Old lady dies (see other post)

[MrGongGong]

Agreed!

(I particularly liked the 3 to argue over whether it’s “lightbulb” or “light bulb” …

... and I've often felt that I was the one "to ask what a light bulb actually is". )

Though if it was on the free jazz thread
the answer would be
"who needs changes" ?

[Anna]

I'm not sure whether you have ever run a forum? The one thing one learns is that outrage will find a way of expressing itself: it's simply that people differ in the objects of their outrage.

The objects of my outrage on the deleted threads were that certain people find it necessary to resort to taunts equivalent to "Yeah, you and whose armies?" and "Oh shut up, you don't know nothing" etc., which is the level of debate usually seen in playgrounds of junior schools and which disrupts any serious discussion of the topic. And, there have been very good, considered posts, notably from Richard Barrett (totally deluded of course, poor dab! ) yet the schoolyard bullies persist in personal insults and a desire to bring things down to their 'Fight-Fight' mentality. I didn't post on the deleted threads because, although I wanted to, I felt I too would be shouted down.

I always felt this MB, although sometimes boistrous and knockabout, was a very adult site, now I don't know, Mrs. T's death has brought out the worst in some people, as has the merest whiff of Popery invading Choral Evensong.

And no, I'm sure none of us would like to run a forum. Also, for the record, I posted on the old R3 MBs from around 2004 and have been here since 2007. French frank set up this forum when the BBC pulled the plug on their forum. As far as I am concerned, if she wishes to alter the way it is run and if she feels it is harmful to FoR3 to continue, then it's her perogative but we all could help by taking a deep breath and counting to three before instantly retorting to a insult with another insult, i.e., ignore those whose only intent is to disrupt.

[Stillhomewardbound]

I think you may well be referring to a small number of long time contributors to the old BBC Radio 3 boards who departed when they were closed by the Beeb but have recently resumed their participation contribution here. As such they have a far longer association with these boards remit than, for instance, you good self.

As requested, the original quotation, unparaphrased. I suppose it would have been a bit much to hope for a small apology (a) for mistakenly claiming to know who my remarks were aimed at and (b) for wrongly suggesting that I was a blow-in myself.

Meanwhile, now I have another member having a go at me, because my remarks, apparently, were clearly aimed at him. No they weren't, as it happens, but in any event how is that person so adamant. I named no names.

[Stillhomewardbound]

French frank set up this forum when the BBC pulled the plug on their forum. As far as I am concerned, if she wishes to alter the way it is run and if she feels it is harmful to FoR3 to continue, then it's her perogative but we all could help by taking a deep breath and counting to three before instantly retorting to a insult with another insult, i.e., ignore those whose only intent is to disrupt.

Agreed entirely, Anna.

[ahinton]

The objects of my outrage on the deleted threads were that certain people find it necessary to resort to taunts equivalent to "Yeah, you and whose armies?" and "Oh shut up, you don't know nothing" etc., which is the level of debate usually seen in playgrounds of junior schools and which disrupts any serious discussion of the topic. And, there have been very good, considered posts, notably from Richard Barrett (totally deluded of course, poor dab! ) yet the schoolyard bullies persist in personal insults and a desire to bring things down to their 'Fight-Fight' mentality. I didn't post on the deleted threads because, although I wanted to, I felt I too would be shouted down.

Agreed on all counts; we should indeed feel fortunate that people like Richard Barrett can actually be bothered to post their articulately expressed, interesting, informative, well reasoned and thoroughly researched ideas in an environment in which the junior school playground mentality of which you write has something of a habit of rearing itself at a moment's notice...

[Flosshilde]

Roll on Wednesday when we can put all this behind us.

I wonder to what extent a certain Welsh lady described by some as a singer might see it this way?

Goodness - is Katherine Jenkins going to be there?

(Remember the KJ threads in the good ol' days? )

[Stillhomewardbound]

(I particularly liked the 3 to argue over whether it’s “lightbulb” or “light bulb” …

... and I've often felt that I was the one "to ask what a light bulb actually is". )

Some of my favourite jokes are the lightbulb changing ones, such as:

Q. How many Oxford dons does it take to change a light-buld/lightbulb?

A. CHANGE??!!

or

Q. How many psychiatrists does it take it take to change a lightbulb?

A. Well, firstly, the lightbulb has to want to change!

[Sir Velo]

It's becoming evident that a number of members are privy to information not available to the rest of us as to the identities of certain persons on this forum. At least two ostensibly "new" members are, we are told, actually long-time members of both this and the previous BBC incarnation of the boards, having used (by their own admission) a variety of aliases at different times. It's perhaps not surprising therefore that they should be looked at as johnny-come-latelies to those without this esoteric knowledge.

While there is nothing to stop members leaving and then re-joining the forum, to do so under a new identity suggests that either they originally left under a cloud, or were in some way ashamed of their previous incarnation(s). I make no inferences but if some people were to come clean on this, it might help to clear the air.

[Thropplenoggin]

What I find odd is that people accuse others of resorting to playground jibes but make these accusations with the utmost ambiguity, refusing to name names. If you are so adamant that there are repeat offenders, why not 'name and shame them'? Open it up to a "reality TV"-style phone vote, then we can vote them off. I do realize that by proffering this solution, I leave myself open to be named, shamed, and voted off.

[Sir Velo]

Agreed!

(I particularly liked the 3 to argue over whether it’s “lightbulb” or “light bulb” …

... and I've often felt that I was the one "to ask what a light bulb actually is". )

FHG, SHB, I think you missed out the one who asks how much a bulb has to weigh for it to be classified as light...

[Serial_Apologist]

Agreed!

(I particularly liked the 3 to argue over whether it’s “lightbulb” or “light bulb” …

... and I've often felt that I was the one "to ask what a light bulb actually is". )

John Etheridge joke:

How many jazz guitarists does it take to change a light bulb?

Six: one to actually change the light bulb; five to stand around shouting, "I could do it faster!"

John Etheridge - of ALL people: one of the true culprits!!!

[Thropplenoggin]

How many 'how many' jokes does it take to change a 'how many' joke?

[Bryn]

Re. #202, I made no request for a complete quotation of my message. I merely pointed out that any sufficiently interested were able to read it, rather than the 'paraphrase'. I feel sure that any such will also be able to comprehend the limiting rationale of such phrases as "I think you may well be referring to", and "As such" and grasp that no apology was warranted.

I can't answer for the 'unidentified' contributors who also seem to have inferred that they might have been the target of your comments. Perhaps I have been unobservant enough not to notice which other contributors' names might have appeared relatively newly here and pitched into the relevant threads?

[Anna]

What I find odd is that people accuse others of resorting to playground jibes but make these accusations with the utmost ambiguity, refusing to name names. If you are so adamant that there are repeat offenders, why not 'name and shame them'? Open it up to a "reality TV"-style phone vote, then we can vote them off. I do realize that by proffering this solution, I leave myself open to be named, shamed, and voted off.

If that remark is addressed to me Throppers it is purely that I wish to keep the peace and have no wish for yet another a war of attrition and recrimination to break out. They know who they are (you are not, I assure you, one of them!)

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

FHG, SHB, I think you missed out the one who asks how much a bulb has to weigh for it to be classified as light...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R15EVtBs1yU

... c 1' 30" in.