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