 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 08:23:56 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> On 17 Mar 2009 15:42:21 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospam com> 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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> It was probably my eyes that were in B&W then ;)
Or the TV. http://www.revver.com/video/109858/bugs-bunny-whats-opera-doc/
Definitely color.
I saw an interview with the Bugs Bunny authors talking about the music, and
how they were trying to introduce kids to classical music and such.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
There's no CD like OCD, there's no
CD I knoooow!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 08:48:29 -0700, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>Stephen wrote:
>> It was probably my eyes that were in B&W then ;)
>
>Or the TV. http://www.revver.com/video/109858/bugs-bunny-whats-opera-doc/
>Definitely color.
>
Hmm, I was being symbolic (or trying to be) :-) implying that I am so old
"colour" had not been invented yet.
>
>I saw an interview with the Bugs Bunny authors talking about the music, and
>how they were trying to introduce kids to classical music and such.
Besides Die Walküre I hear bits from, The Flying Dutchman, Tannhäuser and
Tristan and Isolde. A Wagnarian feast.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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 :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 21:56:36 -0700, Kevin Wampler wrote:
> 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.
It might be hard to judge that, given the retention policy. It's
probably several times longer than any other thread currently on the
server. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 10:07:53 -0700, Kevin Wampler 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 :)
It seems there are only two of us who had that. ;-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 09:36:56 +0000, Stephen wrote:
> 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.
Same here, for the most part. Bugs, Daffy, and Elmer were the best
combination pretty consistently.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 08:48:29 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> Stephen wrote:
>> It was probably my eyes that were in B&W then ;)
>
> Or the TV.
> http://www.revver.com/video/109858/bugs-bunny-whats-opera-doc/
> Definitely color.
>
>
> I saw an interview with the Bugs Bunny authors talking about the music,
> and how they were trying to introduce kids to classical music and such.
The funny thing is that they actually identify the music incorrectly. I
can't remember the details now, if it was in the credits or on the CD
(which I have), but I remember at one point they mis-identified the works
of Wagner they were using.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 17:04:11 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>>I saw an interview with the Bugs Bunny authors talking about the music,
>>and how they were trying to introduce kids to classical music and such.
>
> Besides Die Walküre I hear bits from, The Flying Dutchman, Tannhäuser
> and Tristan and Isolde. A Wagnarian feast.
Very much so.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 10:16:08 -0700, Kevin Wampler 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
That's the other one I was thinking of. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
