Definition of Bravery

"Bravery" is . . .

arriving home late after a boozy night out,
being confronted by your wife/gf with a
broom, and having the guts to ask: "Are
you still cleaning, or are you flying
somewhere?"

 

Thanks for that ßlaine
I take it the "mono" in your email addy is a reference to your brain
cell count.

Moike

 

Stephen King fans get it Moike.

But then reading, and bmw (in the email
addy) could be construed as a potential
oxymoron. Sure as hell I found one half
of the equation, in you.

cheerio..

ßlaine

 

alt.crap.fiction is over there >>>======================>

It might be mildly amusing to discover what that means when expressed in
english.

Moike

 

'twas funny... chill baby, chill

 

What Monty Python sketch is it in then?


...
Bill_H

*** replace the email addy with bill_h at iinet dot net dot au
Some days it's just not worth the bother chewing through the restraints

 

Too many big words for you?

 

Define oxymoron please.
And tell us how your comments make what Moike said was an oxymoron in
the current context.

 

"A rhetorical figure in which incongruous or contradictory
terms are combined, as in a deafening silence and a
mournful optimist."

I post something lighthearted. Someone clearly doesn't
recognise it as such and attacks me personally. He is
dismissive (perhaps ignorant) of literature (which fiction
is)

"alt.crap.fiction is over there >>>======================>"

yet indicates he's a bmw rider via his email address.

Now, I'm probably wrong but I had a different image
of bmw riders. Intelligent, discerning if you will.

I mean "dopey bmw rider" (which was my initial reaction)
just doesn't conjure up the same image as their marketers
would have us believe, does it?

Trust this clears it up for you.

Maybe I shouldn't believe the marketing eh?

 

I would have thought being dismissive of Stephen King to be an attitude
more commonly found in people who AREN'T ignorant of literature, in fact
people who read "literature"(1) as opposed to "pulp fiction" (aka the
sort of books you find in your average airport bookshop) tend to be
quite contemptuous of King(2), Jeffrey Archer, Bryce Courtenay et al.

Indeed, and his response, was quite clearly in that category.

I think he's been entirely consistent with the sort of person I expect
to ride an oldish BMW (and scarily enough he really does fit the
stereotype fairly well

Maybe you should believe the marketing, seems like it has him neatly
boxed so far.


JL
(1) In the generally used sense as a shorthand for the sort of writing
that wins Booker prizes as opposed to the sort of writing that sells
well in airport bookshops. Not the wider sense of "anything published in
a book"
(2) Despite the fact that I'm well into the category of those who are
more likely to look at the Booker nomination list or the NY Times book
reviews to see what the next book I should consider buying is, than I am
to look at the Dymocks top 5 bestsellers list; I think King is actually
unfairly under-rated. Compared to the sort of drivel his contemporaries
are publishing he's streets ahead of them. While never losing sight of
the need to meet the restraints of his chosen genre (ie clear beginning
middle and end, characters not complicated, twists telegraphed well
enough that a below average IQ punter can recognise them), he does a
quite good job of mixing up the plots and the characters. The dialogue
is usually solid and the characters usually believable (albeit a little
thin).

It's also hard to criticise someone for giving the punters what they
want and making a squillion dollars for doing so.

JL
--
Australian Financial Review 17 August 2004
"So far Howard's luck has survived a great deal: his move to dismiss
broken election pledges by distinguishing between "core" and "non-core"
promises; his retrospectively time-limited "never ever" pledge on the
goods and services tax; his vagueness about when he committed Australia
to war against Iraq; his shifting standards for ministerial conduct; his
demonising of asylum seekers as child killers; his tendency to blame
"advice" rather than to openly accept responsibility when things go wrong."
Will Howard's luck survive another election ? Do Australians not care
that their PM is a liar ?
http://www.johnhowardlies.com/

 

Fair enough. Sorry Smee.

Aside from this below, I shall perform self flaggellation on the
hour, every hour, should I ever consider posting anything that
could even be considered remotely humourous or satirical.
I'll even guarantee I won't enjoy it, as much as previous times.

----

The inventor, Arthur Davidson, of the Harley Davidson Motorcycle
Corporation, died and went to heaven. At the gates, St. Peter told
Arthur, "Because you've been such a good man and your motorcycles
have changed the world, your reward is, you can hang out with
anyone you want in Heaven."

Arthur thought about it for a minute and then said, "I want to hang
out with God."

St. Peter took Arthur to the Throne Room and introduced him to God.

Arthur then asked God, "Hey, aren't you the inventor of woman?"

God said, "Ah, yes."

"Well," said Arthur, "professional to professional, you have some
major design flaws in your invention.

1. There's too much inconsistency in the front-end protrusion.

2. It chatters constantly at high speeds.

3. Most of the rear ends are too soft and wobble too much.

4. The intake is placed way too close to the exhaust.

And finally,

5. The maintenance costs are outrageous."

"Hmmmm, you may have some good points there," replied God.
"Hold on."

God went to his Celestial super computer, typed in a few words,
and waited for the results. The computer printed out a slip of
paper and God read it.

"Well, it may be true that my invention is flawed," God said to
Arthur, "but according to these numbers, more men are riding
my invention than yours."

 

Huh ? I ain't smee ? I's me.

Join a monastry perhaps ? I hear some of them are into flagellation

JL
--
Australian Financial Review 17 August 2004
"So far Howard's luck has survived a great deal: his move to dismiss
broken election pledges by distinguishing between "core" and "non-core"
promises; his retrospectively time-limited "never ever" pledge on the
goods and services tax; his vagueness about when he committed Australia
to war against Iraq; his shifting standards for ministerial conduct; his
demonising of asylum seekers as child killers; his tendency to blame
"advice" rather than to openly accept responsibility when things go wrong."
Will Howard's luck survive another election ? Do Australians not care
that their PM is a liar ?
http://www.johnhowardlies.com/

 

He was apologising to me after you chastised him for showing him the
errors of his ways.
why did you deserve an apology?
The one who actually deserves an apology is Moike

 

Shuddup Smee...

Pat

 

ok :-(

 

Not you,the other Smee...

Postman Pat

 

Snot, smee!