On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 10:07:53 -0700, Kevin Wampler <wam### [at] uwashingtonedu>
wrote:

>Stephen wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 12:13:42 -0700, Kevin Wampler <wam### [at] uwashingtonedu>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> This conversation has been going on so long that Thunderbird has 
>>> actually wrapped the header position back around to zero.  I didn't even 
>>> know that was possible.
>> 
>> Is that a hint?
>
>Not at all! I'm quite amused, even if I didn't have the endurance to 
>actually keep reading the whole thread :)

I'll let you into a secret but don't tell Jim. Neither have I.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 17:37:50 +0000, Stephen wrote:

> On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 10:07:53 -0700, Kevin Wampler
> <wam### [at] uwashingtonedu> wrote:
> 
>>Stephen wrote:
>>> On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 12:13:42 -0700, Kevin Wampler
>>> <wam### [at] uwashingtonedu> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> This conversation has been going on so long that Thunderbird has
>>>> actually wrapped the header position back around to zero.  I didn't
>>>> even know that was possible.
>>> 
>>> Is that a hint?
>>
>>Not at all! I'm quite amused, even if I didn't have the endurance to
>>actually keep reading the whole thread :)
> 
> I'll let you into a secret but don't tell Jim. Neither have I.

LOL, that explains a lot. ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 26 Mar 2009 13:17:48 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:

>> I particularly disliked the Yosemite Sam episodes preferring Daffy Duck.
>
>Same here, for the most part.  Bugs, Daffy, and Elmer were the best 
>combination pretty consistently.

Yip!
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 10:16:08 -0700, Kevin Wampler <wam### [at] uwashingtonedu>
wrote:

>Jim Henderson wrote:
>> 
>> Well, they were colour here when I watched them, but it also has been a 
>> long time since I've seen any of the "classic" cartoons.  "What's Opera, 
>> Doc?" being one of my faves.
>
>I love that one too.  I'm also a fond of the "Rabbit of Seville" cartoon 
>along the same lines:
>
>http://video.yahoo.com/watch/42703/964406

Thanks
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 26 Mar 2009 13:38:24 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:

>On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 17:37:50 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 10:07:53 -0700, Kevin Wampler
>> <wam### [at] uwashingtonedu> wrote:
>> 
>>>Stephen wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 12:13:42 -0700, Kevin Wampler
>>>> <wam### [at] uwashingtonedu> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> This conversation has been going on so long that Thunderbird has
>>>>> actually wrapped the header position back around to zero.  I didn't
>>>>> even know that was possible.
>>>> 
>>>> Is that a hint?
>>>
>>>Not at all! I'm quite amused, even if I didn't have the endurance to
>>>actually keep reading the whole thread :)
>> 
>> I'll let you into a secret but don't tell Jim. Neither have I.
>
>LOL, that explains a lot. ;-)
>

You were listening?

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 17:48:20 +0000, Stephen wrote:

> On 26 Mar 2009 13:17:48 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> 
>>> I particularly disliked the Yosemite Sam episodes preferring Daffy
>>> Duck.
>>
>>Same here, for the most part.  Bugs, Daffy, and Elmer were the best
>>combination pretty consistently.
> 
> Yip!

Though I also was fond of Wile E. Coyote & the roadrunner, too.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 17:51:07 +0000, Stephen wrote:

> On 26 Mar 2009 13:38:24 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> 
>>On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 17:37:50 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 10:07:53 -0700, Kevin Wampler
>>> <wam### [at] uwashingtonedu> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>Stephen wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 12:13:42 -0700, Kevin Wampler
>>>>> <wam### [at] uwashingtonedu> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> This conversation has been going on so long that Thunderbird has
>>>>>> actually wrapped the header position back around to zero.  I didn't
>>>>>> even know that was possible.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Is that a hint?
>>>>
>>>>Not at all! I'm quite amused, even if I didn't have the endurance to
>>>>actually keep reading the whole thread :)
>>> 
>>> I'll let you into a secret but don't tell Jim. Neither have I.
>>
>>LOL, that explains a lot. ;-)
>>
>>
> You were listening?

Of course. ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> Though I also was fond of Wile E. Coyote & the roadrunner, too.

Indeed. It's good to have some highbrow humor about exploding roller-skates.

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 12:34:09 -0700, Kevin Wampler wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Though I also was fond of Wile E. Coyote & the roadrunner, too.
> 
> Indeed. It's good to have some highbrow humor about exploding
> roller-skates.

You betcha! ;-)

And my favourite, of course - which I can't remember what it was called 
now - is when the character runs out of ground and keeps running until 
such time as they realise that there's nothing under them.

It's going to bother me that I can't remember the term now.

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> And my favourite, of course - which I can't remember what it was called 
> now - is when the character runs out of ground and keeps running until 
> such time as they realise that there's nothing under them.
> 
> It's going to bother me that I can't remember the term now.


I'm pretty sure I never knew the term, but now it's going to bug me too.

Post a reply to this message