WWTBAM Bored

sunflower wrote:

clem21 wrote:

clem21 wrote:My shoes are awesome.

That's a true statement.

My shoes should be an expert on the show.

That is all.

Come to think of it they really deserve their own sitcom.

We'd call it "Coach and The Shoes"

Admit it, you'd watch that show...

Only if the shoes had a cool car.

Beep! Beep!

Estonut's jerky link pointed out another one of his creepy posts, where he pretends he's having light-hearted fun. Oh sure. Or maybe for him this stuff is light-hearted fun.

I thought it could be, like, a link to where kazoo says she's participating & doesn't mind being dragged in & made fun of. Naah.

Bob78164 wrote:

Estonut wrote:Dear, dear ghostjmf,

I love you to bits, but:

Would someone please pass the popcorn? Thanks. --Bob

I have some white wine as well.

I could open a bottle of red for you if you would like.

peacock2121 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

Estonut wrote:Dear, dear ghostjmf,

I love you to bits, but:

Would someone please pass the popcorn? Thanks. --Bob

I have some white wine as well.

I could open a bottle of red for you if you would like.

Thanks, Pea, but I never learned to drink. If you've got some sparkling cider though . . . . --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

peacock2121 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:Would someone please pass the popcorn? Thanks. --Bob

I have some white wine as well.

I could open a bottle of red for you if you would like.

Thanks, Pea, but I never learned to drink. If you've got some sparkling cider though . . . . --Bob

I could teach you to drink.

It makes things even more entertaining.

ghostjmf wrote:Estonut's jerky link pointed out another one of his creepy posts, where he pretends he's having light-hearted fun. Oh sure. Or maybe for him this stuff is light-hearted fun.

I thought it could be, like, a link to where kazoo says she's participating & doesn't mind being dragged in & made fun of. Naah.

Uhh, I guess you didn't notice that it was a link to my post in the same thread (the one you implied having read before jumping all over my ass), explaining what I meant by the kazoo comment when someone else (your bestest buddy Peaby) called me on it. But you do not read things completely through nor afford the slightest benefit of the doubt when a post might not fit in with your pre- and mis(-)conceptions.

Did you notice the part where I (gasp!) predicted that you would disregard my explanation?

As far as "light-hearted fun" goes, your posting history over the years shows you have no clue as to what that is.

clem21 wrote:

sunflower wrote:

clem21 wrote: Are you kidding???? The Shoes take a lie detector test??? The Shoes never lie!! Chuck Norris wears pajamas with pictures of The Shoes on them!!!!

Okay.

I've considered your facts, and yes, I would watch the show.

Was there ever a question?

Could you throw in several blondes and at least one Brazilian of questionable judgment with even more questionable tattoos? And an elimination ceremony of some sort?

If so, I'm in!

Estonut says:

explaining what I meant by the kazoo comment

Oh, I read what you claimed. Everytime you bring up kazoo's ability with math you make some mean dig. Now, lots of people know that a person can joke about themself, but that doesn't mean other people get to take the person's jokes & use them to make digs insulting the person, & furthermore to bury their digs many pages deep in discussions of unrelated topics.

I bet you know it too; you just like to go on with your prevaricative hooey explaining about how when you insult somebody, of course its not an insult after all.

ghostjmf wrote:Estonut says:

defending someone who is perfectly capable of defending herself (if, in fact, I had offended her) and who has not asked you to, might also be interpreted as rude, creepy behavior.

It might be so interpreted if you're an idiot. Is that you you do interpret it? To be clear & all.

I repeat: Don't bring people into threads they are not participating in so that you can get off a snotty, creepy remark you think is funny. Unless, of course, you wanna show what a creep you are. If you want to address anyone on this board who isn't participating in your 22-page thread by making a dig at them on page # way-deep, at least address them in the post-title, so that they at least can see you've dragged them into your creepshow.

You mean sorta like this?

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=14899

Just so we're clear and all.....

The Lone Fanny wrote:You mean sorta like this?

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=14899

Just so we're clear and all.....

Y'know, on second thought, maybe I'll have some Pringles. --Bob

Hmmm, I thought we were discussing the return of PTBAM in this thread.

Having read the new developments, here's what I think.

TDC won't make PTBAM interesting-part of the drama of the original show (remember Kati Knudsen?) was watching folks sweating over high value questions and trying to decide whether or not to risk huge amounts of money.

I think they will have to come up with a way to get people to watch the show. The Phone Game was a good way to get viewers involved in the show-play the game and YOU could be in NYC trying to win $1M.

The "celebrity playing one question for charity" idea-dumb. Celebrities are what killed the original PTBAM in the first place.

Now, if they could get some good experts like: Ken Jennings, Ogi, Jim Cramer, hermillion, or 15QAway, the contestants would have excellent people who could help them. Please, no editors from Rolling Stone or EW.

Kazoo65 wrote:Hmmm, I thought we were discussing the return of PTBAM in this thread.

Having read the new developments, here's what I think.

TDC won't make PTBAM interesting-part of the drama of the original show (remember Kati Knudsen?) was watching folks sweating over high value questions and trying to decide whether or not to risk huge amounts of money.

I think they will have to come up with a way to get people to watch the show. The Phone Game was a good way to get viewers involved in the show-play the game and YOU could be in NYC trying to win $1M.

The "celebrity playing one question for charity" idea-dumb. Celebrities are what killed the original PTBAM in the first place.

Now, if they could get some good experts like: Ken Jennings, Ogi, Jim Cramer, hermillion, or 15QAway, the contestants would have excellent people who could help them. Please, no editors from Rolling Stone or EW.

Kazoo65, I'm not sure if you missed the posts related to you or if you chose to ignore them.

On 2 occasions (that I can recall), I referenced your difficulties with mathematics. The first one was even in response to your own question about potential audition hooks for you to use. This week, I did it when I realized that I blew my calculation for 25 * 10. In my rush to post, I figured that to be 245 and messed up the point I was trying to illustrate. Somewhere in there I said something like "even kazoo could have done that calculation." I intended it as very minor teasing, but have been called out on it by another. I only referenced you because you have posted so openly over the years about your difficulties with math. If I have offended you, or pissed you off in any way, I apologize sincerely, and will refrain from ever doing so again.

damn, i leave work early one time, and see what i miss...

t.

tlynn78 wrote:damn, i leave work early one time, and see what i miss...

t.

Dammit, TGirl! No one touches this post for well over 2 hours, so I think I can sneak in a 2-second edit (unchecking my signature for the post) and you weasel in ahead of my change...

Estonut wrote:

tlynn78 wrote:damn, i leave work early one time, and see what i miss...

t.

Dammit, TGirl! No one touches this post for well over 2 hours, so I think I can sneak in a 2-second edit (unchecking my signature for the post) and you weasel in ahead of my change...

do you think that might be a hint????

The Lone Fanny wrote:

ghostjmf wrote:Estonut says:

defending someone who is perfectly capable of defending herself (if, in fact, I had offended her) and who has not asked you to, might also be interpreted as rude, creepy behavior.

It might be so interpreted if you're an idiot. Is that you you do interpret it? To be clear & all.

I repeat: Don't bring people into threads they are not participating in so that you can get off a snotty, creepy remark you think is funny. Unless, of course, you wanna show what a creep you are. If you want to address anyone on this board who isn't participating in your 22-page thread by making a dig at them on page # way-deep, at least address them in the post-title, so that they at least can see you've dragged them into your creepshow.

You mean sorta like this?

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=14899

Just so we're clear and all.....

I don't care who you are, THIS was funny!

Now if only I could figure out who the poster was that made this post. I'm sure it's a BB, but the username has been changed so completely that there's not a single clue as to who it is!

Estonut wrote:

Kazoo65 wrote:Hmmm, I thought we were discussing the return of PTBAM in this thread.

Having read the new developments, here's what I think.

TDC won't make PTBAM interesting-part of the drama of the original show (remember Kati Knudsen?) was watching folks sweating over high value questions and trying to decide whether or not to risk huge amounts of money.

I think they will have to come up with a way to get people to watch the show. The Phone Game was a good way to get viewers involved in the show-play the game and YOU could be in NYC trying to win $1M.

The "celebrity playing one question for charity" idea-dumb. Celebrities are what killed the original PTBAM in the first place.

Now, if they could get some good experts like: Ken Jennings, Ogi, Jim Cramer, hermillion, or 15QAway, the contestants would have excellent people who could help them. Please, no editors from Rolling Stone or EW.

Kazoo65, I'm not sure if you missed the posts related to you or if you chose to ignore them.

Unless I'm mistaken, she addressed them as much as she intends to in the first sentence of her post. --Bob

Estonut wrote:

ghostjmf wrote:Estonut's jerky link pointed out another one of his creepy posts, where he pretends he's having light-hearted fun. Oh sure. Or maybe for him this stuff is light-hearted fun.

I thought it could be, like, a link to where kazoo says she's participating & doesn't mind being dragged in & made fun of. Naah.

Uhh, I guess you didn't notice that it was a link to my post in the same thread (the one you implied having read before jumping all over my ass), explaining what I meant by the kazoo comment when someone else (your bestest buddy Peaby) called me on it. But you do not read things completely through nor afford the slightest benefit of the doubt when a post might not fit in with your pre- and mis(-)conceptions.

Did you notice the part where I (gasp!) predicted that you would disregard my explanation?

As far as "light-hearted fun" goes, your posting history over the years shows you have no clue as to what that is.

bestest buddy!

She loves me to bits.

Southpaw Fanny wrote:

clem21 wrote:

sunflower wrote: Okay.

I've considered your facts, and yes, I would watch the show.

Was there ever a question?

Could you throw in several blondes and at least one Brazilian of questionable judgment with even more questionable tattoos? And an elimination ceremony of some sort?

If so, I'm in!

I'll do you better: We'll have several blondes of questionable gender, one Japanese woman who pretends not to speak English but secretly speaks it perfectly and an elimination ceremony punctured by the drama of Coach trying to figure out if he's Straight or not!

That is killer.