´óÏó´«Ã½

« Previous | Main | Next »

Weather

Eddie Mair | 12:28 UK time, Friday, 22 September 2006

Yesterday people were going past my window in t shirts and dresses. But that's the men at the ´óÏó´«Ã½ for you. The point is the weather was warm. Lots of people were out and about. Sauntering to a lunch outside where it was at least 25 celsius. Suddenly it was summer again.

Today it's dark and raining. It looks like November. Or maybe February. Some people seem to have been prepared for that. Others less so.

I am going to monitor what people are wearing as they go past the window. As a public service.

1218: woman running in a flimsy top.
1219: woman with sensible coat and a brolly.
1220: man with big coat and brolly.
1221: man in a light coat but his face said: "I wish I'd brought a brolly". Quite brisk.
1222: no-one.
1223: no-one.
1224: woman in summery top, but with quite a big brolly.
Man in suit with brolly.
Man in very wet suit (not a wetsuit).
1225: woman in summer top, bustling, head down. Think that perm might be in
trouble.
1226: Man in shirt with stripes, running.
1227: car, windscreen wipers going.

And I suppose if any of this has a moral, it's that we should all pay more attention to the weather forecast.

Comments

  1. At 12:35 PM on 22 Sep 2006, big sister wrote:

    Eddie,
    You're like the buses, you! (Not Red and Double Decker, of course - just all that waiting, then two come along at once ...)
    but now we all know why we didn't hear from you before - too busy looking out the window! Are the news stories today so very boring? No telly to look at today?

  2. At 12:40 PM on 22 Sep 2006, big sister wrote:

    How did you see the man with stripes running at 12.26? You were busy logging the previous weblog. Oh no! Does this mean you didn't write it?

  3. At 12:44 PM on 22 Sep 2006, alexander wrote:

    well, Mr M, it is glorious here - although the rabbit population which dot around the office compound look worried. However, they are continuing in their quest to knock a tree over (by burrowing underneath it - more than 45 degrees lean as we speak.

    12.47, man in purple t-shirt.

  4. At 12:47 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Lou Cowt wrote:

    Eddie, I've been looking out of the window as well.

    I'll never understand my neighbour. He has recently started wheel-clamping his own caravan when he finds he's inadvertently parked it on his own drive!

    He's not a full shilling, if you ask me.

  5. At 01:01 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Enoch Ramsbottom wrote:

    Er...I've just forgot what I was going to blog. Or is it post?

    Ah yes, it was this I think?

    The government tells us that we're eating too many pies and that we're dying of heart disease, then in the next breath they're telling us we are living too long and there'll be no more pension money left for us.

    I wish they'd make their bloody minds up.

  6. At 01:02 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Colin wrote:

    Can't be bothered reading this blog anymore. It's drivel. Can't imagine why anybody thought studio-bound presenters would have anything significant to say on a regular basis. Better to focus on journalists stuck in war-zones or at the UN or something.

  7. At 01:13 PM on 22 Sep 2006, wrote:

    The rain was well timed for me. I had a man round to see the leaking gutter, and the rain started just in time for him to see the leak. But I got soaked while he was looking at it. And he cannot fix it for three weeks...

    13:10 Parakeet just few past the window

  8. At 01:14 PM on 22 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Just got back from my hols. Nothing's changed then.

    I posted "Ta Da!" on yesterdays blog and it got moderated.

  9. At 01:19 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Eddie Mair wrote:

    Colin, you are right. I refer you to my second-ever post in August:

    "Let me make this quite clear. I have nothing to say and this will be a waste of everyone's time. Really."

  10. At 01:23 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Roger the Pedant wrote:

    So, a woman running in a flimsy top? Was this a particularly large top, or a particularly small woman. Perhaps it was a circus Big Top, in which case, what was it doing outside your window?
    No, I really don't have anything better to do with my time...

  11. At 01:23 PM on 22 Sep 2006, coco wrote:

    This blog is not drivel -- it's light hearted.

  12. At 01:24 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Pip wrote:

    The trouble is, I do pay attention to the weather forecast, and within 10 seconds totally forget what they say. Why?

  13. At 01:24 PM on 22 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Oh Colin, Isn't it the bread and butter of life though -- there to cheer us up -- on the subject of comedy don't forget to listen to feedback today !

  14. At 01:26 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Rachel wrote:

    Eddie

    Was the man in the striped shirt running, or were the stripes running? And if so, was the shirt still stripey but in a blurry kinda way?

    ta

    Rachel [I'm a very visual person]
    [so why am I commenting on a radio show?]
    [erm....]

  15. At 01:28 PM on 22 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Life Goes On

  16. At 01:35 PM on 22 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Sorry to lose you Colin

    There are blogs out there if you want High Octane, I'm in a War Zone type of stuff.

    I fear this blog very quickly turned into a group of mates chatting. Which is great. Honest.

    Stick around and you might find you enjoy it.

    Particularly when Fearless breaks out the humbugs.

    Welcome back andycra[a-z][a-z]

    SB8

  17. At 01:41 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    Well, I got caught in the rain earlier when I went to the gym and again on the way back. At least I was a bit prepared as I had a jacket with me for once, and the rain isn't too hard here at the moment. Still, it was fuin watching all the people who didn't come prepared running to get to the shops:o)

    Who's turn is it for the sweet-shop run? I've a hankering for a Ripple today for a change...

  18. At 01:46 PM on 22 Sep 2006, M Davies wrote:

    Eddie, I'm just pleased that all the licence money is being put to such good use. If this fashion parade continues I reckon that Trinny and Susanna could soon take over presenting the prog!

  19. At 02:04 PM on 22 Sep 2006, David Buckland wrote:

    There now. I've missed the World at One, because the PM email (posted at 12:47) only arrived at 14:06.

    Another missed opportunity - much like the phone conversation with the DPP.

  20. At 02:09 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Captain Square wrote:

    Eddie old boy,

    A gentleman must have at least four umbrellas. This rule of wardrobe I have determined myself, so let me explain.

    An umbrella is not just an implement for keeping rain of one's pinstripe. Rather, it is a statement about one's character and one's attitude to life.

    Are you content with the cheap and nasty (Heaven forefend!) or do you demand high standards, expert craftmanship and a proper measure of dignity?

    An umbrella can afford all these fine qualities - and impart something quaintessentially English (or Scottish) into the bargain.

    All my umbrellas are long (I will not dignify the miserable folding sort with even the most cursory condition) much the same?

    No, they are not.

    If lightness is you absolute priority, the central stem can be made of steel like the ribs. But it will not be strong and will bend or buckle if you lean upon it.

    I much prefer the solid stick umbrella, which has its handle and stem made from one piece of wood. This can be used as a walking stick and is therefore good for both the balance and the posture. (And very handy for support when you have failed to resist that extra glass of Chateau Latour at lunch.)

    If you look into your wardrobe again, and glance down. There you will see your shoes - both black and brown. The classic English umbrella has a black cover (usually nowadays made of nylon, which is light and hard wearing.) But a black umbrella with brown shoes...banish such a sartorial solecism!!

    You will therefore need 2 further umbrellas (a 25 inch and a 26 inch) with covers in discreet colour. Dark green is perfect. I suppose one could use a green dust sheath to conceal the black in the dry, but come a rainy day and the problem would reveal itself once more.

    I've seen umbrellas in Jermyn Street, London with a gold-plated band, but to my mind this adds an unpleasant touch of vulgarity.

    So Eddie, I'm off to my club now for a gentle libation (or three) ...before it starts to rain.

    I'll be back in time to listen to PM at five o'clock.

    TTFN, old boy.

  21. At 02:17 PM on 22 Sep 2006, The Stainless Steel Cat wrote:

    (SB11)
    Eddie (9) This isn't a waste of anyone's time. This blog is the recycling wheelie bin for time.

    Time spent writing and replying to this blog is a great way to reuse old jokes, old thoughts and slightly damaged punctuation and grammar.

    To waste time you would have to do something like, oh I don't know, stare out a window maybe...

    ...ah.

  22. At 02:19 PM on 22 Sep 2006, russell wrote:

    i was about to leave for my studio when the rain hit - i can't be bothered now, although i do have to go to argos to buy some skipping ropes, then to the vet to get the special diabetic crunchies my almost-as-old-as-ming cat eats. Should I bother?

  23. At 02:20 PM on 22 Sep 2006, wrote:

    For people like me, stuck in a windowless office (well, not exactly, but the walls are about 15 feet high with a small window on top), then it's valuable information, and such a service to provide me with the info that the world is still doing it's thing. If the UK got blitzed by an A bomb, I wouldn't know until I left the office after 5pm, so thanks Eddie

  24. At 02:25 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Robin Andis-Merrymen wrote:

    Hello,

    1439: system administrator walks past window.

    GOODBYE!

  25. At 02:26 PM on 22 Sep 2006, big sister wrote:

    Does anybody know what the record to date is for blog comments? I see we have a 90 going at the moment - Is that a record?

  26. At 02:35 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Fergus wrote:

    it says you have no comments on your blog - you have lots!

    Is anyone else not surpised you noted a woman running in a flimsy top? Shame it wasn't a wet flimsy top eh.

  27. At 02:44 PM on 22 Sep 2006, big sister wrote:

    Eddie, you seem to be fixated on liquids at the moment - see this blog and the newsletter for today. Do you need a lunchtime tipple?
    As for the Sussex County Championship - hurrah, say I! But did they play in this rain?

  28. At 02:52 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Sara wrote:

    Capt Square - sorry to disappoint, but my umbrella folds up very tiny and has a picture of Eeyore on it.

    Very appropriate. I don't even mind being in my sunless basement this afternoon because I can tell from the shaft of daylight at the other side of my tiny exercise yard that it's very dark outside and peeing down.

    I hope Fearless's twizzling duvet keeps him cosy in this awful weather. Is anyone getting any sweeties?

  29. At 03:13 PM on 22 Sep 2006, valery pedant wrote:

    All I can say to you andyc is - where is your postcard and why were we not given prior notice of your holiday plans - we have been concerned? John H managed to send one the other day (postcard that is)

    Welcome back though!

    No rain here, though I do have many umbrellas should it come our way (most of them broken - why can't I bring myself to bin them? they look like they could be used for something else now. Product of a make-do-and-mend upbringing results in us building a new building in order to store all the stuff which I can't throw out....) More stone shovelling - :o(

    Any luck with the TiFFin FF?

  30. At 03:17 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    SB29

    Sorry to disappoint, Big Sis, but the 90 posts is nowhere near a record for this blog... If you go back to the first few of Eddies blogs, you'll see counts well into triple digits... Still I think that now things have settled down, about 100 would be the most we should expect...

    Hey Sara:o) I don't know what it is with me today, but the words "twizzling duvet" just makes me imagine some sort of evil villain for the 1960's Batman TV series!

    Okay, time to break out the emergency chocolate rations if no-one's going to brave the inclement weather outside....

  31. At 03:20 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Rufus T. Firefly wrote:

    Ah the sweet shop. Whatever happened to Aztec Bars, Texan Bars, Frys Five Centres and Mint Cracknell.

    Mint Cracknell use to cut your tongue, so I suppose that did'nt help it much. Is Space Dust still around? Or has clipboard man banned it?

  32. At 03:22 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Phil wrote:

    With reference to Eddies comment about not paying attention to the weather I would like to point out that I always pay attention, especialy when its presented by a certain lady.

    It might be pissing it outside but the sun is shining in my heart.

  33. At 03:24 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    SB31 (at a guess as my SB29 will be at least 30...)

    No luck so far with the tiFFin, I'm afraid Valery:o( I'll carry on looking for you

  34. At 03:30 PM on 22 Sep 2006, valery pedant wrote:

    Fergus - 26 - you should be ashamed of yourself casting nasturtiums on Eddie's observations. I feel inclined to co*plain.....

  35. At 03:46 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Dr Hackenbush wrote:

    SB34

    We should all pay more attention to the weather forecast? In my region, paying attention to the lovely weather presenter is much more the required occupation. See also 26 and 32.

    Who says I was struck off?!

  36. At 03:58 PM on 22 Sep 2006, valery pedant wrote:

    Ta FF

    SB34

  37. At 04:02 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Chris Carter wrote:

    (#6 )Colin: Of course some of it's drivel, and the writers know it. But does it matter? I think it's great for us grown-ups to have breaks from having to be so deadly serious for so many of our waking hours. It's our playtime for goodness sake.


    (Site Administrator: can you fix it so we can post our comments in a green font, as well as black?)

  38. At 04:24 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    Okay, Phil & Dr. H, I think we need to know what region each of you is living, so we can comment on this as well!

    SB37

  39. At 04:58 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Frances O wrote:

    andycriteria - what are the crietris for modding ta and the in proximity da?

  40. At 05:00 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Frances O wrote:

    blast - criteria, of course

  41. At 05:18 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Frances O wrote:

    Colin - maybe it's not so much drival as drizzle????

  42. At 05:22 PM on 22 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Hey Val (29), I was tempted to send a postcard from the hotel Super-Wi-Fi-Hot-Spot but I resisted it easy enough, there was sunshine, pasta and nice boat trips to think about instead.

    I was well heartened when I got back that you'd all missed me. So thankyou. I even got a nice note on my blog (one of only two) (https://andycragg.blogspot.com), thanks Val.


  43. At 05:43 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Frances O wrote:

    Um... please don't hit me, but is Richard Hammond's welfare one of the most important stories on the news?

    Having shared a flat with a Clarkson fanatic I grew to like him a lot, being so different from the (oh, fill in the adjectives yourselves) one. I wish him the speediest, fullest recovery. I wish his wife and family comfort, consolation and happiness when he is well. I wish them all the best I could wish anyone.

    But it's not really headline stuff, is it? Any more?

    Like I say, don't hit me. I'm a gurl and I think other stuff might be more important. What do I know

  44. At 05:53 PM on 22 Sep 2006, whisht wrote:

    well, beers are being wafted around the office - very t'internet boom - and I'm finally listening to "Radio 4".

    PiL though.

    Less words than PM but more letters...

  45. At 05:56 PM on 22 Sep 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    Eddie (9ish),

    What's this with posting in the middle of the blog? No war to report on, or what?

    I'll bet you enjoyed the woman in the flimsy top running past your window.

    I just looked out the window and saw a pigeon fly past. Of course, my window is in the loft.

  46. At 05:57 PM on 22 Sep 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    Good-bye. I've got better things to do anyhow.

  47. At 06:04 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    Hey Frances, I'm a guy, and I totally agree with you! I can understand it being in the bulletins for the first two news cycles (maybe headlines as it happened, and as a mid-running order item in the next set of bulletins). After that, It really should only warrant a one or two sentence piece to say if he's improving, and that the investigations are ongoing. Really, there's not much else to say...

    Okay, serious stuff over. It's the end of the week, so let's have a party here on the blog :D

  48. At 06:06 PM on 22 Sep 2006, whisht wrote:

    hmmmm thanks Frances Ooo

    now I know not to bother listening to today's PM tomorrow....

    which is a public service I'm extremely grateful for...

    oops - hometime! or more specifically go-meet-someone-i-really-like [sigh] time

  49. At 06:16 PM on 22 Sep 2006, wrote:

    O Francis : I don't know, I've tried it again and it got moderated again. I'm going to try "Ta Da" on each blog to see if one will stick .... wts.

  50. At 06:45 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Rachel wrote:

    Hey Rachel #14 - I thought I was Rachel?! How terribly confusing, I'm suffering an identity crisis. How do I know if I'm me or you? Does it matter? Can we coexist in the same blog without imploding? Should I change my name, or should you?

    So many questions, I'm beginning to feel a bit blurry like a stripy shirt left out in the rain. . .

    Colin - sorry you don't like this blog - as a recipient of Eddie's so-called Newsletters since forever, I never really expected it to have any content.

  51. At 06:53 PM on 22 Sep 2006, wrote:

    David McNickle : Check that the pidgeon is not in your water tank.

    Oink Oink, flap, flap! Que?

  52. At 07:05 PM on 22 Sep 2006, valery pedant wrote:

    Party, party, oh forgot, going out at 8, but I'll be back!

    Thanks andyc**, you're entirely welcome. Only teasing about the postcard - same to you Appy, if you get away!

    FF, Wally Winker has suggested Nutty Crisp Surprise as an alternative to Tiffin, wotcha think? they got that one?

    SB47

  53. At 07:14 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Dr Hackenbush wrote:

    SB52

    FF (38) - That would be close to East Anglia

    wh (44) - Ah, Metal Box - although I have Second Edition on CD.

    Now who was the correspondent going on about the REF earlier?

  54. At 07:52 PM on 22 Sep 2006, valery pedant wrote:

    FAR be it from me to be pedantic - but andytada, let's put it down to postholiday excitement or something similar "49" I must point out that Frances is Frances, not Francis. She may not bother of course, but I bother on her behalf, having had ^* years of having mine spelled incorrectly...It's all about identity isn't it Rachel, and Rachel. Perhaps you could do what the Johns do (H. & W.)?

    Off to the pub

    SB53 oooh, there's a coincidence....

  55. At 08:28 PM on 22 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Valery (29) it's very easy to make your own tiffin, do you want a recipe? No baking required. The last one I made had cointreau, almonds, raisins in it & went down a treat with the family. Sadly I couldn't sample it myself. My dentist accused me of eating too much sugar 3 years ago, so I flounced out of the surgery in a huge sulk & haven't eaten sugar since. Now its just the old fillings falling out that cause problems...
    Great to see someone has complained about the quality of this blog. But did he actually fill out a "Complain" form? Has anyone? Ever? If not why are they there? Couldn't we have a tick box selection? "Complain" "Approve" "Ignore" "Shout at the screen" Just a thought Lissa. It all seems to be going far too smoothly.

  56. At 08:39 PM on 22 Sep 2006, wrote:

    btw, re-reading the newsletter, is the end of the story about the non-interview a case of a missing apostrophe completely changing the meaning? I missed the finer points of the punctuation discussion here recently, but surely the sentence ending, "...he, and we didn't try" implies that PM was less than assiduous in their efforts. Sorry, it's been an incredibly tedious/stressful (alternately)day at work, ending with a train trip between 2 men who were both a few sandwiches short of a picnic. I have to rant at someone for a change having been a rantee for too long!

  57. At 09:23 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Aperitif wrote:

    Aha! This is where you did the "tada" thing AndycraOK!

    Whisht (44) "fewer" not "less" - surprised Valery could resist picking you up on that one! But, never mind that - someone who makes you sigh??? (48) Gossip! Tell us more!!!

    Roger the Pedant (10). Really? I hope you asked nicely first. She seems to have these exciting Fridays...

  58. At 11:46 PM on 22 Sep 2006, Dr Hackenbush wrote:

    SB58

    Is it still raining, as I have to nip out to the letter box.

    Question-mark.

    BTW I am also a pedant where English language usage is concerned. Please pick this one apart for my own benefit.

  59. At 07:42 AM on 23 Sep 2006, wrote:

    It's Saturday, and there's a strap line.

    Oh oh, either a change of policy or something else for poor Lissa to have to get resolved.

    SB59

  60. At 09:03 AM on 23 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    Well, it's almost time for Figs' new show to start.. Let's hope it has a better reception on the blog than last week....

  61. At 09:26 AM on 23 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Aperitif Yes! I've posted loads of Ta Das here and none have appeared. Yet I've posted some on other blogs and they've turned up (the "can't" blog has two).

    Valery / Frances : sorry about the mispeling. I did fail my English O level twice. Then only got a C on my third attempt. I did manage to cheat my way into university and got a very unexpected 3rd class honours degree, though.

    Annaseed : Um, your link is one sandwich short of, er, a link.

  62. At 09:50 AM on 23 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Oooh, I've been de-bolded. I can do italics but the boldness has gone. Is this a new feature?

  63. At 10:10 AM on 23 Sep 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    Andy (31ish)
    Our water tank, which is right behind me, isn't large enough to hold Walter Pidgeon. A pigeon, maybe.

    I got a nasty reply from the 'powers that be' yesterday about one of my posts possibly being offensive and posting too much only to discover that someone else had three (3, count 'em) in a row. Then both my 'offensive' post and my 'good-bye' (46ish) post appeared one after the other. Do we have a left hand/right hand situation here?

  64. At 10:13 AM on 23 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    Hey, Andycratada...

    I noticed the bold thing myself a few days ago.... You can still do italics and anchors, but no bold or underlining....

    Weird! (that one's for you, Appy :p )

  65. At 10:30 AM on 23 Sep 2006, wrote:

    The whole blog system has been debolded, I'm sure I've been bold in older posts, but the system has timidifyed me.

  66. At 11:14 AM on 23 Sep 2006, valery pedant wrote:

    What did you think of Fee's show then FF - 60? Was that your sweetie shop starting off an idea for her then?

    Annasee - 55 - thanks for that, I do have many a recipe for tiffin (though my Mum's is the best) but they are all substitutes for Cadbury's version which came in (for those days) a BIG bar. I say Big, because usually we had the choice of 1d bars and 2d bars (twice the size, neatly enough), wrapped only in foil, then the next size which got a paper wrapping too, then the BIG range, which included Tiffin and Fruit and Nut etc. Fairly recently ( 5 years agoish)they flirted with a re-release, in a range which included other bygones. How Do you mange to give up on sugar? Btw I can't get your link to work either, thought it was Just Me...

    Good grief, I'd better go and have some chocolate.

    SB66

  67. At 11:56 AM on 23 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    Figs' show is one I think will grow on me, but I will admit I was multi-tasking by cleaning the bathroom while listening...

    I have a feeling that a www is missing from Annasees' link. Give it a try....

    Ooh! The sun's come out! I can actually go outside and do some gardening I meant to do last week but forgot about:p

  68. At 12:03 PM on 23 Sep 2006, John W wrote:

    Re the changes in the html tags (various people either have problems or commented on the problems). In the first couple of days, I discovered it was not possible to change the colour using the "<font color..." html tags.

    Testing bold That showed up correctly in preview, with the usual html coding (someone commented it did not work for them?

    Strikethrough and underlining are now stripped out and so don't show up.

    It seem that to get a link to work now, you actually have to type in:

    <a href="https://web address of the link"> the text for your link </a>

    Note the quote marks. they are essential to get it to work in this blog now.

    Hope this helps all those who've had problems with what used to work no longer works...

  69. At 12:09 PM on 23 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Hum, It did not remember the link for my name, though, as I was testing the previous post via the preview facility (and thereby worked out the new quirks).

    It was FF and andycra[alpha character][alpha character] who reported no bolding, which at least in preview worked for me.

    Also, last one SB66, this one SB67.

    Let's see if this gets moderated for me posting too fast.

  70. At 12:10 PM on 23 Sep 2006, Dr Hackenbush wrote:

    SB66

    Andy (61), perhaps you were awarded a C when they mis-spelled A.

    Is whist still away listening to Albatross?

  71. At 12:24 PM on 23 Sep 2006, whisht wrote:

    ah, Saturday - bit of a dull head on me shoulders and I discover me grammar's gone to pot.

    Aperitif - yep, "fewer" not "less". Wrist duly slapped.
    (btw I said "me" deliberately just then.... its closer to my tone of voice, although the grammar thing is just pure cock up)

    Didn't catch Fi's show (used to love listening to her on GLR) but worse than missing that is that there's no FT to listen to today!
    ("FT" might sound intelligent, but actually its on Radio 5 Live, so...)

    Dr H - nice.

    and as for gossip Aperitif... sorry - it was a weak moment. I shouldn't have said anything. Anyway, there is no gossip unfortunately. Hence my dull head...

    [sigh]

  72. At 01:23 PM on 23 Sep 2006, Aperitif wrote:

    Oh come on Whisht, you can't leave it at that! Share! Share! I want to hear the whole potential romance/fling/short lustful encounter unfolding now!

    (sorry about all the "!"s - unnecessary I know).

    It was me who reported that, after the initial lesson posted, I'd had some success with italics but none at all with bold or underline, although bold does show up on preview. I thought it was "beginner's (bad) luck".

    Ah, well, the sooner I get my work done the sooner I get to go out and play.

  73. At 01:40 PM on 23 Sep 2006, valery pedant wrote:

    Talking about dull heads - Aperry - Been away for a coupla hours and when re-reading to refresh, I suddenly made sense of your last in 57, LOL! You'll never know. Gosh another whole week till Friday?

    D'you know, I'm beginning to be glad I haven't had time yet to investigate the whole html thing - looks like it's a Can of Worms, not to mention an Unnecessary Stress. I'll maybe just stick to the Shouting Capitals and exclamation marks until you lot have de-bugged it all. OK?

    SB73 to BBQ or not to BBQ?

  74. At 01:45 PM on 23 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Crikey-bob, I go away for a couple of weeks and there's romance/flings/short lustful encounters.

    We need to know all the details.

    Dr H : Maybe the first two Ds (D's? Val - help!) were mis-spellled gold starred A+* too. That would give me three 'O' Levels in English, plus one Grade 1 CSE (I'm old).

  75. At 01:50 PM on 23 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Lissa,

    Why does bold show up in preview and not in the actual posting - what is preview for if not to see what the post will look like?!

    The only tags that seem to work are italics and anchor (so long as you remember the quote marks as well). " (you may use HTML tags for style)" Two html tags do work, a plural, so strictly it's correct....

  76. At 05:43 PM on 23 Sep 2006, Dr Hackenbush wrote:

    SB80 ??

    Who was it that presented today’s PM? Good job, and I suggest that she’d make a very capable substitute for Eric, in preference to the usual suspect.

  77. At 05:53 PM on 23 Sep 2006, Dr Hackenbush wrote:

    SB90 ???

    And one more thing - whoever adds ‘Your Emails’ to this programme’s website should really, really think about learning the correct use of the apostrophe.

  78. At 05:54 PM on 23 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Sorry if the link didn't work, it will have been entirely my fault as I am not even semi-literate computerwise. I've tried adding in the http bit & also a www for good measure. Some combination of the above might do it! (Mind you, you might be disappointed when you get there, unless you're planning on getting married, or do a lot of ironing)
    As far as the sugar - the first 6 months were the worst - practically clawing at the pantry doors insearch of something sweet after dinner. It's definitely an addiction. Now I can happily make chocolate recipes for everyone & not even want to taste it. This is sounding a bit too wholesome for words isn't it? Probably nauseating, in fact...

  79. At 06:24 PM on 23 Sep 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    Hack (77ish),
    I'm not sure what you are referring to, but what's wrong with 'Your Emails'?

  80. At 06:42 PM on 23 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Annaseed : how glamorous are you, eh?

    Expect a deluge of orders for the Ironing CD, you're going to be another internet hype sensation!

  81. At 07:09 PM on 23 Sep 2006, Dr Hackenbush wrote:

    SB81

    David (79)
    Click on ‘The PM Programme’, top right, then go to ‘Your Emails’, bottom right, and click that. When you arrive, you should see what I’m on about fairly rapidly.

  82. At 07:47 PM on 23 Sep 2006, whisht wrote:

    hey Aperitif, Andy,
    LOOK a dancing bear!! over there!!

    ohmygod - and a sea eagle!! quick over there, you'll miss them....


    [slinks slowly away..]

  83. At 08:06 PM on 23 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    Hey Whisht, I hope you took photos to show the rest of us!

  84. At 08:16 PM on 23 Sep 2006, whisht wrote:

    for the luvofgod - the lot of you:

    "will yer whisht?!?"

  85. At 08:24 PM on 23 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    Okay, I've just watched Rory Bremner, and I just realised (as I was listening again to the podcast this afternoon) that he recycled a lot of the material from his appearance on The Now Show! At least he's being environmentally friendly by recycling even his jokes!!

  86. At 08:30 PM on 23 Sep 2006, wrote:

    As usual, the daily Radio4 schedule is riddled with errors, and it reported that Sequin should have been on duty. But it was Ritula Shah. See

    /worldservice/programmes/worldtoday/presenters/story/2004/02/040202_ritulashah.shtml

    I think she sometimes busks the World Tonight as well.

    But Saturday PM is a different programme, so it's hard to make a comparison

    SB83

  87. At 08:51 PM on 23 Sep 2006, anne wrote:

    Hi guys I'm back thank goodness. NO thanks to a party of camp sounding divers from the home counties who joined our plane in Big City: they arrived late from The Capital, and not only was our plane held BUT they took so long getting their gear on board that we missed our slot and didn't leave until we should have been arriving.Very annoying.

    FF - thank you for asking, my order is for a Fry's orange cream ( i know other orange flavoured chocolate bars are probably available, but they won't be as good) and as I have been away it must be my turn to pop out for the chocolate on Monday.

    Didn't relish being away although the Big City which I hadn't been to before was great, and I must go back soon to do some Christmas shopping. Big shops - I do miss them here. Well I do if they're called Waterstones. Or Borders.

    A propos of the duvet shenanigans, do any of the rest of you sleep on the diagonal? If other half is away, or late to bed, I start off straight but invariably end up sleeping corner to corner.

    While in Big City and accompanying teenager to several outpatient appointments, worrying symptoms in eye which had been gong on for months suddenly got much worse, and hey presto, I was able to be seen by specialist within an hour. People moan about NHS and with good cause most of the time but the emergency services are fantastic. Also I have to say that opthalmologists are generally really nice people - I have had far too much to do with them over the last 6 years, but IMO they are the nicest doctors about, except perhaps for good GPs. Anyone else got a candidate for Favourite Specialist of the Week?

    What have you all done to Lissa with an a in my absence? she has gone very quiet. Also the wretched site had lost my details again, but presumably it was just sulking because I hadn't talked to it since Monday night.

  88. At 09:16 PM on 23 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    Hey anne, welcome back:) I'm glad that things went okay down in the big city. I know a bit of what you mean about the NHS. I've had dealings with them over the last ten years or so, and the people I've come into contact with (dermatologists mainly) have always been great to me. I had to go up to nearest city recently, and even though I was expecting hours of wait and stress, I was out of there 30 minutes after arriving, and 25 minutes of that was time with the specialist. Good old NHS:))

    As for shops, I can certainly agree re waterstones and borders. Thank goodness for online shopping!

    Diagonal sleeping, eh? Well, I'll have to give that a try. As I live on my own, I guess I get to sleep any direction I want to:p

    I think Lissa has had too much stress from us, including the "non-rememberance" of details. I hope she's having a nice relaxing w/e without having to worry about us...

  89. At 09:51 PM on 23 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Anne (#87)

    My feelings towards NHS have been dulled by dried old stick of consultant who was blind to the blindingly obvious of my medical condition, (I know what is wrong, but need consultant to give me the drug(s), which they will not...) but to me, their lack of concern to my late father's declining condition was the killer.

    Yes, NHS is wonderful in general. But when I had to tell the junior doctor how to load the scalpel with it's blade before she lanced the boil (I do this daily), one begins to wonder...

  90. At 11:08 PM on 23 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Andy (#80) I'm thrilled the link works this time! Would it spoil the "glamorous" image to say it owes much to the miracles of digital photography? In a budget -saving exercise my husband took the photos. Some of his more repeatable comments were "Shut your mouths, don't show your teeth" and "Could you try to look more normal?" How we did laugh, (mouths closed, obviously). Then he got all carried away taking out wallpaper marks behind us, skin blemishes, dress wrinkles etc. Finally I had to stop him before he took out too many lines, in case clients got a huge shock when we turned up!

  91. At 11:42 PM on 23 Sep 2006, anne wrote:

    John W - I would be the first to agree that there are huge swathes of the NHS which are more or less hopeless, and don't get me started on the way they treat elderly patients because I wouldn't want a certain North Yorkshire hospital to come after me with a try-on libel suit, but shouldn't nurses be taught that elderly people who can't get out of bed to wash themselves would quite like to be washed by someone else at least once a day. Someone will now post to say that NHS nurses are angels in mortal clothing, and again, I'm sure some if not most of them are, but some aren't. And the ones that aren't were the ones that nursed my parents.
    However I have yet to meet a rude dismissive arrogant eye doctor, and I've seen a few. So three cheers for opthelmologists, and three boos for general surgeons and stroppy nurses.

  92. At 11:49 PM on 23 Sep 2006, Aperitif wrote:

    Whisht and someone sitting in a tree,
    K-I-S-S-I-N-G...

    Oh, c'mon... TELL :)

    Welcome back Anne. Glad your NHS experience has been good. I've spent a lot of time over the last few years in various hospitals with different members of my family who've had varying degrees of illness. My experience has been largely positive too. Apart from one time - when I was having an examination myself and the consultant took a call on his mobile phone with his left hand while his right hand was in a very intimate place. When the disbelief finally wore off I let him know that this was not at all appropriate...

    Re diagonal sleeping - no; never do. Tried it and it just feels all wrong. Has noone else named their duvet yet then?

    Annasee, wow! Very impressive.

    Dr H. I had a quick look - I couldn't see any badly placed apostrophes. Better clue please?

    I worked so hard today - all by myself in the office on a Saturday please can I have a gold star?

    Thanks.

  93. At 12:38 AM on 24 Sep 2006, I Kew wrote:

    sb 91

    "Saturday strapline;
    Sunday brought another one;
    They don't grow on trees."

  94. At 08:13 AM on 24 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    SB94

    Well, I tried the diagonal sleep, but I ended up hitting my head on the bedside table, so I doubt I'll try it again. But, no twizzling duvet last night, so that was a bonus.

    As for names for the duvet, I don't know her full name yet, but I think it starts with Tara :o)

  95. At 08:59 AM on 24 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Anne, glad it all went ok, & good to have you back.. We've (well, Eddie really) has lost a customer while you've been away, I'm not sure of his name -was it Colin? Can't be bothered to look it up now. Anyway seems he thought this blog was absolute drivel. I mean, how lacking in the appreciation of irony & post -modernism can you get? Just because Mr Mair spends his valuable ´óÏó´«Ã½ salaried time listing the people who walk past his window, doesn't mean there isn't a deeper , nay, profound sub-text to this cyber-gathering. I'm not sure what it is yet, but I just know if I keep reading all will eventually become clear. And it's a good laugh.

  96. At 10:45 AM on 24 Sep 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    Hackensak (81ish),
    I still don't see the need for an apostrophe anywhere. ¿email's/emails'/emails's?

  97. At 10:53 AM on 24 Sep 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    John W (86ish),
    Sandy Toksvig said on The News Quiz that Lucy was discovered by Richard Leaky. Lucy was discovered by Donald Johanson and I saw both of them at the Cleveland (Ohio) Museum of Natural History when I was doing volunteer work there in the 1970-80's. I have a plaster cast of her lower jaw.

  98. At 10:57 AM on 24 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Welcome, I Kew, and what an entrance, with an " 'I Kew"

    I hope there's not an organsation akin to the RSPCA that looks after duvets. I always seem to wake up at 04:00 or so to find three quarters of it hiding on the corner of the bed. What am I doing in my sleep?

    The upshot of all the html tag business is:

    to put a word in italics, you have to type

    to put a word in <i>italics</i> ....

    And that is the only style change you can make. Refer to my post #68 for putting links into your text - the so called anchor tag.

    And that's it. Clearly the moderators don't want us to do anything too fancy......

    SB96

  99. At 11:09 AM on 24 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Come to think of it,

    Lissa,

    I nominate I Kew's Hiaku for a strapline one weekend.

    SB97

  100. At 12:57 PM on 24 Sep 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    John W,
    C'mon, you could at least be polite and reply. Or are you one of those people who think that Americans aren't worth talking to?

  101. At 01:10 PM on 24 Sep 2006, wrote:

    David (currently 97, but then my SB96 became 98 later on),

    I wondered why I was bothered by Sandi's script at that point. Leaky is, of course so well known in that field.

    I was referring to the schedule as published on the web site everyday

    /radio4/schedule

    which usually has the correct programme at the correct time (but don't count on that), but is an obvious cut-and-paste job in places, never seems to get the whole day's rota of news presenters correct.

    Examples of cut and paste - Womans hour, and the repeat of the story at 19:45; GQT and it's repeat on the Wednesday (when the GQT garden does not appear). Some even worse examples are programme details repeated, or indeed apparent gaps in the schedule.

    No doubt today's example is perfect, to prove me wrong, but in general...

    SB100

  102. At 01:19 PM on 24 Sep 2006, anne wrote:

    well thanks all for your return welcomes. I was sorry to see that somebody had gone off in a pout. We do occasionally post the odd blog equivalent of 'hard news' and as you say annesee one day the full post modern irony purpose of the whole thing will just fall into place,

    my husband thinks my diagonal sleeping is to do with ley lines - I throw this out as a theory for you to rubbish or not.

    anyone know how and why teenagers can turn a perfectly tidy room into a tip within 3 minutes max? some of you guys out there might remember something about it I thought.

    of course the other Good Thing about this blog is that it takes up time that would otherwise be spent on a website peopled largely by americans and dedicated to a certain long running medical tv program. If Colin or whoever thought this one was a waste of time he should visit there for a short sharp lesson in how a site can really be a waste of life.

  103. At 01:27 PM on 24 Sep 2006, Aperitif wrote:

    re 94

    Fearless, "Tara"? As in "ta-ra-ra-bum-te-ay"?

    Or as in Scarlett O'Hara?

    No, you'll have to explain.

  104. At 01:36 PM on 24 Sep 2006, Aperitif wrote:

    Valery, is that you at no.13 on vibrant? Just it's an anagram of "Valery Hein", and given all the shovelling and whacking lately... Otherwise I may have been flippant to someone who was making a serious point and has now gone away in a huff.

    Either that's or it's "I Kew"/"Lou Cowt"/etc. in yet another incarnation.

  105. At 01:47 PM on 24 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    re 102

    It's not really Tara as in anything really. It's a name that sticks in my head from a friend of mine many years ago, and a character from one of my favourite TV shows of recent years:o) (There may be a prize if you can guess which show....)

    SB103

  106. At 02:30 PM on 24 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    SB106

    Okay, that's annoying. Here I am replying to Appy's number 102 as was, only for it to suddenly metamorphose into 103, as an earlier post has suddenly appeared. I swear there are people posting here with the aid of a time travel device!

  107. At 02:33 PM on 24 Sep 2006, Aperitif wrote:

    SB106

    re 105

    I can't think of anything that might've had a Tara in it in recent years. So either I didn't see it or she/it wasn't memorable for me.

    Oh, wasn't Tara P-T on one of the "celebrity" "reality" programmes? Surely not her Fearless?

    Actually I want to say "Bodies" or "Green Wing". I dunno why as I don't remember a Tara in either of them, but they have a Tara-esque feel somehow...

    What's the potential prize? Is it worth trying any harder?

    re 98

    Careful - I work for the RSPCD, so make sure you're not doing anything too harsh - we will catch up with you eventually. We're a bit overwhelmed at the moment though - an outbreak, in southern parts of the midlands, of people using lobster claws and broken umberellas to mistreat these defenceless creatures, purely on the grounds of mild rotation. We shan't rest until we round up every last one of these brutes.

  108. At 03:03 PM on 24 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    SB108, maybe?

    No, definitely wide of the mark with your guesses so far:o) Okay, I'll tell you, it was Buffy The Vampire Slayer. A bit cheesy I know, but still a great show, wonderfully written.

    Appy, can I join the RSPCD?

  109. At 04:57 PM on 24 Sep 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    John W (101ish),
    I began to think that you were referring to the listings and not the actual programs. I e-mailed The News Quiz to correct them.

  110. At 07:07 PM on 24 Sep 2006, valery pedant wrote:

    :o((

    Fallen foul of the "don't remember me" trick. I spent a lo-ong time commenting on loads and loads, only to submit and be told, peremptorily I thought, to return to my original page. Of course when I did it had all been whisked off.... I'm losing the will to live. S.O. who would actually have preferred to buy me the ironing CD and get me going on the pile in the corner of the kitchen, spent about an hour trying to chase it through the ether, but tis gone.

    It's raining - no building - would have been on to shuttering today too, yay!

    Briefly I think what I said, was

    Annasee - gr8, love your site, we have photos of me whacking but it would take more than a photoshop to make me look as good. Also I must hunt out the name of a harpist I went to see during the Festival, fantastic. More anon

    AndycrA* - Ds

    Anne - welcome home, re teenagers, see mine to FF previously, once you've had one you can't stop Trying To Organise Everyone. (Original comment didn't look as ambiguous as that, but you get the idea.)(Can you imagine how much organising FF needs, only Ap knows, she's the one with the webcam..)

    Ap - 104 - not me, sorry, but if your 2nd suggestion is correct, then my guess is he won't take offence - nor indeed a gate.

    FF - since you've changed her cover, then I think you are well on the way to being a member already?

    Whisht - ahh gwan, gwan, gwan-gwan, gwan?

    Dr H - sb Richard Hammond's?

    Another long gap here before submitting, as Pof the W just replayed Elizabeth Davidson's statement from Wednesday's Today programme, which was mentioned on the day but I had missed. So I shan't bother dredging up the remainder of my flippant comments but cut to the point which I ended on, which is that Eddie's Blog has spawned a community, like-minded or otherwise, it's good to talk.

    SB110

  111. At 08:03 PM on 24 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    So, Valery, you think I need organising do you? I think you ought to explain further:p

    Sb111

  112. At 08:28 PM on 24 Sep 2006, wrote:

    OK, who's the one with a TARDIS up their sleeve. Getting their posts submitted earlier in the queue, and upsetting the numbering. Dr Who, what's your blog name? No-one is using Them Aster, or D Alek.

    Aperitif, my mattress, Zem, comes from Squornshellous Zeta. So perhaps, unaware of this before, the duvet comes from another planet in that system (given that pillows/cushions comes from S. Beta). But while the mattress is relaxed about things, the duvet seems to have problems.

    David, give me a chance to reply! I was rounding up the tools for this weeks maintenance visit to mother's (kitchen taps is the highlight). Actually, I was thinking of complaining to Feedback about how unreliable the on-line schedule is, how dreadful etc., but that would make me out to be even more of an old fogie than I already am. And this is one who keep an on-line schedule bang up to date.

    Valery, are we really going to allow txt spk in this blog?

  113. At 10:22 PM on 24 Sep 2006, Aperitif wrote:

    HI everyone. Re Valery (110), I heard the beginning of Elizabeth Davidson's statement on the Today programme, and switched off quickly, knowing I'd be upset and it not being a convenient time for tears etc. etc. Having read what several people had to say here I too stopped work and listened closely today. I sobbed and sobbed. Eloquent and uttely moving and, for me, touched something raw. At risk of immense understatement, powerful radio.

  114. At 10:23 PM on 24 Sep 2006, Aperitif wrote:

    btw, if you use your browser's back button when you get a ticking off from the blogmeister for leaving out details/offensive speediness/other you should find your typing remains visible.

    Is that even more frustrating to know at this late stage?

  115. At 10:50 PM on 24 Sep 2006, Dr Hackenbush wrote:

    For those of you who haven’t been the slightest bit concerned at my non-answering of your non-questions - comma - the Doctor is in, and making his first appearance here today.

    David (77, 79, 81, 96), Valery has seen what I was on about (110).

    Fred (105, 108) - Had I seen your question in time, my guess would have been correct...

    John (112) - My mattress is called Zem, too.

    And now news and current affairs -
    Who thinks Rossi will beat Hayden this year? I’m assuming someone here knows what this question refers to.

  116. At 12:18 AM on 25 Sep 2006, valery pedant wrote:

    Ap 114, the thing is I did go with the Back button as once before I had been caught out by using the "return to original entry" trick, but it had definitely gone... Ach well, some of it was pretty irrelevant anyway, along with a Specialist story which was probably best not repeated.

    John W, yes we are, unless you don't want to read mine. I do so much texting to The Teenagers, that it's hard to stop when I'm in full flow - as I was with having to go over it all again.

    FF, No of course I don't (just remember the lobster claws though if you're tempted to use the cover with the missing poppers next time you change the sheets!). Better be my turn to go out for the sweets tomorrow, the car's in for an MOT (how does that work as an expression "the car is in for a Ministry of Transport"? Scheesch!) so I'll need to walk 5 miles, but hey - you're all worth it! Orders below please.

    Night all
    SB116

    PS Nope sorry Dr H - you've got me there

  117. At 01:10 AM on 25 Sep 2006, anne wrote:

    I got Mrs Davidson's letter on POTW and found it incredibly moving, especially the bit about having to choose a dress for her daughter to be buried in rtaher than helping her choose a dress to get married in. Just wonder if it had any effect on the teenager who used his car to kill her.

    I'd volunteered for sweetie shop duty tomorrow Valery but I can go Tuesday instead.

    Total blank re Rossi and Hayden but dismayed today to see that Loeb is more or less a 100% cert over Gronholm.

    And now I really MUST go to bed. Niteall, as that bird says on some advert or other - is it for eye drops? seems unlikely somehow.

  118. At 08:44 AM on 25 Sep 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    Morning all,

    Well, another week of fun'n'frolics has started, and already I've got a new set of issues land on my desk that need to be resolved while I'm still working on last weeks':( I think I'll need to take a break soon, just to recharge the batteries...

    V: I think it's time to get the sewing kit out and fix the duvet cover (yes, I can sew... don't faint!). I know what you mean about MOT. I've got a similar "grrr" when people say "PIN number". IT'S NOT A PIN NUMBER, IT@S A PIN! Sorry for shouting then, but PIN stands for Personal Identification Number, so saying "PIN Number" translates to personal identification number number. Silly, silly, silly....

    I'll have a Ripple, if I may, V? (other "wavy" chocolate bars are availble, of course...)

  119. At 09:21 AM on 25 Sep 2006, whisht wrote:

    Valery P (and the lot of yer) - even though you may try to convince me with a cod oirish accent, the lady's not for turning.

    or me.

    Anyway, I don't mind talking about myself and stuff (such as sobbing on the edge of me bed during that statement by Mrs. Davidson - such an expression of pure 'loss' I don't think I've ever heard).

    however, I'm not going to talk about other people.

    Those are my principles and if you don't like them... I've got others

    (thenk yew Mr.Marx....)

  120. At 09:50 AM on 25 Sep 2006, wrote:

    I once came across to a Personal Indentification PIN number....talk about tautology and saying the same thing twice.

    Being an old fogie (and having a mobile that will only text in upper case, so it looks as if I'm shouting), I don't text. Actually, I may have once sent an SMS text message. It of course means not only do I not understand teenage speak, but no longer understand teenage rite.

  121. At 10:58 AM on 25 Sep 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    John W (112ish),
    I once, years ago, corrected Brain of Britain and got a nice letter in return from the now dead ?founder of the program. They asked what film was based on a yearly occurence in the fictional town of Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania. I was born not too far from there, so knew it really existed. I was told that they couldn't spell it, so thought it didn't exist. Now they could just Google Groundhog Day.

  122. At 11:00 AM on 25 Sep 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    Hackensack (115ish),
    I will give it another try.

  123. At 11:03 AM on 25 Sep 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    Hack,
    People's/peoples'?

  124. At 11:08 AM on 25 Sep 2006, Aperitif wrote:

    SB 121

    I'll have a Chocolate Orange bar today please - I'll get the round in on Thursday when I get back, OK?

    John W: re

    Zem, comes from Squornshellous Zeta. So perhaps, unaware of this before, the duvet comes from another planet in that system (given that pillows/cushions comes from S. Beta). But while the mattress is relaxed about things, the duvet seems to have problems.

    I think you need to have a lie down.

    But not while the mattress and duvet are fighting, obviously. :)

  125. At 12:48 PM on 25 Sep 2006, valery pedant wrote:

    John W - most of the time you wouldn't be missing much. It's all about rites of passage methinks....

    Dr H - it came to me during the night, you meant Moto GP? Yay, if I wait long enough the old grey cells can come up with the answers, although at that point I may well have forgotten the questions.

    Anne - well it's a truly hideous Novemberish day here so the 5mile sweetshop trip is not appealing (given that I'd probably have to eat all your orders on the subsequent 5m return trip and miss all the fun this afternoon) so I don't mind if you go and I'll do tomorrow :o) (in the hopes that the car will have been MOT'd by then!)

  126. At 01:10 PM on 25 Sep 2006, Dr Hackenbush wrote:

    SB126

    David (122, 123)
    To put you out of your confusion, in big letters is written, RICHARD HAMMONDS ACCIDENT, and it is this phrase that clearly needs an apostrophe. There was a similar omission for another recent main topic, but I forget the exact wording.

    Aperitif (124)
    John is absolutely right (see 115), and the acronym DNA would seem to apply.

    Valery (125)
    Yes indeed. This was one of the things that kept me occupied during yesterday. See also .
    Also, how about the term ‘MoT tested’?

    Doc (115)
    Are you now talking to yourself? Yes. OK.

  127. At 01:32 PM on 25 Sep 2006, wrote:

    Dr Hack : Was the MotoGP live on "interactive"?

    I watched the shortened version on ´óÏó´«Ã½2 yesterday (I really like the warm-up lap, but they cut it out. I like the warm-up lap mainly because it has so many different names : warm-up lap, installation lap, parade lap, green-flag lap, etc).

    How do you record an "interactive" channel? Anyone?

  128. At 01:45 PM on 25 Sep 2006, Colin wrote:

    I get the irony, and Eddie made his feelings on the exercise perfectly clear. It's the signal to noise ratio that does me 'ead in. There's no shortage of drivel-dumps on the internet, and I do partake of a few when I'm in the mood, but I'd hoped for better here *sigh. Oh well, fill your boots.

  129. At 03:00 PM on 25 Sep 2006, wrote:

    There was a signal?

  130. At 03:46 PM on 25 Sep 2006, Dr Hackenbush wrote:

    SB129

    Andy, I believe it was, but I, too, watched without the lap in question.

  131. At 05:13 PM on 25 Sep 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    Hack (126ish),
    As I didn't actually click on it, I only saw the 'headline'. I'll take your word for it.

  132. At 04:25 PM on 26 Sep 2006, David R wrote:

    I listened to the weather forecast once, Michael fish made me go and sunbath in my Shorts during a hurricane....... Never again

  133. At 06:09 PM on 26 Sep 2006, Rufus A Bairzarce wrote:

    sb 133

    David R,

    Don't keep us in suspense - "Never again" ... ?
    Never again sunbathe in a hurricane?
    Never again listen to a whether (to sunbathe) forecast?
    Never again believe Mchael Fish?

    Oh, and shouldn't that be David "IS" not "R" ?

  134. At 11:26 PM on 26 Sep 2006, whisht wrote:

    trust us to have the longest running Blog on the flippin' weather.

  135. At 03:31 PM on 27 Sep 2006, big sister wrote:

    Hi whisht - and FF on 30.
    I've just done a count on the archive and we're nowhere near day one's record of 243 blogs, far and away the most to date. Incidentally, FF, the only other blog to come close (apart from this one, of course) is 6.9.06 at 131 entries.
    Is this a challenge to us? Should we keep blogging here and push for another 110+ entries?

  136. At 06:51 PM on 27 Sep 2006, whisht wrote:

    hm - dunno how we'd scope the challenge - blogs started on a day? If so we can add the 45 entries from "can't".

    but, is this really fair as it'd be counting days of replies..?

    I'm gonna keep to the latest (few) though it is odd to know that its not just me who goes back...!!

    :¬)

  137. At 10:24 PM on 27 Sep 2006, valery pedant wrote:

    Intrigued to find yours at 136 Whisht, as I've only been going back over couple of days recently, but tonight was pondering on why some blogs go on indefinitely, and some just kinda dry up? I speculated that you become attached to some of them, sentimentality, theme, humour, whatever. Bet Laurie Taylor could come up with some sociological reason for it?

    How many Beeb folk do you think read their colleagues' Blogs? My first newsletter was Laurie's and I still enjoy it immensely and forward it to the Kraken even tho he's only doing the Anthropology bit now.
    SB137

  138. At 12:25 AM on 01 Oct 2006, whisht wrote:

    I really shouldn't be replying here - must stop going back...

    my first newsletter was "Snowmail" the Channel Four News newsletter. For similar reason, I'd miss the news as I wasn't home in time (hold on - how late was I working??!?)

    started well, but... standards slipped and before long all they'd issue was a summary - nee ad - for the news that day.

    what's the point in that??

This post is closed to new comments.

´óÏó´«Ã½ iD

´óÏó´«Ã½ navigation

´óÏó´«Ã½ © 2014 The ´óÏó´«Ã½ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.