´óÏó´«Ã½

""

Comments

1. At 12:31 PM on 21 Sep 2006, wrote:

   SB1

   I presume that to thanks us all for our efforts, all of us who submimitted an intro will be presented with a curly-wurly.

   I am looking forward to mine already

2. At 12:35 PM on 21 Sep 2006, Enoch Ramsbottom wrote:

   Nae bovver Eddie,

   If you're not your self today, enjoy it while you can.

   My lunchtime claret is utterly devine.

3. At 12:42 PM on 21 Sep 2006, valery pedant wrote:

   Yes "it can be"

   SB1 surely not (waiting for delivery lorry)

4. At 12:56 PM on 21 Sep 2006, wrote:

   Two threads in ten minutes, very impressive!

   Should vex the die-hard blogistas out there no end!

   Seems to tax some people if they see more than one thread a day. Me? I love it...

   Si.

5. At 12:57 PM on 21 Sep 2006, Dr Hackenbush wrote:

   ````

   SB1 + 34mins

   Good job Chris. I do a bit of unofficial editing myself, but could not clear enough space in my head to have a go at the challenge yesterday. Maybe next time - although did Eddie pick the entry of someone with a more broadcast-friendly name?

6. At 01:07 PM on 21 Sep 2006, Dr Hackenbush wrote:

   SB6 ?

   It says there are five comments, but I can only see three.

   But while I’ve got your eye - can we organise a campaign (or smaller scale movement) to have ‘before’ reinstated where radio presenters, etc, have adopted ‘ahead of’?

   OK, Doc.

7. At 01:07 PM on 21 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

   That'll make two curly wurlys for me today! I think I'll need to spend longer in the gym tonight:(

8. At 01:10 PM on 21 Sep 2006, wrote:

   What's today's challenge for us then Eddie ? How about if we listen carefully to tonights broadcasts and see if we can all agree on any weak spots in the programme ?

9. At 01:33 PM on 21 Sep 2006, wrote:

   Eddie, I started by writing yesterday's cue in the voice of Ashley Cole (not his real name) but I began shaking with anger and found myself rejecting your offer.

10. At 01:47 PM on 21 Sep 2006, big sister wrote:

    "Yes" is the "simple answer".
    N.B. Don't make it a habit to invite contributions from bloggers or you'll invite a fate worse than Fi Glovers!

11. At 01:50 PM on 21 Sep 2006, big sister wrote:

    'Problems with server' are holding up contributions to the website today - Is Eddie playing tennis again?

12. At 02:14 PM on 21 Sep 2006, Rufus T. Firefly wrote:

    I've had problems with my server too - big sister (SB12)

    Yesterday,
    All those backups seemed a waste of pay,
    Now my database has gone away,
    Oh I believe in yesterday.

    Suddenly,
    There's not half the files there used to be,
    And there a deadline
    hanging over me
    The system crashed so suddenly.

    I pushed something wrong -
    what it was I could not say,
    Now all my data's gone and I long
    for yesterday-ay-ay-ay.

    Yesterday,
    The need for backups
    seemed so far away,
    I knew my data was all here to stay
    Now I believe in yesterday.

13. At 02:26 PM on 21 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    Oh dear, big sister... And I thought I was the only one doing bad puns here!

14. At 04:33 PM on 21 Sep 2006, wrote:

    As song lyric rip-offs go, I found the above rather amusing. Having two computers, full of valuable files and yet still not backing them up, I can empathise...

15. At 05:06 PM on 21 Sep 2006, Olive Greene wrote:

    sb14
    (can't be, surely)

    Where are you hiding? Are you all playing truant?

    (and don't call me Olive!)

16. At 05:16 PM on 21 Sep 2006, Lady Penelope wrote:

    Pfuff - not many bloggeroos around today. I reckon everyone gone round to Valery's to play with her rockwhacker . . .

    Ho ho, hi ho.

17. At 05:20 PM on 21 Sep 2006, Lady Penelope wrote:

    That should have read 'Hi ho, hi ho', as the more observant among you will have noticed already. It winged (wang?) off as I was proofreading it.

    It's just occurred to me to wonder whether the word 'minging' (oops quotes) has anything to do with Sir Campbell . . . just a thought.

18. At 05:21 PM on 21 Sep 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    So, once again, yesterday, Ed DieMair repeated the base calumny about Fig Lover being sacked by Broadcasting House. I think he should show us the proof (the stolen stationery), apologise, or be sued.

    Is Fi short for Fiona?

19. At 05:36 PM on 21 Sep 2006, Phthalo Blue wrote:

    Re 16
    And just TRY calling me 'Pthalo' (oops MORE quotes!).

    sb about at least 22, given that I've got about two messages queued up waiting and I bet there are loads more . . .

    Lady P

20. At 06:00 PM on 21 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    Oh Eddie, a rugby shirt?? I'm disappointed in your sartorial choice. I hope it's just for the one day....

    Hey folks, did you hear that Lissa was the Editor today? Yay Lissa!!

21. At 07:45 PM on 21 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Well, Lady P (17), I was working, so no chance to blog, or even listen to PM this evening. Customers, again.

    David (19), I heard the Friday exchange some months agin about BH, when it was Fig's last turn on the gig, and I remember Eddie turning to Fig and saying along the lines of "Well, you've been sacked", and Fig did not deny it.

22. At 10:21 PM on 21 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    Hmmm... It seems a little quiet here this evening... Is everyon out enjoying themselves?

23. At 10:21 PM on 21 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    oh and sb23 and sb24

24. At 10:46 PM on 21 Sep 2006, Aperitif wrote:

    SB23

    Rufus (13) - very nice. Hate that miserable song (reminds me of a school teacher who used to make us sing it to her "improved" child-friendly lyrics). You have just made it palatale for me.

    OOh, Martha just said "hoist by your own pertard" on Newsnight - wasn't everyone saying that here the other day???? Spooky. Or not.

25. At 11:05 PM on 21 Sep 2006, Pat Burrows wrote:

    Today's blog really cheered me up as it had an extra special meaning for me. I knew straight away what you were talking about when you referred to the big screen next to your desk in the PM office and it brought back memories of writing things like Kendal [Bridget] and Bennett [Neil] on a specially prepared form at the special desk in the Bush House Newsroom for tapes for the Reel at World Service.

    It's also awful, writing this, as I am having problems remembering things like 'Traffic', but it was fifteen years ago that I worked as an RPA in the World Service newsroom and those most familiar terms come back eventually. It brings back many happy memories and is like being with old friends again!!

26. At 11:54 PM on 21 Sep 2006, Aperitif wrote:

    Hurrah! 'This Week' is back. Why do I like it? Can't abide Diane Abbott or Portaloo. And silly smug git Neil is only slightly better.

    I really should go to bed.

27. At 08:11 AM on 22 Sep 2006, Lady Penelope wrote:

    Yes, Aperitif (23) - she surely did. Makes all the hard work truly worthwhile, doesn't it?

28. At 09:01 AM on 22 Sep 2006, big sister wrote:

    Has anyone looked at the LibDem conference blog page? Desperate to experience Ed's 'bleeding eye' syndrome, I logged on today for a quick sighting ... Stunned by the content of the Emperor's speech (Check against delivery - Sorry, I only heard extracts yesterday..... Did he really say all that? Oaks, acorns, hurricanes - highly relevant to LibDem policies???) but disappointed not to see the backdrop. Ah well, back to the Conference Blog .... And now I know who I'll be voting for - Lord Muir!!! The true upholder of democracy! For, do the LibDems offer their public the opportunity to comment? Like heck! No options there at all, unlike our democratic leader. Who says there are too many Scots in positions of power? Not I!
    C'mon Ed, time to stand up for the little people (oh, now we're sounding like Lilliputians, or, even worse, Diddymen!) Throw your hat, or rugby shirt, into the ring and put yourself forward against Gloomy Gordon!

29. At 10:21 AM on 22 Sep 2006, Aperitif wrote:

    re 29

    Marvellous idea Big Sister (I've never had a big sister before - this is great). I have a question: I'm quite tall (for a girl) - can I be in Eddie's Diddymen party too?

30. At 10:24 AM on 22 Sep 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    John (22),
    I thought, at the time, as I remember it, Ed said that he wanted Fi in the sack.

    So sue me for saying Ed should be sued.

    I think he is just jealous because she got the Peel slot and he didn't.
    

31. At 11:02 AM on 22 Sep 2006, big sister wrote:

    David (30) - I think you've got that wrong. Not the bit about the sack - Who knows Eddie's intentions? - but about the Peel slot. Everybody knows Eddie doesn't like early mornings - PM's much more his 'timeslot'. And, am I the only one to notice that Sequin is often left to carry the Friday slot? So - late starts, long weekends, this blog .... No contest really, is it?

32. At 11:36 AM on 22 Sep 2006, big sister wrote:

    Something strange is happening on the blog today ....suddenly David has become 31, and there's a new number 30. It's a bit like a rewrite of the Top Forty. So David, you are now 31. But, getting back to 30 - I'm really glad you agree with me, Aperitif (by the way, is that Martini or Cinzano? With or without tonic/slice/ice? Is that what Eddie's always referring to in his newsletter?) Of course you can join the party!
    BTW, Big Sisters aren't at all like Big Brothers - We're cuddly, caring, sharing folk who keep a friendly eye out for our folk. So, I'm lining up for a post as Ed's shadow spokesperson on comunity relations, once the party's underway.
    Of course, if he doesn't like the idea, the bloggers could have their own party. Mine's a single malt .....

33. At 11:48 AM on 22 Sep 2006, big sister wrote:

    Eddie
    Where are you?
    Hasn't Chris given you your "voice" back yet?
    

34. At 03:38 PM on 22 Sep 2006, valery pedant wrote:

    Lady P - 17 - no rush, we've had to keep it for another day, as yesterday's stone delivery didn't show up (praise the Lord. Who mentioned the word Bung?).

    SB35

35. At 05:30 PM on 22 Sep 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    Big sister (30something),
    I thought it was just my poor eyesight, but apparently somebody enjoys switching number around.

36. At 08:50 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Aperitif wrote:

    Hi Big Sister, that changing numbers thing happens to me all the time. I've given up putting "re 33" or whatever because the blogmeister just likes to make a show of me.

    As for the Martini/Cinzano question - close but neither: Other aperitifs are available... :)...

37. At 09:54 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Aperitif wrote:

    Why have later posts shown up before my post on this blog then?

    What did I say that was so bad? Did it have "ta-da" in it?

38. At 11:59 PM on 23 Sep 2006, Aperitif wrote:

    Sigh