|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> There's something to be said for the fact that they generally never spoke
> and still managed to be entertaining. Speech is overrated. :-)
True, but it would have been a lot harder to start this thread using a
Wile E. Coyote & Roadrunner reference.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 16:15:14 -0700, Kevin Wampler wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> There's something to be said for the fact that they generally never
>> spoke and still managed to be entertaining. Speech is overrated. :-)
>
> True, but it would have been a lot harder to start this thread using a
> Wile E. Coyote & Roadrunner reference.
Definitely. Would've needed to be something like:
--------------------
| |
| YIKES! |
| |
--------------------
||
||
||
||
:-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
>> True, but it would have been a lot harder to start this thread using a
>> Wile E. Coyote & Roadrunner reference.
>
> Definitely. Would've needed to be something like:
>
> --------------------
> | |
> | YIKES! |
> | |
> --------------------
> ||
> ||
> ||
> ||
>
This completely cracked me up. My attempts at creating an ascii-art
Wile E. Coyote in response were unfortunately similarly hilarious.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:32:25 -0700, Kevin Wampler wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> True, but it would have been a lot harder to start this thread using a
>>> Wile E. Coyote & Roadrunner reference.
>>
>> Definitely. Would've needed to be something like:
>>
>> --------------------
>> | |
>> | YIKES! |
>> | |
>> --------------------
>> ||
>> ||
>> ||
>> ||
>>
>>
> This completely cracked me up. My attempts at creating an ascii-art
> Wile E. Coyote in response were unfortunately similarly hilarious.
And yet you failed to share them with us? ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27 Mar 2009 10:59:35 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 07:44:18 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 26 Mar 2009 13:52:26 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>>Though I also was fond of Wile E. Coyote & the roadrunner, too.
>>
>> I liked those two too.
>
>There's something to be said for the fact that they generally never spoke
>and still managed to be entertaining.
True and clever ASCII art below.
>Speech is overrated. :-)
>
Mumble, mumble, mumble :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 28 Mar 2009 18:16:18 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 27 Mar 2009 10:59:35 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 07:44:18 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 26 Mar 2009 13:52:26 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Though I also was fond of Wile E. Coyote & the roadrunner, too.
>>>
>>> I liked those two too.
>>
>>There's something to be said for the fact that they generally never
>>spoke and still managed to be entertaining.
>
> True and clever ASCII art below.
Good one....I like it.
>>Speech is overrated. :-)
>>
>>
> Mumble, mumble, mumble :)
Huh? ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 29 Mar 2009 01:43:14 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>>Speech is overrated. :-)
>>>
>>>
>> Mumble, mumble, mumble :)
>
>Huh? ;-)
Uh! :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 12:08:35 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 29 Mar 2009 01:43:14 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>
>>>>Speech is overrated. :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Mumble, mumble, mumble :)
>>
>>Huh? ;-)
>
> Uh! :)
Ah. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 29 Mar 2009 14:52:27 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 12:08:35 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 29 Mar 2009 01:43:14 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>Speech is overrated. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Mumble, mumble, mumble :)
>>>
>>>Huh? ;-)
>>
>> Uh! :)
>
>Ah. ;-)
>
Hmm ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 23:38:01 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>>>> Mumble, mumble, mumble :)
>>>>
>>>>Huh? ;-)
>>>
>>> Uh! :)
>>
>>Ah. ;-)
>>
>>
> Hmm ;)
MMM? ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |