 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 26 Nov 2008 15:38:42 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospam com> wrote:
>On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 20:00:52 +0000, Bill Pragnell wrote:
>
>> Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> Hehehehehehehehehe. ;-)
>>
>> You pair of geniuses, you. :)
>
>It's a tough job, but someone's gotta do it. ;-)
>
>Jim
I cannot believe the pair of you.
<Shakes head and walks away mumbling>
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill Pragnell wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Hehehehehehehehehe. ;-)
>
> You pair of geniuses, you. :)
You're too kind :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008 00:04:56 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 26 Nov 2008 15:38:42 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 20:00:52 +0000, Bill Pragnell wrote:
>>
>>> Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>> Hehehehehehehehehe. ;-)
>>>
>>> You pair of geniuses, you. :)
>>
>>It's a tough job, but someone's gotta do it. ;-)
>>
>>Jim
>
> I cannot believe the pair of you.
Well, I'd try to sell you a bridge.... ;-)
> <Shakes head and walks away mumbling>
LOL
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 1 Dec 2008 13:11:15 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>Well, I'd try to sell you a bridge.... ;-)
>
No you won't!
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:35:23 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 1 Dec 2008 13:11:15 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>
>>Well, I'd try to sell you a bridge.... ;-)
>>
> No you won't!
I said I'd *try*, not that I'd *succeed* at it. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 1 Dec 2008 18:34:13 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:35:23 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 1 Dec 2008 13:11:15 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Well, I'd try to sell you a bridge.... ;-)
>>>
>> No you won't!
>
>I said I'd *try*, not that I'd *succeed* at it. ;-)
>
You didn't bite then :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 12:34:41 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 1 Dec 2008 18:34:13 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:35:23 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 1 Dec 2008 13:11:15 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Well, I'd try to sell you a bridge.... ;-)
>>>>
>>> No you won't!
>>
>>I said I'd *try*, not that I'd *succeed* at it. ;-)
>>
>>
> You didn't bite then :)
You're not the first person to say that to me. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2 Dec 2008 13:09:54 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 12:34:41 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>> You didn't bite then :)
>
>You're not the first person to say that to me. ;-)
Hmm! You must be trustworthy ;)
I'm not going to go any further down that road :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 18:22:16 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 2 Dec 2008 13:09:54 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 12:34:41 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>>> You didn't bite then :)
>>
>>You're not the first person to say that to me. ;-)
>
> Hmm! You must be trustworthy ;)
LOL, just trying to see if you'd take the bait. :-)
> I'm not going to go any further down that road :)
Probably a wise decision.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2 Dec 2008 14:05:31 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> Hmm! You must be trustworthy ;)
>
>LOL, just trying to see if you'd take the bait. :-)
>
>> I'm not going to go any further down that road :)
>
>Probably a wise decision.
Sorry, I can't speak, my mouth is full.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 19:42:29 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 2 Dec 2008 14:05:31 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>> Hmm! You must be trustworthy ;)
>>
>>LOL, just trying to see if you'd take the bait. :-)
>>
>>> I'm not going to go any further down that road :)
>>
>>Probably a wise decision.
>
> Sorry, I can't speak, my mouth is full.
That doesn't seem to have stopped you from typing. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2 Dec 2008 15:01:37 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 19:42:29 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 2 Dec 2008 14:05:31 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>>> Hmm! You must be trustworthy ;)
>>>
>>>LOL, just trying to see if you'd take the bait. :-)
>>>
>>>> I'm not going to go any further down that road :)
>>>
>>>Probably a wise decision.
>>
>> Sorry, I can't speak, my mouth is full.
>
>That doesn't seem to have stopped you from typing. ;-)
>
I have a cold!
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 22:08:51 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 2 Dec 2008 15:01:37 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 19:42:29 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 2 Dec 2008 14:05:31 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Hmm! You must be trustworthy ;)
>>>>
>>>>LOL, just trying to see if you'd take the bait. :-)
>>>>
>>>>> I'm not going to go any further down that road :)
>>>>
>>>>Probably a wise decision.
>>>
>>> Sorry, I can't speak, my mouth is full.
>>
>>That doesn't seem to have stopped you from typing. ;-)
>>
> I have a cold!
But you didn't say "miss"! ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2 Dec 2008 18:17:02 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 22:08:51 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 2 Dec 2008 15:01:37 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 19:42:29 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2 Dec 2008 14:05:31 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Hmm! You must be trustworthy ;)
>>>>>
>>>>>LOL, just trying to see if you'd take the bait. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not going to go any further down that road :)
>>>>>
>>>>>Probably a wise decision.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, I can't speak, my mouth is full.
>>>
>>>That doesn't seem to have stopped you from typing. ;-)
>>>
>> I have a cold!
>
>But you didn't say "miss"! ;-)
>
OK then, I miss you ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 23:24:05 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>>>That doesn't seem to have stopped you from typing. ;-)
>>>>
>>> I have a cold!
>>
>>But you didn't say "miss"! ;-)
>>
> OK then, I miss you ;)
Awww, isn't that sweet? ;-)
(Now tell me, honestly, how could I *not* reply in that manner?)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3 Dec 2008 12:23:21 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 23:24:05 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>>>>>That doesn't seem to have stopped you from typing. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>> I have a cold!
>>>
>>>But you didn't say "miss"! ;-)
>>>
>> OK then, I miss you ;)
>
>Awww, isn't that sweet? ;-)
>
What ever turns you on, Jim ;)
>(Now tell me, honestly, how could I *not* reply in that manner?)
>
No need to be shy, just unburden yourself, in all confidence.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 20:02:08 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 3 Dec 2008 12:23:21 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 23:24:05 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>>>>>That doesn't seem to have stopped you from typing. ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>> I have a cold!
>>>>
>>>>But you didn't say "miss"! ;-)
>>>>
>>> OK then, I miss you ;)
>>
>>Awww, isn't that sweet? ;-)
>>
> What ever turns you on, Jim ;)
Well, the other way to respond would've been to ask how well adjusted the
scope is on that rifle.... ;-)
>>(Now tell me, honestly, how could I *not* reply in that manner?)
>>
> No need to be shy, just unburden yourself, in all confidence.
LOL
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3 Dec 2008 19:48:32 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>>Awww, isn't that sweet? ;-)
>>>
>> What ever turns you on, Jim ;)
>
>Well, the other way to respond would've been to ask how well adjusted the
>scope is on that rifle.... ;-)
Remind me again what part of the world you live in? LOL
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 11:53:45 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 3 Dec 2008 19:48:32 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>>>Awww, isn't that sweet? ;-)
>>>>
>>> What ever turns you on, Jim ;)
>>
>>Well, the other way to respond would've been to ask how well adjusted
>>the scope is on that rifle.... ;-)
>
> Remind me again what part of the world you live in? LOL
I don't think I need to. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5 Dec 2008 12:04:55 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 11:53:45 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 3 Dec 2008 19:48:32 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>>>>Awww, isn't that sweet? ;-)
>>>>>
>>>> What ever turns you on, Jim ;)
>>>
>>>Well, the other way to respond would've been to ask how well adjusted
>>>the scope is on that rifle.... ;-)
>>
>> Remind me again what part of the world you live in? LOL
>
>I don't think I need to. ;-)
It's OK, we have a special relationship ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 17:21:47 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>> Remind me again what part of the world you live in? LOL
>>
>>I don't think I need to. ;-)
>
> It's OK, we have a special relationship ;)
Apparently. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5 Dec 2008 15:18:38 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 17:21:47 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>>>> Remind me again what part of the world you live in? LOL
>>>
>>>I don't think I need to. ;-)
>>
>> It's OK, we have a special relationship ;)
>
>Apparently. ;-)
>
Who's going to have the last word?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 21:17:55 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 5 Dec 2008 15:18:38 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 17:21:47 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>>>> Remind me again what part of the world you live in? LOL
>>>>
>>>>I don't think I need to. ;-)
>>>
>>> It's OK, we have a special relationship ;)
>>
>>Apparently. ;-)
>>
>>
> Who's going to have the last word?
Well, you said "last word", so does that mean you had it?
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5 Dec 2008 17:31:42 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> Who's going to have the last word?
>
>Well, you said "last word", so does that mean you had it?
>
It does at the moment :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> On 5 Dec 2008 17:31:42 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>> Who's going to have the last word?
>> Well, you said "last word", so does that mean you had it?
>>
>
> It does at the moment :)
No it doesn't ;P
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 09:13:38 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
wrote:
>Stephen wrote:
>> On 5 Dec 2008 17:31:42 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>>> Who's going to have the last word?
>>> Well, you said "last word", so does that mean you had it?
>>>
>>
>> It does at the moment :)
>
>No it doesn't ;P
Yes, it does :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 09:13:38 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Stephen wrote:
>>> On 5 Dec 2008 17:31:42 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Who's going to have the last word?
>>>> Well, you said "last word", so does that mean you had it?
>>>>
>>> It does at the moment :)
>> No it doesn't ;P
>
> Yes, it does :)
Nuh uh ...
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 10:40:48 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
wrote:
>Stephen wrote:
>> On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 09:13:38 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Stephen wrote:
>>>> On 5 Dec 2008 17:31:42 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Who's going to have the last word?
>>>>> Well, you said "last word", so does that mean you had it?
>>>>>
>>>> It does at the moment :)
>>> No it doesn't ;P
>>
>> Yes, it does :)
>
>Nuh uh ...
Oh! Yes it does!
(The Panto season is upon us :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 10:40:48 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Stephen wrote:
>>> On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 09:13:38 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Stephen wrote:
>>>>> On 5 Dec 2008 17:31:42 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Who's going to have the last word?
>>>>>> Well, you said "last word", so does that mean you had it?
>>>>>>
>>>>> It does at the moment :)
>>>> No it doesn't ;P
>>> Yes, it does :)
>> Nuh uh ...
>
> Oh! Yes it does!
>
Does not!
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 23:29:56 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 5 Dec 2008 17:31:42 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>> Who's going to have the last word?
>>
>>Well, you said "last word", so does that mean you had it?
>>
>>
> It does at the moment :)
But which moment? You don't at this particular moment, I do. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 12:22:08 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
wrote:
>Stephen wrote:
>> On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 10:40:48 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Stephen wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 09:13:38 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Stephen wrote:
>>>>>> On 5 Dec 2008 17:31:42 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Who's going to have the last word?
>>>>>>> Well, you said "last word", so does that mean you had it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> It does at the moment :)
>>>>> No it doesn't ;P
>>>> Yes, it does :)
>>> Nuh uh ...
>>
>> Oh! Yes it does!
>>
>
>Does not!
Oh! No it doesn't!
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8 Dec 2008 13:53:50 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 23:29:56 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 5 Dec 2008 17:31:42 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>>> Who's going to have the last word?
>>>
>>>Well, you said "last word", so does that mean you had it?
>>>
>>>
>> It does at the moment :)
>
>But which moment? You don't at this particular moment, I do. :-)
>
The moment furthest from the fulcrum ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> Oh! No it doesn't!
Oh, this is arguments. Abuse is down the hall.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> On 8 Dec 2008 13:53:50 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 23:29:56 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 5 Dec 2008 17:31:42 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Who's going to have the last word?
>>>> Well, you said "last word", so does that mean you had it?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It does at the moment :)
>> But which moment? You don't at this particular moment, I do. :-)
>>
>
> The moment furthest from the fulcrum ;)
Keep it up guys, see if you can get Thunderbird's indentation to stretch
to the moon.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 11:28:11 -0800, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>Stephen wrote:
>> Oh! No it doesn't!
>
>Oh, this is arguments. Abuse is down the hall.
Oh! Not it's not ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> On 8 Dec 2008 13:53:50 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 23:29:56 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 5 Dec 2008 17:31:42 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Who's going to have the last word?
>>>> Well, you said "last word", so does that mean you had it?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It does at the moment :)
>> But which moment? You don't at this particular moment, I do. :-)
>>
>
> The moment furthest from the fulcrum ;)
My evil twin will have the last word.
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill Pragnell wrote:
> Stephen wrote:
>> On 8 Dec 2008 13:53:50 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 23:29:56 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5 Dec 2008 17:31:42 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Who's going to have the last word?
>>>>> Well, you said "last word", so does that mean you had it?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> It does at the moment :)
>>> But which moment? You don't at this particular moment, I do. :-)
>>>
>>
>> The moment furthest from the fulcrum ;)
>
> Keep it up guys, see if you can get Thunderbird's indentation to stretch
> to the moon.
sorry - I just thought that without our mascot around it was quiet and I
would try to hunt wabbits.
I didn't realize that they were on the moon.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 19:18:58 +0000, Bill Pragnell <bil### [at] hotmailcom>
wrote:
>Keep it up guys, see if you can get Thunderbird's indentation to stretch
>to the moon.
Oh! No we won't!
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 14:01:32 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
wrote:
>My evil twin will have the last word.
Oh! No he won't!
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 14:01:32 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> My evil twin will have the last word.
>
> Oh! No he won't!
Yes he will. Just watch. :)
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 15:34:07 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
wrote:
>Yes he will. Just watch. :)
Do you do "Panto" in the states?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 19:06:29 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>But which moment? You don't at this particular moment, I do. :-)
>>
>>
> The moment furthest from the fulcrum ;)
Was that supposed to not make sense?
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 14:01:32 -0600, Mike Raiford wrote:
> Stephen wrote:
>> On 8 Dec 2008 13:53:50 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 23:29:56 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5 Dec 2008 17:31:42 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Who's going to have the last word?
>>>>> Well, you said "last word", so does that mean you had it?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> It does at the moment :)
>>> But which moment? You don't at this particular moment, I do. :-)
>>>
>>>
>> The moment furthest from the fulcrum ;)
>
> My evil twin will have the last word.
No, I will. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 21:49:07 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 15:34:07 -0600, Mike Raiford
> <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Yes he will. Just watch. :)
>
> Do you do "Panto" in the states?
We don't, but some of us know what it is. :-)
I particularly like last years' with Brian Blessed and David Tennant.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8 Dec 2008 18:11:58 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 19:06:29 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>>>But which moment? You don't at this particular moment, I do. :-)
>>>
>>>
>> The moment furthest from the fulcrum ;)
>
>Was that supposed to not make sense?
>
Time for bed as it makes perfect sense to this tired mechanic ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8 Dec 2008 18:15:10 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 21:49:07 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 15:34:07 -0600, Mike Raiford
>> <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Yes he will. Just watch. :)
>>
>> Do you do "Panto" in the states?
>
>We don't, but some of us know what it is. :-)
>
Ah!
>I particularly like last years' with Brian Blessed and David Tennant.
>
Whivh one were they in?
Brian Blessed is so OTT :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 23:16:56 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 8 Dec 2008 18:11:58 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 19:06:29 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>>>But which moment? You don't at this particular moment, I do. :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> The moment furthest from the fulcrum ;)
>>
>>Was that supposed to not make sense?
>>
>>
> Time for bed as it makes perfect sense to this tired mechanic ;)
Who still hasn't gotten in the last word. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 23:18:30 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 8 Dec 2008 18:15:10 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 21:49:07 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 15:34:07 -0600, Mike Raiford
>>> <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Yes he will. Just watch. :)
>>>
>>> Do you do "Panto" in the states?
>>
>>We don't, but some of us know what it is. :-)
>>
> Ah!
But then again, some of us are Americans who could pass for British if it
weren't for the American accents. ;-)
>>I particularly like last years' with Brian Blessed and David Tennant.
>>
>>
> Whivh one were they in?
Cinderella on Virgin Radio.
> Brian Blessed is so OTT :)
Well, *yeah*, one of my favourite reasons for watching the first
Blackadder series. Didn't really care for Edmund in that one, but King
Richard was a blast to watch.
"Whaaaat?"
You heard me. :-)
And of course in Blackadder's Christmas Carol. I'd love to see him in
something more serious, but at the same time, it'd be hard to picture him
as anyone other than King Richard. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8 Dec 2008 23:43:30 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 23:16:56 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 8 Dec 2008 18:11:58 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 19:06:29 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>>
>>>>>But which moment? You don't at this particular moment, I do. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> The moment furthest from the fulcrum ;)
>>>
>>>Was that supposed to not make sense?
>>>
>>>
>> Time for bed as it makes perfect sense to this tired mechanic ;)
>
>Who still hasn't gotten in the last word. ;-)
>
No?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8 Dec 2008 23:46:21 -0500, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>> Brian Blessed is so OTT :)
>
>Well, *yeah*, one of my favourite reasons for watching the first
>Blackadder series. Didn't really care for Edmund in that one, but King
>Richard was a blast to watch.
I remember from way back as PC "Fancy" Smith in Z cars. I never watched
Blackadder partly because I was working offshore and partly because I don't like
Rowan Atkinson. If you can find a copy of the BBC series "I, Claudius" he played
Caesar Augustus. Also he played Mr. Western in the TV series "The History of Tom
Jones, a Foundling" 1997.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
