Talibanning - 11/09/01 04:04 PM
The "Omegatist" thread has just been officially Talibanned by the arbiters of "good breeding". Personally I think its 
. But my breeding is suspect.
. But my breeding is suspect.
Re: Good breeding - 11/09/01 04:37 PM
...banned by the arbiters of "good breeding"
When a thread gets too long it is especially vexing to flatliners, particularly to flatliners who are paying for connect time as the amount of time spent waiting for the thread to load becomes too great for the value of the thread, a questionable matter in the case of that thread anyway. It is a simple matter of good manners to avoid posting to such a thread. The perhaps arbitrary (but not unreasonable) limit of one hundred posts has been suggested. That thread exceeded that limit yesterday at 09:02:27 board time. tsuwm opted out of the thread on the next post.
When a thread gets too long it is especially vexing to flatliners, particularly to flatliners who are paying for connect time as the amount of time spent waiting for the thread to load becomes too great for the value of the thread, a questionable matter in the case of that thread anyway. It is a simple matter of good manners to avoid posting to such a thread. The perhaps arbitrary (but not unreasonable) limit of one hundred posts has been suggested. That thread exceeded that limit yesterday at 09:02:27 board time. tsuwm opted out of the thread on the next post.
Re: Good breeding - 11/09/01 05:00 PM
I have to confess I do not know what "flatlining" means, and so have no idea how long post inconveniences them. Certainly I do not wish to offend anybody.
Flatliners vs. Threadnodists (long post) - 11/09/01 05:51 PM
I do not know what "flatlining" means
The two methods of viewing posts are known as Threaded Mode and Flat Mode. Proponents of these modes are known jocularly as threadnodists and flatliners respectively. In Threaded Mode the Subject Lines of the individual posts are shown in an arrangement that reflects the logical order of the posts, that is, with a given post beneath and indented to the right of the post to which it is a response, or, at least, the post owning the Response Icon that was clicked to enable the response. In Flat Mode, all the posts are visible and are arranged in strictly chronological order. The advantages of Threaded Mode are that the individual posts load somewhat faster and it is easy to tell to what post a given post is responding to without counting on the somewhat lax attitude towards changing Subject Lines. The advantages of the Flat Mode are that a large number of posts will load quicker and it is easier to tell what the chronological order is. Confusion can result when a flatliner is responding to two posts which are chronologically close to each other but may be very far apart from the threadnodists point of view, such as when someone responds to an early post and someone else responds to a recent post and a flatliner, seeing the two posts right next to each other alludes to something in each post. On the other hand a flatliner can be confused when a threadnodist responds to an early post without clearly indicating what is being responded to and the flatliner sees it on a different page.
Added to almost immediately after posting
The very long threads become an annoyance to flatliners because they start to take a prohibitively long amonut of time to load. I haven't done any great studies but I suspect that this might be alleviated by having fewer posts per page. This is settable and defaults to 20. I suspect that tsuwm has his set at 100 since he complained about the Omegatist thread going to page two. Or was it 50 because he complained about its going past page two? He may find it beneficial to cut that number down a little.
The two methods of viewing posts are known as Threaded Mode and Flat Mode. Proponents of these modes are known jocularly as threadnodists and flatliners respectively. In Threaded Mode the Subject Lines of the individual posts are shown in an arrangement that reflects the logical order of the posts, that is, with a given post beneath and indented to the right of the post to which it is a response, or, at least, the post owning the Response Icon that was clicked to enable the response. In Flat Mode, all the posts are visible and are arranged in strictly chronological order. The advantages of Threaded Mode are that the individual posts load somewhat faster and it is easy to tell to what post a given post is responding to without counting on the somewhat lax attitude towards changing Subject Lines. The advantages of the Flat Mode are that a large number of posts will load quicker and it is easier to tell what the chronological order is. Confusion can result when a flatliner is responding to two posts which are chronologically close to each other but may be very far apart from the threadnodists point of view, such as when someone responds to an early post and someone else responds to a recent post and a flatliner, seeing the two posts right next to each other alludes to something in each post. On the other hand a flatliner can be confused when a threadnodist responds to an early post without clearly indicating what is being responded to and the flatliner sees it on a different page.
Added to almost immediately after posting
The very long threads become an annoyance to flatliners because they start to take a prohibitively long amonut of time to load. I haven't done any great studies but I suspect that this might be alleviated by having fewer posts per page. This is settable and defaults to 20. I suspect that tsuwm has his set at 100 since he complained about the Omegatist thread going to page two. Or was it 50 because he complained about its going past page two? He may find it beneficial to cut that number down a little.
Re: Talibanning - 11/09/01 06:29 PM
I don't want to offend anyone either. And I'm not sure I understand what this "flat liners" business is all about. (I thought it was the horizontal signal on a heart monitor signifying death. I saw the movie with Kiefer Sutherland and Julie Roberts.) Anyway, I'm sure there are people much better qualified than I am to judge "good breeding", but I do know something about good manners. And, in my book, it is not good manners to belittle a whole class of harmless posters by saying anyone who posts anything on a particular thread is lacking in "good breeding". Telling people where they should or should not post is like telling them what they should think. I don't want to call this "snobbery" because I don't know the personalities involved. But this sort of 'hoier than thou' intimidation is not like to work. At least, it doesn't work on me.
Re: Talibanning - 11/09/01 06:55 PM
Telling people where they should or should not post is like telling them what they should think.
You can post where you want and when you want, but it is likely to be ignored by people who deem reading it more expensive than it's worth.
You can post where you want and when you want, but it is likely to be ignored by people who deem reading it more expensive than it's worth.
Re: Talibanning - 11/09/01 07:31 PM
especially now, when the whole object seems to be vieing to have the last word..
i did of course, as did tsuwm-- we each put in our last word, and don't bother with the thread any more!
it takes way to long to open, only to find a bunch of people acting like 2 years olds saying me, its my turn -- no its my turn--no its my turn.. no me, me, me, me!
i did of course, as did tsuwm-- we each put in our last word, and don't bother with the thread any more!
it takes way to long to open, only to find a bunch of people acting like 2 years olds saying me, its my turn -- no its my turn--no its my turn.. no me, me, me, me!
Re: Talibanning - 11/09/01 08:05 PM
You can post where you want and when you want
Thank you for that assurance, Faldage. I understand that your issue is "flat lining" so my comments obviously don't apply to you. But the mullahs of "good breeding" may be contributing to the popularity, and thus the length, of this thread themselves. By threatening never to return to the "Omegatist" thread, they are creating a safe haven for many who are hoping they will keep their word. (BTW I have gone back a bit and I see that the recent record for a thread is "brick outhouse bertha" which attracted 899 visitors in a single month. A lot of people had a lot of harmless fun with that it seems. Where were the Talibanners to protect our well-bred posters then?)
Thank you for that assurance, Faldage. I understand that your issue is "flat lining" so my comments obviously don't apply to you. But the mullahs of "good breeding" may be contributing to the popularity, and thus the length, of this thread themselves. By threatening never to return to the "Omegatist" thread, they are creating a safe haven for many who are hoping they will keep their word. (BTW I have gone back a bit and I see that the recent record for a thread is "brick outhouse bertha" which attracted 899 visitors in a single month. A lot of people had a lot of harmless fun with that it seems. Where were the Talibanners to protect our well-bred posters then?)
Re: You have a point, moss. - 11/09/01 08:28 PM
We are all taliban here.
And some of us even know what that means.
And some of us even know what that means.
Re: You have a point, moss. - 11/09/01 09:20 PM
We are all taliban here.
Scary thought. (Just kidding.) Thank you for taking the time to explain your issue. I see the issue is number of posts, not the number of visits. Since there seems to be some kind of concensus that more than 100 posts is too many, I am sure well-mannered people will elect not to post there anymore. Myself included. Its a shame this issue became tangled up with unrelated complaints about "good breeding".
Scary thought. (Just kidding.) Thank you for taking the time to explain your issue. I see the issue is number of posts, not the number of visits. Since there seems to be some kind of concensus that more than 100 posts is too many, I am sure well-mannered people will elect not to post there anymore. Myself included. Its a shame this issue became tangled up with unrelated complaints about "good breeding".
Re: Talibanning - 11/09/01 09:28 PM
moss, I seem to have been strewn on the wrong side of the tree here. although I am one who left the thread that is under discussion, it was mostly because of the length. the inbreeding I don't recall being mentioned. that thread reminded me of a song my daughter used to sing, to great effect when she wanted to annoy:
this is the song that never ends,
it just goes on and on, my friends.
some people started singing it
not knowing what it was
and they’ll continue singing it forever just because,
this is the song that never ends....
<repeat... and repeat... and...>
imagine how pleased I was to get the chance to post this somewhere.
this is the song that never ends,
it just goes on and on, my friends.
some people started singing it
not knowing what it was
and they’ll continue singing it forever just because,
this is the song that never ends....
<repeat... and repeat... and...>
imagine how pleased I was to get the chance to post this somewhere.
Re: Talibanning - 11/09/01 09:37 PM
imagine how pleased I was to get the chance to post this somewhere
I know just the place where you can post it. It seems fitting that you should have the last word.
I know just the place where you can post it. It seems fitting that you should have the last word.
Re: Flatliners vs. Threadnodists (long post) - 11/09/01 09:51 PM
I suspect that tsuwm has his set at 100 since he complained about the Omegatist thread going to page two. Or was it 50 because he complained about its going past page two? He may find it beneficial to cut that number down a little.
I do have it set to 100, as a result of the board bug that we discovered in referencing old threads (the one where you can only see the first page and then you get shunted off to some current thread?); at the time we were seeing that someone found the workaround of setting the page length to something greather than 20. 100 works well with the guideline of keeping threads under 100 posts. so it's a tradeoff, I guess.
I do have it set to 100, as a result of the board bug that we discovered in referencing old threads (the one where you can only see the first page and then you get shunted off to some current thread?); at the time we were seeing that someone found the workaround of setting the page length to something greather than 20. 100 works well with the guideline of keeping threads under 100 posts. so it's a tradeoff, I guess.
Re: Flatliners vs. Threadnodists (long post) - 11/09/01 11:19 PM
I sincerely apologize for adding to a length that I wasn't aware of. It's apparent that the culture of this board doesn't tolerate excessively long robes. I will mend my ways...and wear new threads.
WW
WW
Re: Flatliners vs. Threadnodists (long post) - 11/09/01 11:39 PM
For what it's worth, I have my one-page display set to 99, at mav's suggestion. I just went to an old thread that had 101 posts, and it didn't come unraveled--I got page two just fine. Flat mode rules!
Re: Flatliners vs. Threadnodists (long post) - 11/10/01 12:00 AM
Hem.. Everyone seems ta be a bit shirty and somewhat needled over this thread issue. Let Ted cast the hole thing off and declare it all sewed up.
Re: Flatliners vs. Threadnodists (long post) - 11/10/01 12:21 AM
With Bolero blaring in the background!
2 Teds? NOT! - 11/10/01 02:35 AM
Ted, you are so busted.This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification.
Delivery to the following recipients failed.
corkieie@yahoo.co.uk
Not to mention the fact that the last 2 posts by GallantTed were closely followed by You!
EDITED when I saw that I had misread the time between Ted posts
Delivery to the following recipients failed.
corkieie@yahoo.co.uk
Not to mention the fact that the last 2 posts by GallantTed were closely followed by You!
EDITED when I saw that I had misread the time between Ted posts
Re: 2 Teds? NOT! - 11/10/01 03:14 AM
Dear Consuelo,
GallantTed here - the one and only. I yam shocking
that ya think otherwise. And what are ya doen posten me email address all over the show? Is that SUE in yer name of any significance? Blantant libel is too good a word fer it.
I assure ya that I yam the genwine article. Check out me Forem if ya don't believe @ http://www.gamblingcommunity.com - it's the GallantTed ChronicAils in the Community Forem section. Let's see ya square up ta me in me natural habitat.
Yours sincerely
THE GallentTed
PS - Leave the other TEd alone. I've got frends in the woods, ya know.
GallantTed here - the one and only. I yam shocking
that ya think otherwise. And what are ya doen posten me email address all over the show? Is that SUE in yer name of any significance? Blantant libel is too good a word fer it.I assure ya that I yam the genwine article. Check out me Forem if ya don't believe @ http://www.gamblingcommunity.com - it's the GallantTed ChronicAils in the Community Forem section. Let's see ya square up ta me in me natural habitat.
Yours sincerely
THE GallentTed
PS - Leave the other TEd alone. I've got frends in the woods, ya know.
Re: Talibanning - 11/10/01 03:40 AM
this is the song that never ends,
it just goes on and on, my friends.
Does this have anything to do with a cat, white carpet, and some gooey chicken dish?
On another subject, Faldage (I think it was) stated that some folks know what Taliban means. I know what it means, but am unsure if the "an" ending implies an article. I've noted of late that, at least in the US, people form double articles, i.e. "the el nino," or "the al kaida," and so forth. Is this kind of ignorance endemic to the US, or pandemic?
Geoff the ignorant student
it just goes on and on, my friends.
Does this have anything to do with a cat, white carpet, and some gooey chicken dish?
On another subject, Faldage (I think it was) stated that some folks know what Taliban means. I know what it means, but am unsure if the "an" ending implies an article. I've noted of late that, at least in the US, people form double articles, i.e. "the el nino," or "the al kaida," and so forth. Is this kind of ignorance endemic to the US, or pandemic?
Geoff the ignorant student
An Apology for Good Breeding. - 11/10/01 03:52 AM
Gee thanks Moss, thank you for this site that allows me to correct my mistakes. I am embarrassed. Over the years my particular brand of smooth, subtle, humour has proved to be a hit with bar room chicks but I am finding out that my humour doesn't travel well beyond the Alabama state line. Let me explain...
I wrote: "I, like Tsuwm, choose to announce my intent to never post on this thread again."
Com'on Moss, don't you think it a bit ironic and a lesser bit patrician and a lot funny, that Tsuwm, one of the greatest of the Pooh-bahs, would announce his "good-bye" by posting on the same thread that he found too lengthy for further postings.
I wrote: "Furthermore I would like to urge all others of good breeding to do the same."
Com'on Moss, nobody sez " good breeding" anymore. I interjected the phrase expressly to insure that even the most humourless reader in Awadland would realise that what I was writing was in jest.
Well now Moss, I know one swinging thing; The next time I poke fun at folk on the Yankee Internet, I will decorate my post with a happy number of those stupid, insipid, little e-cons. I no longer enjoy the conceit that I can convey irony, sarcasm, or wit on this infernal mindless machine.
Milum.
I wrote: "I, like Tsuwm, choose to announce my intent to never post on this thread again."
Com'on Moss, don't you think it a bit ironic and a lesser bit patrician and a lot funny, that Tsuwm, one of the greatest of the Pooh-bahs, would announce his "good-bye" by posting on the same thread that he found too lengthy for further postings.
I wrote: "Furthermore I would like to urge all others of good breeding to do the same."
Com'on Moss, nobody sez " good breeding" anymore. I interjected the phrase expressly to insure that even the most humourless reader in Awadland would realise that what I was writing was in jest.
Well now Moss, I know one swinging thing; The next time I poke fun at folk on the Yankee Internet, I will decorate my post with a happy number of those stupid, insipid, little e-cons. I no longer enjoy the conceit that I can convey irony, sarcasm, or wit on this infernal mindless machine.
Milum.
Re: An Apology for Good Breeding. - 11/10/01 04:01 AM
[irony] [sarcasm][wit] 
WW
WW
Mending our ways - 11/10/01 04:50 AM
It's apparent that the culture of this board doesn't tolerate excessively long robes.
I guess that's OK, wordwind, so long as the culture of this board doesn't force you into a burqua. I just have one question. Maybe you can help me out. I think we can all agree that a consensus freely formed by a representative sampling of participants should be respected as the dominant "culture" of AWADtalk. But who sits in judgment on these rules? Is there a chain of command here like the military with the Pooh-Bah corresponding in rank to a general? For instance, this rule or consensus or guideline (or whatever it is) that more than 100 postings is too many. Who made that rule? Is it written anywhere? Does anyone vote on it? How come no-one seems to know about except those who seek to enforce it? And is this rule being enforced selectively. I don't mean to be disrespectful, Wordwind, I am just trying to understand the "culture" here. It appears that the "Omegatist" thread has been pretty much shut down in deference to pronouncements from on high. It just seems curious to me that an entire thread can be shut down for exhibiting an excessive amount of enthusiasm and collegiality. I hope you [or someone, please] can help me out here, Wordwind, because I am at a loss for words. I have looked everyone on my own and I can't find anything about this 100 posting limit. Is somebody putting me on here?
I guess that's OK, wordwind, so long as the culture of this board doesn't force you into a burqua.
I just have one question. Maybe you can help me out. I think we can all agree that a consensus freely formed by a representative sampling of participants should be respected as the dominant "culture" of AWADtalk. But who sits in judgment on these rules? Is there a chain of command here like the military with the Pooh-Bah corresponding in rank to a general? For instance, this rule or consensus or guideline (or whatever it is) that more than 100 postings is too many. Who made that rule? Is it written anywhere? Does anyone vote on it? How come no-one seems to know about except those who seek to enforce it? And is this rule being enforced selectively. I don't mean to be disrespectful, Wordwind, I am just trying to understand the "culture" here. It appears that the "Omegatist" thread has been pretty much shut down in deference to pronouncements from on high. It just seems curious to me that an entire thread can be shut down for exhibiting an excessive amount of enthusiasm and collegiality. I hope you [or someone, please] can help me out here, Wordwind, because I am at a loss for words. I have looked everyone on my own and I can't find anything about this 100 posting limit. Is somebody putting me on here?
Re: Talibanning - 11/10/01 06:15 AM
I apologize for breeching board etiquette and posting on the former thread, but the Ogden Nash piece I stumbled across seemed so appropriate I just had to. And as a flatliner I know how lugubrious opening a long thread can be, even the main threads are taking forever to reveal themselves. It seems I do more waiting than reading or posting when I'm here now. And since I'm over 2,200 posts behind on Q & A and another few hundred back on Misc., the task of catching up seems formidible (if not downright impossible).
So, here, for those who missed it due to my carelessness, is the poem...'cause chuckles are priceless these days!
He must've written this poem with this (the former) thread in mind!
THE SCREEN WITH THE FACE WITH THE VOICE
by Ogden Nash
How long
Is a song?
O Lord,
How long?
A second?
A minute?
An hour?
A day?
A decade?
A cycle of Cathay?
Press the ears
With occlusive fingers;
The whining melody
Lingers, lingers;
The mouthing face
Will not be hid,
But leers at the eye
From the inner lid.
With the sure advance of ultimate doom
The moaning adenoids larger loom;
The seven-foot eyebrows fall and rise
In roguish rapture or sad surprise;
Eyeballs roll with fine emotion,
Like buoys rocked by a treacle ocean;
Tugged like the bell above the chapel,
Tosses the giant Adam's apple;
Oozes the voice from the magic screen,
A slow Niagra of Grenadine;
A frenzy of ripe orgiastic pain,
Niagra gurgling down the drain.
How long
Is a song?
O Lord,
How long?
As long as Loew,
And Keith,
And Albee;
It Was,
And Is,
And Always Shall Be.
This is the string Time may not sever,
This is the music that lasts forever,
This is the Womb,
This is the Tomb,
This is Alpha, Omega, and Oom!
The eyes, the eyes shall follow you!
The throat, the throat shall swallow you!
Hygienic teeth shall wolf you!
And viscous voice engulf you!
The lolloping tongue itself answer your question!
The Adam's Apple dance at your ingestion!
And you shall never die, but live to nourish the bowels
Of deathless celluloid vowels.
© 1947 by Ogden Nash
(note: the italics are mine)
So, here, for those who missed it due to my carelessness, is the poem...'cause chuckles are priceless these days!
He must've written this poem with this (the former) thread in mind!
THE SCREEN WITH THE FACE WITH THE VOICE
by Ogden Nash
How long
Is a song?
O Lord,
How long?
A second?
A minute?
An hour?
A day?
A decade?
A cycle of Cathay?
Press the ears
With occlusive fingers;
The whining melody
Lingers, lingers;
The mouthing face
Will not be hid,
But leers at the eye
From the inner lid.
With the sure advance of ultimate doom
The moaning adenoids larger loom;
The seven-foot eyebrows fall and rise
In roguish rapture or sad surprise;
Eyeballs roll with fine emotion,
Like buoys rocked by a treacle ocean;
Tugged like the bell above the chapel,
Tosses the giant Adam's apple;
Oozes the voice from the magic screen,
A slow Niagra of Grenadine;
A frenzy of ripe orgiastic pain,
Niagra gurgling down the drain.
How long
Is a song?
O Lord,
How long?
As long as Loew,
And Keith,
And Albee;
It Was,
And Is,
And Always Shall Be.
This is the string Time may not sever,
This is the music that lasts forever,
This is the Womb,
This is the Tomb,
This is Alpha, Omega, and Oom!
The eyes, the eyes shall follow you!
The throat, the throat shall swallow you!
Hygienic teeth shall wolf you!
And viscous voice engulf you!
The lolloping tongue itself answer your question!
The Adam's Apple dance at your ingestion!
And you shall never die, but live to nourish the bowels
Of deathless celluloid vowels.
© 1947 by Ogden Nash
(note: the italics are mine)
Re: Flatliners vs. Threadnodists (long post) - 11/10/01 09:13 AM
I'm sure that everyone really has better things to do than to descend once again into the name-calling and general abuse syndrome which seems to have been infecting the board all too frequently of late.
I don't necessarily want the last word here, I just don't want to be continually opening threads where all that're being discussed are the "errors" of others' ways.
On-line time costs me money these days. Please don't waste it for me!
I don't necessarily want the last word here, I just don't want to be continually opening threads where all that're being discussed are the "errors" of others' ways.
On-line time costs me money these days. Please don't waste it for me!
Re: 2 Teds? NOT! - 11/10/01 10:41 AM
Now Ted, one would think you were 'Merkin with that there "Sue" talk. All one has to do is click on your name to get your "e-mail address" and the site you posted above takes me no-where. I also googled you and guess what? Not one single hit. I stand my ground on this one.
This to Moss "Rules? We don't need no steenkin' rules here!"
This to Moss "Rules? We don't need no steenkin' rules here!"
"Good Breeding" - 11/10/01 10:53 AM
I no longer enjoy the conceit that I can convey irony, sarcasm, or wit on this infernal mindless machine.
Milum.
Well, at least we know what you mean by "good breeding".
Milum.
Well, at least we know what you mean by "good breeding".
Re: nashery - 11/10/01 11:43 AM
Whitman, loved your extended nashing. Thinking about whit's wit, I noted this distinction: a song has a finite end (albeit remote), while bilateral omegatism is (by definition) infinite, endless and non-asymptotic. Hence this non-orignal poem, whose second, sixth, tenth, etc. lines seem particularly apt w/r/t omegatism:
A mad metapoet,
With nothing to say,
Wrote a mad meta-poem
That started this way:
"A mad metapoet,
With nothing to say,
Wrote a mad meta-poem
That started this way:
"'A mad metapoet,
With nothing to say,
Wrote a mad meta-poem
That started this way:
[etc. .....]
A mad metapoet,
With nothing to say,
Wrote a mad meta-poem
That started this way:
"A mad metapoet,
With nothing to say,
Wrote a mad meta-poem
That started this way:
"'A mad metapoet,
With nothing to say,
Wrote a mad meta-poem
That started this way:
[etc. .....]
Re: Flatliners vs. Threadnodists (long post) - 11/10/01 12:01 PM
apologies if this is a YART.
tsuwm recalls: the board bug that we discovered in referencing old threads (the one where you can only see the first page and then you get shunted off to some current thread) Similarly, if you are seeing an old post in threaded mode (as via a Search), you cannot convert to flat to see even that one page.
There may be a solution, though somewhat tedious, when researching old threads. thanks, musick! From your search-result, appearing in threaded mode, you cannot click over to showflat; the shunt will defeat you. But you can get to flat mode with no shunt, if you copy the url (for the theaded view) into your word processor; edit it there to change the letters "showthread" to "showflat", and then paste back the url as edited. At least, that's worked for me.
tsuwm recalls: the board bug that we discovered in referencing old threads (the one where you can only see the first page and then you get shunted off to some current thread) Similarly, if you are seeing an old post in threaded mode (as via a Search), you cannot convert to flat to see even that one page.
There may be a solution, though somewhat tedious, when researching old threads. thanks, musick! From your search-result, appearing in threaded mode, you cannot click over to showflat; the shunt will defeat you. But you can get to flat mode with no shunt, if you copy the url (for the theaded view) into your word processor; edit it there to change the letters "showthread" to "showflat", and then paste back the url as edited. At least, that's worked for me.
Re: 2 Teds? NOT! - 11/10/01 03:31 PM
Nay, my dear,
The other Ted and I share only one thing, the name Ted. One would think that he and I share also the adjectival appelation gallant, but I cannot answer for the other Ted, only for myself on the adjectives that truly apply, and not for the adjectives that are claimed to apply.
Now how's that for a Godforsaken excuse for a sentence???
All seriousness aside, he and I are not the same human being. At first I wasn't sure, but now I am.
The other Ted and I share only one thing, the name Ted. One would think that he and I share also the adjectival appelation gallant, but I cannot answer for the other Ted, only for myself on the adjectives that truly apply, and not for the adjectives that are claimed to apply.
Now how's that for a Godforsaken excuse for a sentence???
All seriousness aside, he and I are not the same human being. At first I wasn't sure, but now I am.
Re: 2 Teds? NOT! - 11/10/01 03:42 PM
Dear Consuelo
I'm awfull sorry about the URL I gave. Ya upset me so mush with yer accusations that me paw must have slipped and I made a teeny typen error. The address is http://www.gamblingcommunity.com. Sorry again fer inconvincing ya. I'm in the Community Forem section.
GallantTed
I'm awfull sorry about the URL I gave. Ya upset me so mush with yer accusations that me paw must have slipped and I made a teeny typen error. The address is http://www.gamblingcommunity.com. Sorry again fer inconvincing ya. I'm in the Community Forem section.
GallantTed
Re: 2 Teds? NOT! - 11/10/01 05:14 PM
At the risk of having even more people wonder if there is only one Ted, and I assure you that this is not the case, I found the entire URL for GallantTed's site:
http://www.gamblingcommunity.com/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=list&forum=DCForumID17&conf=Travel
This'll probably make your screen go wide on you. Sorry!
TTF
http://www.gamblingcommunity.com/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=list&forum=DCForumID17&conf=Travel
This'll probably make your screen go wide on you. Sorry!
TTF
Re: 2 Teds? NOT! - 11/10/01 08:11 PM
Dunno about my screen, what about my eyes? What is the site about? Is it gamblers anonymous or gamblers synonymous? And what happened to the English language?
TEd (TEd The First, I presume), your puns are forgiven. Trespass all you like old son.
TEd (TEd The First, I presume), your puns are forgiven. Trespass all you like old son.
TeD 2 Ted - 11/10/01 08:14 PM
Dear TeD
Thanks fer that extended URL - I didn't even know that meself. Good job. What did ya think of me work - ammen't I doen a good job fer the bewildered and bebludgeoned masses?
Bye the way - is there no word of the day on Saturdays? Do the dictionaries wipe themselves clean at the weekends or somethin?
Be seein ya
GallantTed
Thanks fer that extended URL - I didn't even know that meself. Good job. What did ya think of me work - ammen't I doen a good job fer the bewildered and bebludgeoned masses?
Bye the way - is there no word of the day on Saturdays? Do the dictionaries wipe themselves clean at the weekends or somethin?
Be seein ya
GallantTed
Re: TeD 2 Ted - 11/10/01 09:00 PM
Dear GallantTed: I remember seeing a post several months ago that the board members took pity on Wordsmith's elf assistants, and voted to allow them to be idle on weekends.
Re: TeD 2 Ted - 11/10/01 10:33 PM
Dear WWH
Everyone deserves a brake. In order ta get me daily fix of new words, I just picked up me all comprehensive tedasaurus and found the following word. I'll share it with ya -
Euphony - a sweet sound or somethin ya call a person when they're being pretentious. I think I'll be sayen the latter a lot ta Goldilocks.
If ya need any help with the Gaelic I'll do me best ta help.
However, although I have an excellent command of the English language me Irish is a bit rusty. But I'll do what i can fer ya.
Be seein ya
GallantTed
Everyone deserves a brake. In order ta get me daily fix of new words, I just picked up me all comprehensive tedasaurus and found the following word. I'll share it with ya -
Euphony - a sweet sound or somethin ya call a person when they're being pretentious. I think I'll be sayen the latter a lot ta Goldilocks.
If ya need any help with the Gaelic I'll do me best ta help.
However, although I have an excellent command of the English language me Irish is a bit rusty. But I'll do what i can fer ya.
Be seein ya
GallantTed
Re: 2 Teds? NOT! - 11/11/01 02:06 AM
Howya Capital Kiwi
I thought it was Captain Kiwi fer a minute - that would be a cool name.
The site in question is a games site. Ya play with a fun money called Ludos (Latin - "I Play" - or so I'm told). Me favourite game is hangman - I did all 2,500 puzzles. There's also slots, and poker and games like that.
And then of course there are the Forems where people can talk about gamblem and games and tell stories and stuff. And there's my Problem Page - put there no doubt ta add a bit of culture ta the whole affair. Ya should try the hangman - there are some awfully hard clues there altagether.
Delighted ta have met ya and it's good ta see that the English language is alive and kikken.
Be seein ya
GallanTed - The Trouble Shooten Teddy Bear
I thought it was Captain Kiwi fer a minute - that would be a cool name.
The site in question is a games site. Ya play with a fun money called Ludos (Latin - "I Play" - or so I'm told). Me favourite game is hangman - I did all 2,500 puzzles. There's also slots, and poker and games like that.
And then of course there are the Forems where people can talk about gamblem and games and tell stories and stuff. And there's my Problem Page - put there no doubt ta add a bit of culture ta the whole affair. Ya should try the hangman - there are some awfully hard clues there altagether.
Delighted ta have met ya and it's good ta see that the English language is alive and kikken.
Be seein ya
GallanTed - The Trouble Shooten Teddy Bear
Re: 2 Teds? NOT! - 11/11/01 02:19 AM
Ah, synonymous then. Thank you kindly, squire.
Re: 2 Teds? NOT! - 11/12/01 12:34 PM
Be that as it may, our double-dose of Teds merits a Te Deum, rather than tedium.
Re: 2 Teds? NOT! - 11/13/01 01:41 AM
We may rather prefer it was the kaddish before too long ...