 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 19:56:28 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> So, while Samantha nips out to enjoy a portion of winkles in cider and
> as the squirrel of time nibbles on the nuts of eternity, while the
> irritated bulldog of destiny tries to shake him off...
>
> It's Wabbit season!
Duck season! :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 13 Mar 2009 15:59:38 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospam com> wrote:
>On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 19:56:28 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> So, while Samantha nips out to enjoy a portion of winkles in cider and
>> as the squirrel of time nibbles on the nuts of eternity, while the
>> irritated bulldog of destiny tries to shake him off...
>>
>> It's Wabbit season!
>
>Duck season! :-)
>
>Jim
Wabbit season Jim but not as we know it.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 20:01:24 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>Duck season!
>>
>>Jim
>
> Wabbit season Jim but not as we know it.
It's the end of the world as we know it......
Duck season!
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 13 Mar 2009 16:03:44 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 20:01:24 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>>>Duck season!
>>>
>>>Jim
>>
>> Wabbit season Jim but not as we know it.
>
>It's the end of the world as we know it......
>
>Duck season!
>
Wa Wa Wa Wabbits!
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 20:16:23 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 13 Mar 2009 16:03:44 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 20:01:24 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>>>Duck season!
>>>>
>>>>Jim
>>>
>>> Wabbit season Jim but not as we know it.
>>
>>It's the end of the world as we know it......
>>
>>Duck season!
>>
>>
> Wa Wa Wa Wabbits!
Du du du du DUCKS! :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 13 Mar 2009 18:20:31 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>>> Wabbit season Jim but not as we know it.
>>>
>>>It's the end of the world as we know it......
>>>
>>>Duck season!
>>>
>>>
>> Wa Wa Wa Wabbits!
>
>Du du du du DUCKS! :-)
You win, it's Duck season. What would I know about it anyway?
I think killing things for fun is immoral even if they are only 2D :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 14 Mar 2009 09:08:05 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 13 Mar 2009 18:20:31 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>>>> Wabbit season Jim but not as we know it.
>>>>
>>>>It's the end of the world as we know it......
>>>>
>>>>Duck season!
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Wa Wa Wa Wabbits!
>>
>>Du du du du DUCKS! :-)
>
> You win, it's Duck season. What would I know about it anyway? I think
> killing things for fun is immoral even if they are only 2D :)
But it's Wabbit season! :-)
(And I don't disagree with you on your final comment)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 15 Mar 2009 13:15:22 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Sat, 14 Mar 2009 09:08:05 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 13 Mar 2009 18:20:31 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Wabbit season Jim but not as we know it.
>>>>>
>>>>>It's the end of the world as we know it......
>>>>>
>>>>>Duck season!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Wa Wa Wa Wabbits!
>>>
>>>Du du du du DUCKS! :-)
>>
>> You win, it's Duck season. What would I know about it anyway? I think
>> killing things for fun is immoral even if they are only 2D :)
>
>But it's Wabbit season! :-)
>
Ah! you were just bending your knees sharply :)
>(And I don't disagree with you on your final comment)
>
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007jzy5
Just for you :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 15 Mar 2009 17:28:18 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 15 Mar 2009 13:15:22 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 14 Mar 2009 09:08:05 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 13 Mar 2009 18:20:31 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> Wabbit season Jim but not as we know it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It's the end of the world as we know it......
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Duck season!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Wa Wa Wa Wabbits!
>>>>
>>>>Du du du du DUCKS! :-)
>>>
>>> You win, it's Duck season. What would I know about it anyway? I think
>>> killing things for fun is immoral even if they are only 2D :)
>>
>>But it's Wabbit season! :-)
>>
>>
> Ah! you were just bending your knees sharply :)
Well, I do occasionally have muscle spasms that cause that - seems that
my muscles have gotten used to exercise, and when I don't, they remind me.
>>(And I don't disagree with you on your final comment)
>>
>>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007jzy5
>
> Just for you :)
And every other reader of that page. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 15 Mar 2009 16:25:45 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007jzy5
>>
>> Just for you :)
>
>And every other reader of that page. :-)
Note the date. I'm lost for words. :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 21:17:39 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 15 Mar 2009 16:25:45 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007jzy5
>>>
>>> Just for you :)
>>
>>And every other reader of that page. :-)
>
> Note the date. I'm lost for words. :)
Lost for words? :-)
Did note the date - are they doing new ones?
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 16 Mar 2009 17:26:10 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 21:17:39 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 15 Mar 2009 16:25:45 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007jzy5
>>>>
>>>> Just for you :)
>>>
>>>And every other reader of that page. :-)
>>
>> Note the date. I'm lost for words. :)
>
>Lost for words? :-)
>
>Did note the date - are they doing new ones?
>
No, no, no. Note today's date because I'm lost for words and it doesn't happen
very often.
I don't know, they did series in 2002, 2006 and 2007.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamish_and_Dougal
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 22:24:36 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 16 Mar 2009 17:26:10 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 21:17:39 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 15 Mar 2009 16:25:45 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007jzy5
>>>>>
>>>>> Just for you :)
>>>>
>>>>And every other reader of that page. :-)
>>>
>>> Note the date. I'm lost for words. :)
>>
>>Lost for words? :-)
>>
>>Did note the date - are they doing new ones?
>>
>>
> No, no, no. Note today's date because I'm lost for words and it doesn't
> happen very often.
Ah, well, that at least in my experience is certainly true.
> I don't know, they did series in 2002, 2006 and 2007.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamish_and_Dougal
Yeah, that's what I knew about. But I haven't heard any of those series
either so even if it was a repeat, it's still new to us. :-)
Marble Arch.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 16 Mar 2009 18:37:34 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>Yeah, that's what I knew about. But I haven't heard any of those series
>either so even if it was a repeat, it's still new to us. :-)
>
I've only heard a couple, myself
>Marble Arch.
Oh! No you don't!
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 23:00:03 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 16 Mar 2009 18:37:34 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>Yeah, that's what I knew about. But I haven't heard any of those series
>>either so even if it was a repeat, it's still new to us. :-)
>>
>>
> I've only heard a couple, myself
Time to start searching, methinks. :-)
>>Marble Arch.
>
> Oh! No you don't!
I think rule 47(a) says that the winner is permitted to start the next
round - and I'm already in hoc to you for a bought round, so I figured
let's give it another go and see if I can earn that bought round back. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 16 Mar 2009 22:11:11 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 23:00:03 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 16 Mar 2009 18:37:34 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>>Yeah, that's what I knew about. But I haven't heard any of those series
>>>either so even if it was a repeat, it's still new to us. :-)
>>>
>>>
>> I've only heard a couple, myself
>
>Time to start searching, methinks. :-)
>
A starting point, maybe
http://tinyurl.com/d75bx6
>>>Marble Arch.
>>
>> Oh! No you don't!
>
>I think rule 47(a) says that the winner is permitted to start the next
>round - and I'm already in hoc to you for a bought round, so I figured
>let's give it another go and see if I can earn that bought round back. :-)
>
I think that the teams are too small and we need an adjudicator.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 08:49:09 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>Time to start searching, methinks. :-)
>>
> A starting point, maybe
>
> http://tinyurl.com/d75bx6
:-)
>>>>Marble Arch.
>>>
>>> Oh! No you don't!
>>
>>I think rule 47(a) says that the winner is permitted to start the next
>>round - and I'm already in hoc to you for a bought round, so I figured
>>let's give it another go and see if I can earn that bought round back.
>>:-)
>>
> I think that the teams are too small and we need an adjudicator.
Well, the teams aren't too small, because we had 2+ months of a game with
teams the way we are now....But I'll call in an adjudicator, one
moment. :-)
OK, adjudication is in......
I am permitted to start this round, but my next move has to be to
Bayswater.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 17 Mar 2009 15:42:21 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>Well, the teams aren't too small, because we had 2+ months of a game with
>teams the way we are now....But I'll call in an adjudicator, one
>moment. :-)
>
>OK, adjudication is in......
>
>I am permitted to start this round, but my next move has to be to
>Bayswater.
You can't fool me, your lips moved. We need an independent adjudicator.
If you are at Bayswater then I will meet you in the Redan at the top of
Queensway.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 08:23:56 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 17 Mar 2009 15:42:21 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>Well, the teams aren't too small, because we had 2+ months of a game
>>with teams the way we are now....But I'll call in an adjudicator, one
>>moment. :-)
>>
>>OK, adjudication is in......
>>
>>I am permitted to start this round, but my next move has to be to
>>Bayswater.
>
> You can't fool me, your lips moved. We need an independent adjudicator.
My lips couldn't have moved, I had an independent adjudicator. Of course
it was my wife Amy, but she's independent. :-)
> If you are at Bayswater then I will meet you in the Redan at the top of
> Queensway.
Hmmm.
Well, I'll go for Elephant & Castle, then, keeping with the chess theme.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 18 Mar 2009 10:16:46 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 08:23:56 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 17 Mar 2009 15:42:21 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>>Well, the teams aren't too small, because we had 2+ months of a game
>>>with teams the way we are now....But I'll call in an adjudicator, one
>>>moment. :-)
>>>
>>>OK, adjudication is in......
>>>
>>>I am permitted to start this round, but my next move has to be to
>>>Bayswater.
>>
>> You can't fool me, your lips moved. We need an independent adjudicator.
>
>My lips couldn't have moved, I had an independent adjudicator. Of course
>it was my wife Amy, but she's independent. :-)
>
Hardly unbiased, I think.
>> If you are at Bayswater then I will meet you in the Redan at the top of
>> Queensway.
>
>Hmmm.
>
>Well, I'll go for Elephant & Castle, then, keeping with the chess theme.
>
I'm still not playing, you'll catch me at World's End before I start another
game with out backup ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 15:37:58 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>My lips couldn't have moved, I had an independent adjudicator. Of
>>course it was my wife Amy, but she's independent. :-)
>>
> Hardly unbiased, I think.
Well, oddly enough, she made the same observation before ruling on the
issue - so I think she's probably done so in a completely fair way.
>>> If you are at Bayswater then I will meet you in the Redan at the top
>>> of Queensway.
>>
>>Hmmm.
>>
>>Well, I'll go for Elephant & Castle, then, keeping with the chess theme.
>>
> I'm still not playing, you'll catch me at World's End before I start
> another game with out backup ;)
Well, if that's the case, then I have no choice but to go to Paddington.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 18 Mar 2009 11:42:08 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 15:37:58 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>>>My lips couldn't have moved, I had an independent adjudicator. Of
>>>course it was my wife Amy, but she's independent. :-)
>>>
>> Hardly unbiased, I think.
>
>Well, oddly enough, she made the same observation before ruling on the
>issue - so I think she's probably done so in a completely fair way.
>
Well I've gone to an independent adjudicator and the opinion is that it is "mugs
away".
>>>> If you are at Bayswater then I will meet you in the Redan at the top
>>>> of Queensway.
>>>
>>>Hmmm.
>>>
>>>Well, I'll go for Elephant & Castle, then, keeping with the chess theme.
>>>
>> I'm still not playing, you'll catch me at World's End before I start
>> another game with out backup ;)
>
>Well, if that's the case, then I have no choice but to go to Paddington.
>
Paddington is out of bounds due to it being up to me to start and I'm pondering
the rules to play by.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:07:17 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> Well I've gone to an independent adjudicator and the opinion is that it
> is "mugs away".
Well, if you lose this one you get to start then. Deal. :-)
>>> I'm still not playing, you'll catch me at World's End before I start
>>> another game with out backup ;)
>>
>>Well, if that's the case, then I have no choice but to go to Paddington.
>>
> Paddington is out of bounds due to it being up to me to start and I'm
> pondering the rules to play by.
No, you get to start the next game. :-)
Since you didn't make a move, you miss your turn and I am just going to
sit on this train and ride it to Bayswater.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 19 Mar 2009 16:27:02 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:07:17 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> Well I've gone to an independent adjudicator and the opinion is that it
>> is "mugs away".
>
>Well, if you lose this one you get to start then. Deal. :-)
>
>>>> I'm still not playing, you'll catch me at World's End before I start
>>>> another game with out backup ;)
>>>
>>>Well, if that's the case, then I have no choice but to go to Paddington.
>>>
>> Paddington is out of bounds due to it being up to me to start and I'm
>> pondering the rules to play by.
>
>No, you get to start the next game. :-)
>
>Since you didn't make a move, you miss your turn and I am just going to
>sit on this train and ride it to Bayswater.
>
As we're using the simplified international variation for overseas visitors. I
remove a qbit and find myself transported to Mornington Crescent on the number
27 (Not a bendy bus so I don't fall foul of the Johnson Trap).
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 09:00:22 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> As we're using the simplified international variation for overseas
> visitors. I remove a qbit and find myself transported to Mornington
> Crescent on the number 27 (Not a bendy bus so I don't fall foul of the
> Johnson Trap).
So if not a bendy bus, then what kind of bus?
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 20 Mar 2009 12:17:57 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 09:00:22 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> As we're using the simplified international variation for overseas
>> visitors. I remove a qbit and find myself transported to Mornington
>> Crescent on the number 27 (Not a bendy bus so I don't fall foul of the
>> Johnson Trap).
>
>So if not a bendy bus, then what kind of bus?
>
A red double decker.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 07:59:15 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 20 Mar 2009 12:17:57 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 09:00:22 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> As we're using the simplified international variation for overseas
>>> visitors. I remove a qbit and find myself transported to Mornington
>>> Crescent on the number 27 (Not a bendy bus so I don't fall foul of the
>>> Johnson Trap).
>>
>>So if not a bendy bus, then what kind of bus?
>>
>>
> A red double decker.
So rather than fall for the Johnson Trap, you instead fell for the Boris
Trap. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 21 Mar 2009 12:18:26 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 07:59:15 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 20 Mar 2009 12:17:57 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 09:00:22 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>>
>>>> As we're using the simplified international variation for overseas
>>>> visitors. I remove a qbit and find myself transported to Mornington
>>>> Crescent on the number 27 (Not a bendy bus so I don't fall foul of the
>>>> Johnson Trap).
>>>
>>>So if not a bendy bus, then what kind of bus?
>>>
>>>
>> A red double decker.
>
>So rather than fall for the Johnson Trap, you instead fell for the Boris
>Trap. ;-)
>
>
Duh! That sounds like winkles at dawn!
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 22:16:14 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>> A red double decker.
>>
>>So rather than fall for the Johnson Trap, you instead fell for the Boris
>>Trap. ;-)
>>
> Duh! That sounds like winkles at dawn!
Perhaps, but that means you forfeit your turn again. ;-)
So I'm going to continue to stay on the train I'm on and go to Notting
Hill Gate.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 21 Mar 2009 18:25:48 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 22:16:14 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>>>> A red double decker.
>>>
>>>So rather than fall for the Johnson Trap, you instead fell for the Boris
>>>Trap. ;-)
>>>
>> Duh! That sounds like winkles at dawn!
>
>Perhaps, but that means you forfeit your turn again. ;-)
>
>So I'm going to continue to stay on the train I'm on and go to Notting
>Hill Gate.
>
>Jim
You can spend all day on the circle line for very little cost.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 08:48:29 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 21 Mar 2009 18:25:48 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 22:16:14 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>>>> A red double decker.
>>>>
>>>>So rather than fall for the Johnson Trap, you instead fell for the
>>>>Boris Trap. ;-)
>>>>
>>> Duh! That sounds like winkles at dawn!
>>
>>Perhaps, but that means you forfeit your turn again. ;-)
>>
>>So I'm going to continue to stay on the train I'm on and go to Notting
>>Hill Gate.
>>
>>Jim
>
> You can spend all day on the circle line for very little cost.
This is true, but it's your turn. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 22 Mar 2009 14:29:42 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 08:48:29 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 21 Mar 2009 18:25:48 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 22:16:14 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> A red double decker.
>>>>>
>>>>>So rather than fall for the Johnson Trap, you instead fell for the
>>>>>Boris Trap. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>> Duh! That sounds like winkles at dawn!
>>>
>>>Perhaps, but that means you forfeit your turn again. ;-)
>>>
>>>So I'm going to continue to stay on the train I'm on and go to Notting
>>>Hill Gate.
>>>
>>>Jim
>>
>> You can spend all day on the circle line for very little cost.
>
>This is true, but it's your turn. ;-)
>
>
It is not, I won.
Fineto.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 22:15:54 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>> You can spend all day on the circle line for very little cost.
>>
>>This is true, but it's your turn. ;-)
>>
>>
>>
> It is not, I won.
Well, no, the Boris trap you fell into invalidated your last move. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 22 Mar 2009 20:27:13 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 22:15:54 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>>>> You can spend all day on the circle line for very little cost.
>>>
>>>This is true, but it's your turn. ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> It is not, I won.
>
>Well, no, the Boris trap you fell into invalidated your last move. ;-)
>
>
No it didn't. Ken still lives.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 07:05:19 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 22 Mar 2009 20:27:13 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 22:15:54 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>>>> You can spend all day on the circle line for very little cost.
>>>>
>>>>This is true, but it's your turn. ;-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It is not, I won.
>>
>>Well, no, the Boris trap you fell into invalidated your last move. ;-)
>>
>>
>>
> No it didn't. Ken still lives.
Ah, now I missed that part of the rule. Fair enough.
Given that your adjudicator said it was a mug's game, I guess that means
I get the first go this time around. :-)
Notting Hill Gate.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 23 Mar 2009 12:16:34 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 07:05:19 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 22 Mar 2009 20:27:13 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 22:15:54 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> You can spend all day on the circle line for very little cost.
>>>>>
>>>>>This is true, but it's your turn. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> It is not, I won.
>>>
>>>Well, no, the Boris trap you fell into invalidated your last move. ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> No it didn't. Ken still lives.
>
>Ah, now I missed that part of the rule. Fair enough.
>
>Given that your adjudicator said it was a mug's game, I guess that means
>I get the first go this time around. :-)
>
>Notting Hill Gate.
>
Mug's away, mug's game is something different.
Anyway I thought that the game had reached its natural conclusion and would
return later for a new series.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:54:24 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 23 Mar 2009 12:16:34 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 07:05:19 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 22 Mar 2009 20:27:13 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 22:15:54 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> You can spend all day on the circle line for very little cost.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>This is true, but it's your turn. ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> It is not, I won.
>>>>
>>>>Well, no, the Boris trap you fell into invalidated your last move. ;-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> No it didn't. Ken still lives.
>>
>>Ah, now I missed that part of the rule. Fair enough.
>>
>>Given that your adjudicator said it was a mug's game, I guess that means
>>I get the first go this time around. :-)
>>
>>Notting Hill Gate.
>>
> Mug's away, mug's game is something different.
Ah, right - right thought, wrong terminology. :-)
> Anyway I thought that the game had reached its natural conclusion and
> would return later for a new series.
Fair enough, I can save it for later. :-)
Duck season! ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 24 Mar 2009 12:05:36 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> Mug's away, mug's game is something different.
>
>Ah, right - right thought, wrong terminology. :-)
>
I thought so :)
>> Anyway I thought that the game had reached its natural conclusion and
>> would return later for a new series.
>
>Fair enough, I can save it for later. :-)
>
>Duck season! ;-)
Only if it is crispy aromatic duck <Yum yum>
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:15:25 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 24 Mar 2009 12:05:36 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>> Mug's away, mug's game is something different.
>>
>>Ah, right - right thought, wrong terminology. :-)
>>
>>
> I thought so :)
That's my story and I'm sticking to it. ;-)
>>> Anyway I thought that the game had reached its natural conclusion and
>>> would return later for a new series.
>>
>>Fair enough, I can save it for later. :-)
>>
>>Duck season! ;-)
>
> Only if it is crispy aromatic duck <Yum yum>
Well, then, it must be hassenfefer. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 24 Mar 2009 13:03:48 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>Well, then, it must be hassenfefer. ;-)
That's a Woosh!
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 17:16:26 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 24 Mar 2009 13:03:48 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>
>>Well, then, it must be hassenfefer. ;-)
>
> That's a Woosh!
Wabbit season. :-)
Probably would've helped if I'd spelt it correctly:
http://www.fabulousfoods.com/recipes/article/134/27929
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 24 Mar 2009 16:31:54 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 17:16:26 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 24 Mar 2009 13:03:48 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Well, then, it must be hassenfefer. ;-)
>>
>> That's a Woosh!
>
>Wabbit season. :-)
>
If you say so
>Probably would've helped if I'd spelt it correctly:
LOL
>
>http://www.fabulousfoods.com/recipes/article/134/27929
>
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:50:16 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>Probably would've helped if I'd spelt it correctly:
>
> LOL
>>
>>http://www.fabulousfoods.com/recipes/article/134/27929
>>
I kinda figured you'd be familiar with it, being familiar with the Warner
Bros. cartoons - the dish comes up quite frequently when Yosemite Sam
shows up on the scene.
I spent probably far, far too much time as a kid watching those
cartoons. I wish they still ran those classics.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 25 Mar 2009 11:38:04 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:50:16 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>>>Probably would've helped if I'd spelt it correctly:
>>
>> LOL
>>>
>>>http://www.fabulousfoods.com/recipes/article/134/27929
>>>
>
>I kinda figured you'd be familiar with it, being familiar with the Warner
>Bros. cartoons - the dish comes up quite frequently when Yosemite Sam
>shows up on the scene.
>
>I spent probably far, far too much time as a kid watching those
>cartoons. I wish they still ran those classics.
>
Although I liked Bugs it is a long time since I've watched any. Not since I was
in my teens and again that was so long ago they were in black and white. ;)
I seem to remember that puppets were more popular here in the UK. Bill and Ben,
Stingray, Four Feather Falls and of course Muffin the Mule :-)
<sings> "We love Muffin, Muffin the mule"
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'long_conversation.png' (48 KB)
Preview of image 'long_conversation.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 18:31:36 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 25 Mar 2009 11:38:04 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:50:16 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>>>Probably would've helped if I'd spelt it correctly:
>>>
>>> LOL
>>>>
>>>>http://www.fabulousfoods.com/recipes/article/134/27929
>>>>
>>>>
>>I kinda figured you'd be familiar with it, being familiar with the
>>Warner Bros. cartoons - the dish comes up quite frequently when Yosemite
>>Sam shows up on the scene.
>>
>>I spent probably far, far too much time as a kid watching those
>>cartoons. I wish they still ran those classics.
>>
>>
> Although I liked Bugs it is a long time since I've watched any. Not
> since I was in my teens and again that was so long ago they were in
> black and white. ;)
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 seem to remember that puppets were more popular here in the UK. Bill
> and Ben, Stingray, Four Feather Falls and of course Muffin the Mule :-)
>
> <sings> "We love Muffin, Muffin the mule"
LOL
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 12:13:42 -0700, Kevin Wampler 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.
Wow, I didn't either. :-)
Isn't that one of the reasons this thread started?
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 12:13:42 -0700, Kevin Wampler 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.
>
> Wow, I didn't either. :-)
>
> Isn't that one of the reasons this thread started?
I suppose so. Now I mostly wonder by what factor this is the longest
p.o.t thread ever.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 25 Mar 2009 18:04:21 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> 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.
It was probably my eyes that were in B&W then ;)
I particularly disliked the Yosemite Sam episodes preferring Daffy Duck.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
