Miss Manners
K. D.
In today's Miss Manners column, she makes some comments regarding
manners which are relevant to folklore:
{begin quote]
.... [propriety] will capriciously go in for something apparently crude
..... and yet be horried by something similar ... This is because
etiquette is a patchwork of folk customs, rather than a sensible
approach to life -- its reasoning being that there is no such thing as
a sensible approach to life.
[end quote]
-KD
David Hatunen
I wonder if KD understands the implications of this as it applies
to her? Would she have posted it if she did?
--
********** DAVE HATUNEN (hat...@sonic.net) ***********
* Daly City California *
******* My typos are intentional copyright traps ******
Gerald Belton
>
>In today's Miss Manners column, she makes some comments regarding
>manners which are relevant to folklore:
>
>{begin quote]
>
>.... [propriety] will capriciously go in for something apparently crude
>..... and yet be horried by something similar ... This is because
>etiquette is a patchwork of folk customs, rather than a sensible
>approach to life -- its reasoning being that there is no such thing as
>a sensible approach to life.
I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you!
Here I am, reading this eminently sensible advice from Ms. Manners,
and thinking to myself: "I can't wait to see K.D.'s response to this."
For I was sure that the person posting it was about to do the obvious,
and point out to K.D. that manners are manners, and they don't have to
make sense, and she should just mind hers and shut up about it.
Then I saw that the poster was K.D. herself.
Whatever was she thinking?
Gerald "flabbergasted" Belton
Paul Tomblin
>Then I saw that the poster was K.D. herself.
>
>Whatever was she thinking?
I think I've discovered the subtle flaw in your logic...
--
Paul Tomblin, not speaking for anybody.
SETI@Home: Finally a *good* way to impress Jodie Foster
http://www.setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/
Lee Rudolph
somewhat obscure intent. (But I always like to read Miss Manners.)
>.... [propriety] will capriciously go in for something apparently crude
>..... and yet be horried by something similar ... This is because
>etiquette is a patchwork of folk customs, rather than a sensible
>approach to life -- its reasoning being that there is no such thing as
>a sensible approach to life.
This prompts me to repost the quotation below, which I originally
posted on November 15, 1999; it's from the NYT obituary for Max Hunter,
78, a folklore collector whose beat was the Ozarks.
A few years ago Hunter explained his interviewing style: "You
gotta come down on their level. If they use a little bit of
rough language, you use a little bit of rough language. You
just be yourself and don't try to put on some airs."
Nobody ever accused Hunter of putting on airs. To get people
to cooperate, he would help them with the chores, loading hay,
tending chickens, feeding calves.
Lee "chicken-tender" Rudolph
Jason R. Heimbaugh
>In a previous article, gbe...@interpath.com (Gerald Belton) said:
>>Then I saw that the poster was K.D. herself.
>>
>>Whatever was she thinking?
> ^^^^^^^^
>I think I've discovered the subtle flaw in your logic...
Subtle?
--
McCAIN.
Lon Stowell
K. D. <kaye...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>In today's Miss Manners column, she makes some comments regarding
>manners which are relevant to folklore:
>
>{begin quote]
>
>..... and yet be horried by something similar ... This is because
>etiquette is a patchwork of folk customs, rather than a sensible
>approach to life -- its reasoning being that there is no such thing as
>a sensible approach to life.
>
Do all of your children tend to hang out at the neighbor's
house a lot? By any chance is your husband an alcoholic?
You have to be the most obnoxiously overbearing nag ever
created by a sardonic creator.
Brian Yeoh
<snip Ms Manners>
> Here I am, reading this eminently sensible advice from Ms. Manners,
> and thinking to myself: "I can't wait to see K.D.'s response to this."
> For I was sure that the person posting it was about to do the obvious,
> and point out to K.D. that manners are manners, and they don't have to
> make sense, and she should just mind hers and shut up about it.
> Then I saw that the poster was K.D. herself.
> Whatever was she thinking?
Throwing in the towel, perhaps?
Brian "one can always hope" Yeoh
It was as if even the most intelligent person had this little blank
spot in their heads where someone had written: "Kings. What a good
idea." Whoever had created humanity had left in a major design flaw. It
was its tendency to bend at the knees.
Terry Pratchett, _Feet of Clay_
Lee Rudolph
>In today's Miss Manners column,
...
and I just realized today (Sunday, January 9) that that was
a silly mistake! Judith Martin's columns appear (in their
_fons et origo_, the Washington Post) on Wednesdays and
Sundays!! Hahahahaha!!!
But anyway, in *today's* Miss Manners column, there's even
*more* good stuff. I quote (excisions to make a point about
clothing more general, without changing its truth):
Miss Manners recognizes that there are occasions when
... standards, whatever they happen to be, should be
challenged for the sake of reform ... . She recognizes
that there are those who wish to titillate or shock.
What she finds offensive is violating standards and then
claiming to be surprised that people are offended.
Lee "hahahahahahahaha!!!!" Rudolph
[posted and e-mailed, just for kicks, to kaye...@hotmail.com]
Dr H
On 9 Jan 2000, Lee Rudolph wrote:
}
}But anyway, in *today's* Miss Manners column, there's even
}*more* good stuff. I quote (excisions to make a point about
}clothing more general, without changing its truth):
}
} Miss Manners recognizes that there are occasions when
} ... standards, whatever they happen to be, should be
} challenged for the sake of reform ... .
Imagine that.
Dr H
RM Mentock
You clipped out the context. Miss Manners seems to be saying
that standards can be challenged for the sake of reform, but
until the reform is done, the standards should still apply.
--
RM Mentock
but who'd agree to that
The war on ignorance begins with me
http://sentient.home.mindspring.com/dan/
Don Whittington
H <hiaw...@efn.org> wrote:
> On 9 Jan 2000, Lee Rudolph wrote:
>
> }
> }But anyway, in *today's* Miss Manners column, there's even
> }*more* good stuff. I quote (excisions to make a point about
> }clothing more general, without changing its truth):
> }
> } Miss Manners recognizes that there are occasions when
> } ... standards, whatever they happen to be, should be
> } challenged for the sake of reform ... .
>
>
> Imagine that.
God bless that you are here to teach us all.
Don Whittington
--
"Aside from its unscientificaliness, it has destroyed my faith
in my fellow man. (My fellow women are still faithable.)"
--Timothy A. McDaniel on the state of the poll
David Hatunen
Dr H <hiaw...@efn.org> wrote:
>
>On 9 Jan 2000, Lee Rudolph wrote:
>
>}
>}But anyway, in *today's* Miss Manners column, there's even
>}*more* good stuff. I quote (excisions to make a point about
>}clothing more general, without changing its truth):
>}
>} Miss Manners recognizes that there are occasions when
>} ... standards, whatever they happen to be, should be
>} challenged for the sake of reform ... .
>
>
> Imagine that.
Dr H again demonstrates his desire to say nothing.
Chris Clarke
<men...@mindspring.com> wrote:
| Dr H wrote:
| >
| > On 9 Jan 2000, Lee Rudolph wrote:
| >
| > }
| > }But anyway, in *today's* Miss Manners column, there's even
| > }*more* good stuff. I quote (excisions to make a point about
| > }clothing more general, without changing its truth):
| > }
| > } Miss Manners recognizes that there are occasions when
| > } ... standards, whatever they happen to be, should be
| > } challenged for the sake of reform ... .
| >
| > Imagine that.
|
| You clipped out the context.
It still disappoints me, at my advancing age in which I should Know
Better By Now[1], when a person styling himself a Crusader for Good
Things turns out to have so little intellectual integrity. Perhaps I'm
naive. I had thought Dr. H was merely an incredibly annoying person
with a too-marked tendency to post while drunk, working out some
deep-seated feeling of inadequacy through his keyboard. Now even
starry-eyed I have to admit that he's worse than that. He can't use the
KD excuse of being too stupid to know what he's doing. This is
sociopathy, plain and simple. What a depressing, ugly-minded little
man.
Chris "" Clarke
[1] in that I have clear memories of things that happened when Maddy
was merely "old".
--
-----------
Chris Clarke
Faultline Magazine
http://www.faultlinemag.org
Madeleine Page
[Dr H, Dr H, Dr H... who *cares*?]
>It still disappoints me, at my advancing age in which I should Know
>Better By Now[1]
>[1] in that I have clear memories of things that happened when Maddy
>was merely "old".
Dear boy, dear boy. You *do* understand, do you not, that if you maintain
this sort of raillery about my geriatricism, that your age will suddenly
and painfully cease to advance?
Madeleine "just checking" Page
jerryG
dun...@mindspring.com (Don Whittington) wrote:
> In article <Pine.GSU.4.05.100011...@garcia.efn.org>,
Dr
>
> > >On 9 Jan 2000, Lee Rudolph wrote:
> > > Miss Manners recognizes that there are occasions when
> > > ... standards, whatever they happen to be, should be
> > > challenged for the sake of reform ...
> >
>
> God bless that you are here to teach us all.
>
> Don Whittington
But he was tempted to say more.
jerry "terse" G
--
But risk must be taken, because the greatest hazard in life is to risk
nothing. Anonymous
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Chris Clarke
<mp...@mpage.net> wrote:
| Chris Clarke writes, in a sudden frenzy of Life Limiting Moves:
| >It still disappoints me, at my advancing age in which I should Know
| >Better By Now[1]
|
| >[1] in that I have clear memories of things that happened when Maddy
| >was merely "old".
|
| Dear boy, dear boy. You *do* understand, do you not, that if you maintain
| this sort of raillery about my geriatricism, that your age will suddenly
| and painfully cease to advance?
|
| Madeleine "just checking" Page
Duly noted, Madam^H^Hdy.
Does that apply only to comments about your age, or are things like
references to Job 38:29,30 proscribed as well?
Chris "just asking" Clarke
--
-----------------
"Though wonderful to watch, transformation from larva to pupa
or from pupa to butterfly is not a particularly pleasant process
for the subject involved." -- Vladimir Nabokov
Dr H
On Wed, 12 Jan 2000, RM Mentock wrote:
}Dr H wrote:
}>
}> On 9 Jan 2000, Lee Rudolph wrote:
}>
}> }
}> }But anyway, in *today's* Miss Manners column, there's even
}> }*more* good stuff. I quote (excisions to make a point about
}> }clothing more general, without changing its truth):
}> }
}> } Miss Manners recognizes that there are occasions when
}> } ... standards, whatever they happen to be, should be
}> } challenged for the sake of reform ... .
}>
}> Imagine that.
}
}You clipped out the context. Miss Manners seems to be saying
}that standards can be challenged for the sake of reform, but
}until the reform is done, the standards should still apply.
Actually, Lee cliped the context.
But I liked what he left.
Dr H
Dr H
On Wed, 12 Jan 2000, Don Whittington wrote:
}In article <Pine.GSU.4.05.100011...@garcia.efn.org>, Dr
}H <hiaw...@efn.org> wrote:
}
}> On 9 Jan 2000, Lee Rudolph wrote:
}>
}> }
}> }But anyway, in *today's* Miss Manners column, there's even
}> }*more* good stuff. I quote (excisions to make a point about
}> }clothing more general, without changing its truth):
}> }
}> } Miss Manners recognizes that there are occasions when
}> } ... standards, whatever they happen to be, should be
}> } challenged for the sake of reform ... .
}>
}>
}> Imagine that.
}
}
}God bless that you are here to teach us all.
Don't thank me; thank Miss Manners.
Dr H
Dr H
On Wed, 12 Jan 2000, Chris Clarke wrote:
}It still disappoints me, at my advancing age in which I should Know
}Better By Now[1], when a person styling himself a Crusader for Good
}Things turns out to have so little intellectual integrity. Perhaps I'm
}naive. I had thought Dr. H was merely an incredibly annoying person
}with a too-marked tendency to post while drunk, working out some
}deep-seated feeling of inadequacy through his keyboard. Now even
}starry-eyed I have to admit that he's worse than that. He can't use the
}KD excuse of being too stupid to know what he's doing. This is
}sociopathy, plain and simple. What a depressing, ugly-minded little
}man.
When's our next counseling session, Doc?
Dr H
Andrea Jones
<snip any and everything substantive>
>Joe "tempuraed morays is mine, c'mon Andrea own up" Yuska
But Mr. Yuska sir, I already admitted this in e-mail... must I now grovel
in public? Oh, the shame and dishonor!
Andrea "stoned on painkillers, your tax dollars at work" Jones
--
"I troubleshot for four hours once, and the problem turned
out to be a faulty oscilloscope probe. That's when you
start saying ugly words." --FC1(SW) Perry
Madeleine Page
>Madeleine Page <mp...@mpage.net> wrote:
[Chris indulges in a moment of foolishly dangerous behaviour; I gently
point out the risks he runs by referring to me as "old"]
>| Dear boy, dear boy. You *do* understand, do you not, that if you maintain
>| this sort of raillery about my geriatricism, that your age will suddenly
>| and painfully cease to advance?
[...]
>Does that apply only to comments about your age, or are things like
>references to Job 38:29,30 proscribed as well?
Who you calling 'hoary', bub?
Madeleine "of course, there's always the verse about Chris in Job 39:5"
Page
Brian Yeoh
> Chris Clarke writes, in a sudden frenzy of Life Limiting Moves:
> [Dr H, Dr H, Dr H... who *cares*?]
> >It still disappoints me, at my advancing age in which I should Know
> >Better By Now[1]
> >[1] in that I have clear memories of things that happened when Maddy
> >was merely "old".
> Dear boy, dear boy. You *do* understand, do you not, that if you maintain
> this sort of raillery about my geriatricism, that your age will suddenly
> and painfully cease to advance?
Could it be? After her long and precious search for the Peach of Life[1]
the sekrit Meth^H^H^Hadeleine is withholding from us is that in order to
achieve as long a life as she has, all you need to do is piss the next
person older than you off enough?
Brian "Mr Yeoh, Mr Occam. Mr Occam, Mr Yeoh. <slice>" Yeoh
[1] Ancient story which leads to the Chinese version of the creation myths
surrounding Korea and Japan, which I will not post as it is no doubt
inflammatory.[2]
[2] E-mail request honoured, of course.
RM Mentock
> }You clipped out the context. Miss Manners seems to be saying
> }that standards can be challenged for the sake of reform, but
> }until the reform is done, the standards should still apply.
>
> Actually, Lee cliped the context.
> But I liked what he left.
Very well. I haven't seen the original. But I know
you clipped even more, at least changing the meaning
of Lee's post.
--
RM Mentock
Joseph Yuska
Brian Yeoh wrote:
>
> On 12 Jan 2000, Madeleine Page wrote:
>
> > Chris Clarke writes, in a sudden frenzy of Life Limiting Moves:
> > [Dr H, Dr H, Dr H... who *cares*?]
> > >It still disappoints me, at my advancing age in which I should Know
> > >Better By Now[1]
> > >[1] in that I have clear memories of things that happened when Maddy
> > >was merely "old".
> > Dear boy, dear boy. You *do* understand, do you not, that if you maintain
> > this sort of raillery about my geriatricism, that your age will suddenly
> > and painfully cease to advance?
>
> Could it be? After her long and precious search for the Peach of Life[1]
> the sekrit Meth^H^H^Hadeleine is withholding from us is that in order to
> achieve as long a life as she has, all you need to do is piss the next
> person older than you off enough?
If she meant that, she would (in this froup) have to piss me off, which
she hasn't since the "there are no atheists in foxholes" thread.
Brian Yeoh
> Brian Yeoh wrote:
> > On 12 Jan 2000, Madeleine Page wrote:
> > > Chris Clarke writes, in a sudden frenzy of Life Limiting Moves:
> > > Dear boy, dear boy. You *do* understand, do you not, that if you maintain
> > > this sort of raillery about my geriatricism, that your age will suddenly
> > > and painfully cease to advance?
> > Could it be? After her long and precious search for the Peach of Life[1]
> > the sekrit Meth^H^H^Hadeleine is withholding from us is that in order to
> > achieve as long a life as she has, all you need to do is piss the next
> > person older than you off enough?
> If she meant that, she would (in this froup) have to piss me off, which
> she hasn't since the "there are no atheists in foxholes" thread.
Shock, horror. There _are_ people older than Madeleine! Will neural
Chernobyls never cease?
> Joe "tempuraed morays is mine, c'mon Andrea own up" Yuska
Oi. I had it back in 1998, thankyouverymuch. Deja has swallowed my post,
though.
Is it my gut or is Deja systematically starting to lose chunks of memory?
Brian "<insert infinite monkeys, infinite rooms joke here>" Yeoh
Harry MF Teasley
> On 12 Jan 2000, Madeleine Page wrote:
>> Dear boy, dear boy. You *do* understand, do you not, that if you maintain
>> this sort of raillery about my geriatricism, that your age will suddenly
>> and painfully cease to advance?
> Could it be? After her long and precious search for the Peach of Life[1]
> the sekrit Meth^H^H^Hadeleine is withholding from us is that in order to
> achieve as long a life as she has, all you need to do is piss the next
> person older than you off enough?
Would that it were so. I'm obviously on borrowed time, as she hasn't yet
noticed my new .sig.
Harry "Charles is next, I'm sure" Teasley
--
"The question is, is the coelacanth older the Maddy?" -CB
Visit the AFU archives at www.urbanlegends.com
Deborah Stevenson
On Thu, 13 Jan 2000, Brian Yeoh wrote:
> Is it my gut or is Deja systematically starting to lose chunks of memory?
I haven't done a systematic check throughout, but all of Usenet from
April-July 1996 is missing for a start (sometime in April to sometime in
July, to be inexact). I contacted Deja about it and they essentially
said, "Yes, we know, we've got a couple of broken servers, we've got no
idea what's going to happen about it."
Deborah Stevenson
(stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Madeleine Page
>Brian Yeoh wrote:
[snip what that amazingly elgant and charming Madeleine Page person wrote
in response to Chris Clarke's extraordinary temerity]
>> Could it be? After her long and precious search for the Peach of Life[1]
>> the sekrit Meth^H^H^Hadeleine is withholding from us is that in order to
>> achieve as long a life as she has, all you need to do is piss the next
>> person older than you off enough?
>If she meant that, she would (in this froup) have to piss me off, which
>she hasn't since the "there are no atheists in foxholes" thread.
Dammit, that thread was a *long* time ago. Looks like my standards are
slipping.
Madeleine "gotta work on the snarliness and provocation" Page
Madeleine Page
>Brian Yeoh <by...@panix.com> wrote:
>> Could it be? After her long and precious search for the Peach of Life[1]
>> the sekrit Meth^H^H^Hadeleine is withholding from us is that in order to
>> achieve as long a life as she has, all you need to do is piss the next
>> person older than you off enough?
>Would that it were so. I'm obviously on borrowed time, as she hasn't yet
>noticed my new .sig.
Oh, she's noticed it. Definitely noticed it on its first outing a couple
days ago. It's just that I'm going after Charles Bishop *first*. You're
the small fry, Teasley.
Madeleine "it's all about the loathe" Page
Joseph Yuska
>
> Joseph Yuska wrote in message <387D64CD...@mediaone.net>...
> <snip any and everything substantive>
> in public? Oh, the shame and dishonor!
>
> Andrea "stoned on painkillers, your tax dollars at work" Jones
>
> --
> "I troubleshot for four hours once, and the problem turned
> out to be a faulty oscilloscope probe. That's when you
> start saying ugly words." --FC1(SW) Perry
I was actually trying to elicit a reaction from Brian (see his aminal
name)
And I got it. Sorry, Brian. Don't (consciously) remember your post.
Joe
Linda Teasley
: Harry MF Teasley writes:
:>Would that it were so. I'm obviously on borrowed time, as she hasn't yet
:>noticed my new .sig.
: Oh, she's noticed it. Definitely noticed it on its first outing a couple
: days ago. It's just that I'm going after Charles Bishop *first*. You're
: the small fry, Teasley.
People over thirty, which as best I can recall includes the previous
poster, best not rattle cages of the Older and Wiser Ones. Borrowed time
takes on a whole new meaning.
Linda "Mom" Teasley
_________________
Work like you don't need money.
Love like you've never been hurt.
Dance like nobody's watching.
Miriam Rocke
: Madeleine Page <mp...@mpage.net> wrote:
: : Harry MF Teasley writes:
:
: :>Would that it were so. I'm obviously on borrowed time, as she hasn't yet
: :>noticed my new .sig.
:
: : Oh, she's noticed it. Definitely noticed it on its first outing a couple
: : days ago. It's just that I'm going after Charles Bishop *first*. You're
: : the small fry, Teasley.
:
: People over thirty, which as best I can recall includes the previous
: poster, best not rattle cages of the Older and Wiser Ones. Borrowed time
: takes on a whole new meaning.
And what for people *under* thirty? Are we allowed? Huh, huh, are we?
[quietly prepares to rattle cages, while keeping an innocent expression]
Miriam "*very* innocent" Rocke
--
Miriam Rocke "Just so we're clear, you guys
mrr...@ucdavis.edu know you're nuts, right?"
http://handel.cipic.ucdavis.edu/~mrrocke/ --BtVS, "Gingerbread"
Harry MF Teasley
> People over thirty, which as best I can recall includes the previous
> poster, best not rattle cages of the Older and Wiser Ones. Borrowed time
> takes on a whole new meaning.
Jeez, mom, do you have to drop me off in AFU, right in front of all of my
friends?
Harry "the shame, the terrible shame" Teasley
Madeleine Page
>Linda Teasley <l...@panix.com> wrote:
>> People over thirty, which as best I can recall includes the previous
>> poster, best not rattle cages of the Older and Wiser Ones. Borrowed time
>> takes on a whole new meaning.
>Jeez, mom, do you have to drop me off in AFU, right in front of all of my
>friends?
>Harry "the shame, the terrible shame" Teasley
Where's the apology the, whippersnapper?
>--
>"The question is, is the coelacanth older the Maddy?" -CB
I think even more than the gibe as to my antiquity, I resent being made to
sound like that ghastly little counter jumper, Donald Trump.
Madeleine "difference between the Maddy and the Donald #7894: she doesn't
blow dry her hair" Page
Linda Teasley
: Jeez, mom, do you have to drop me off in AFU, right in front of all of my
: friends?
: Harry "the shame, the terrible shame" Teasley
Age is the only argument I stand a chance of winning.
Linda "it's all about the love" Teasley
Vicki Robinson
:"The question is, is the coelacanth older the Maddy?" -CB
:
I don't know. I didn't even know that 'older' was a transitive verb.
Vicki "go figger" Robinson
--
Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution Resources:
http://www.rit.edu/~vjrnts/mediation/mediation.html
The alt.folklore.urban FAQ and archive can be found at
http://www.urbanlegends.com/
Charles Wm. Dimmick
> Brian Yeoh <by...@panix.com> wrote:
> > Could it be? After her long and precious search for the Peach of Life[1]
> > the sekrit Meth^H^H^Hadeleine is withholding from us is that in order to
> > achieve as long a life as she has, all you need to do is piss the next
> > person older than you off enough?
>
> Would that it were so. I'm obviously on borrowed time, as she hasn't yet
> noticed my new .sig.
> Harry "Charles is next, I'm sure" Teasley
> "The question is, is the coelacanth older the Maddy?" -CB
OK, I'm thoroughly confused.
When you say "Charles is next..." do you mean me?
And if you do mean me, are you suggesting that I'm about
to piss Maddy off, or that she is about to piss me off, or
that either of us has achieved our long life by pissing off
people older than us (David H?), or do I have hold of
the wrong end of the stick? Actually, I'm getting to the
point that most of the ladies younger than 60 are
starting to look pretty good.
Charles D.
Harry MF Teasley
> OK, I'm thoroughly confused.
> When you say "Charles is next..." do you mean me?
Your name Bishop? No? Siddown then, and finish your fruit cup. The
nurse will come by and wheel you back to your room at three.
Harry "it's sad, the effects of aging on the mind" Teasley
--
"The question is, is the coelacanth older than Maddy?" -CB
Derek Tearne
<he...@panix.com> wrote:
>Would that it were so. I'm obviously on borrowed time, as she hasn't yet
>noticed my new .sig.
[...]
>"The question is, is the coelacanth older the Maddy?" -CB
Fortunately Maddie, being a pedantic sort, realises that the Coelacanth
is a relatively short lived fish.
Derek "or not" Tearne
--
Derek Tearne. --- @URL Internet Consultants --- http://url.co.nz/
Charles Bishop
<cdim...@snet.net> wrote:
>Harry MF Teasley wrote:
>
>> Brian Yeoh <by...@panix.com> wrote:
>> > Could it be? After her long and precious search for the Peach of Life[1]
>> > the sekrit Meth^H^H^Hadeleine is withholding from us is that in order to
>> > achieve as long a life as she has, all you need to do is piss the next
>> > person older than you off enough?
>>
>> Would that it were so. I'm obviously on borrowed time, as she hasn't yet
>> noticed my new .sig.
>> Harry "Charles is next, I'm sure" Teasley
>> "The question is, is the coelacanth older the Maddy?" -CB
>
>OK, I'm thoroughly confused.
>When you say "Charles is next..." do you mean me?
>And if you do mean me, are you suggesting that I'm about
>to piss Maddy off, or that she is about to piss me off, or
>that either of us has achieved our long life by pissing off
>people older than us (David H?), or do I have hold of
>the wrong end of the stick? Actually, I'm getting to the
>point that most of the ladies younger than 60 are
>starting to look pretty good.
>
>Charles D.
Yes, yes, yes, it's him.
Charles, the Pokemon of Pertinent Persiflage, Fishop
Chris Clarke
<de...@iprolink.co.nz> wrote:
|
| Fortunately Maddie, being a pedantic sort, realises that the Coelacanth
| is a relatively short lived fish.
Praise Baal for individual variation.
Chris "the coelacanth of obscurity" Clarke
Phil Edwards
>"The question is, is the coelacanth older the Maddy?" -CB
This has still got me puzzled.
Fonder the Maddy, maybe. Prouder the Maddy, potentially. But "older"?
Phil "*has* the coelacanth older the Maddy, maybe" Edwards
--
Phil Edwards http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/amroth/
"We're a little touchy about proper terminology on this BBS."
- Andy Walton
Phil Edwards
<cdim...@snet.net> wrote:
>Actually, I'm getting to the
>point that most of the ladies younger than 60 are
>starting to look pretty good.
I must be getting old - Vanessa Redgrave looks pretty good to me.
Helen Mirren, Patti Smith, Charlotte Rampling...
Phil "just off for a brisk walk" Edwards
Madeleine Page
>Harry MF Teasley <he...@panix.com> wrote:
>>I'm obviously on borrowed time, as she hasn't yet
>>noticed my new .sig.
>[...]
>>"The question is, is the coelacanth older the Maddy?" -CB
>Fortunately Maddie, being a pedantic sort, realises that the Coelacanth
>is a relatively short lived fish.
This has nothing to do with my alleged pedantry. In fact I keep meaning to
kill Harry, it's just that I forget.
Madeleine "forget about the damn fish, it's my memory that's short
lived" Page
Simon Slavin
mrr...@schubert.ucdavis.edu (Miriam Rocke) wrote:
> Linda Teasley (l...@panix.com) wrote:
>
> : People over thirty, which as best I can recall includes the previous
> : poster, best not rattle cages of the Older and Wiser Ones. Borrowed time
> : takes on a whole new meaning.
>
> And what for people *under* thirty? Are we allowed? Huh, huh, are we?
You're not allowed, you just run too fast for us to catch.
Simon.
--
http://www.hearsay.demon.co.uk | John Peel:
No junk email please. | [My daughter] has modelled herself on you.
| Courtney Love:
| Oh, I'm so sorry.
Monte Davis
-Monte "the cook...and my fantasies" Davis
mod...@bellatlantic.net
Phil Edwards
<mod...@bellatlantic.net> wrote:
>When Helen Mirren stops looking good to me, I'll be dead.
>
>-Monte "the cook...and my fantasies" Davis
But what a way to go.
Phil "edit out Michael Gambon and you'll be away" Edwards