Subject: Re: West Berks Vindictive TRO (Somme)
Chris, who seems to have a guest atm in the form of a Ukrainian
sign-painters serving-wench, says
<<<<Did you make enough of a nuisance of yourself last time?>>>
Obviously too much.
<<<<Is it justified?>>>
IMV no...they spit on the notion of LARA Vr then apply their own
half-assed version, they made it clear to me that they are not interested
in VolLab (thats another new acronym) and their pet newspaper seems to be
just a mouthpiece
<<<<. If it is sort out the hooligans.>>>>
Howard, Matt and I have all been there and there is _NO WAY_ that the
Somme was created by 4x4s. Just plain ol-fashioned lack of mx.
<<<<Are all th signs still securely in place on any unjustified TROs? when
arethey reviewing them?>>>>
will ask them for this info
<<<<What is the CoCo view on jacking you out of the countryside, first on
onelane then another? You will soon have to go down to Hampshire. Have you
asked Mr Tilbury if you may, when you have no lanes left? ;-)>>>
Why do you think I'll be buying DT his lunch on Monday next :-))))))))?
You see, Moriarty, its all part of a grander design......
<<<<<Issue a s56 for the agri damage regardless of the TRO.>>>>>>>
Ive asked if one can in another posting, confirm that I can or not?
[spamkill: [Mm]erchant input: %s] <<<<<Does any councillor or gloom
merchant live along side the lanes?>>>>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ <- Message 26 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
END OF * LIST DIGEST
Input: messages 25 lines 0 [forwarded 43 whitespace 0]
Output: lines 770 [content 638 forwarded 38 (cut 5) whitespace 0]
[ First Message
| Table of Contents
| <- Digest 990130 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]