Why?

-- 
David

the Omrud wrote...
(Count Arthur Strong)

>Why?

To see how many there are?
-- 
Martin

Martin Clark wrote:
> the Omrud wrote...
> (Count Arthur Strong)
> 
>> Why?
> 
> To see how many there are?

See, the thing is, it must have somehow escaped from Radio 2.  Can we 
get it sent back?

-- 
David

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 17:35:35 GMT, the Omrud
 wrote:

>Why?

arthur_strongs = 0;
for (count=0, count<sizeof(population), count++) {
  if tolower(population(count)) = "arthur strong" {
    arthur_strongs++;
  }
}


-- 
Regards, Paul Herber, Sandrila Ltd.
http://www.sandrila.co.uk/              http://www.pherber.com/

the Omrud wrote:
> Why?
> 
Because it's hilarious ?

BrritSki wrote:
> the Omrud wrote:
>> Why?
>>
> Because it's hilarious ?

Nope, that's clearly the wrong answer.

-- 
David

On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 +0100, the Omrud  said:

> Why?

Because it is ingenious, finely-observed and oddly edgy. I think it is 
brilliant. My wife hates it.

But what's your point? Is he going to be on The Archers?


Ian.
--

"the Omrud"  wrote in message 
news:Hjqfk.27944$E41.6663@text.news.virginmedia.com...
> Why?
>
He doesn't count at all.

But why must we be subjected to such drivel whilst awaiting the next 
exciting episode of our daily fix?

Tch.

ally

(Dammit. Just realised I've missed tonight's episode 'cos I was at the gym. 
Listen Again, here I come . . .)

Ian Piper wrote:
> On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 +0100, the Omrud  
> said:
> 
>> Why?
> 
> Because it is ingenious, finely-observed and oddly edgy. I think it is 
> brilliant. My wife hates it.
> 
> But what's your point? Is he going to be on The Archers?

I posted when it came on.  It's about the only time in the last 40 years 
I'd rather sit in silence than listen to Radio 4.   I do often switch 
over to Radio 3, but not because I can't bear to have the R4 programme on.

-- 
David

On 16 Jul, 22:25, the Omrud  wrote:
> Ian Piper wrote:
> > On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 퍝, the Omrud 
> > said:

> >> Why?

> > But what's your point? Is he going to be on The Archers?

> I posted when it came on.  It's about the only time in the last 40 years
> I'd rather sit in silence than listen to Radio 4.   I do often switch
> over to Radio 3, but not because I can't bear to have the R4 programme onWhy not post it on the Radio 4 newsgroup?
Or at least put OT (off topic) in the title.
I thought we had a new replacement for the elderly gentleman, Colonel
Danby/ Ollie.

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:31:04 -0700 (PDT), Bob E
 wrote:

>On 16 Jul, 22:25, the Omrud  wrote:
>> Ian Piper wrote:
>> > On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 +0100, the Omrud 
>> > said:
>
>> >> Why?
>
>> > But what's your point? Is he going to be on The Archers?
>
>> I posted when it came on.  It's about the only time in the last 40 years
>> I'd rather sit in silence than listen to Radio 4.   I do often switch
>> over to Radio 3, but not because I can't bear to have the R4 programme on.

Not even Quote Unquote?
>
>Why not post it on the Radio 4 newsgroup?
>Or at least put OT (off topic) in the title.
>I thought we had a new replacement for the elderly gentleman, Colonel
>Danby/ Ollie.

Since when has discussing the 18.30 comedy programme been an
aberration around here? Hardly a week passes, IME.

-- 
Jo

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:31:04 -0700 (PDT), Bob E
 wrote:

>Why not post it on the Radio 4 newsgroup?

BTW, Are you familiar with the Radio 4 newsgroup? It's a virtual
cesspit.

-- 
Jo

In message <1wfpoWFvMjfIFwXA@oooah.noooah>, Martin Clark  
writes
>the Omrud wrote...
>(Count Arthur Strong)
>
>>Why?
>
>To see how many there are?

But "Strong" is in the singular. Reminds me of a line that only Spike 
Milligan could have written:

"To pass the time, he counted his nose."

(Whenever I hear a snooker referee solemnly announcing the score after 
the first red of a turn has been potted, I always think of the above 
line. If hearing it with my brother, we both silently touch the tip of 
our nose, in homage to Spike.)
-- 
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL(+++)IS-P--Ch+(p)Ar+T[?]H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for thoughts on PCs. **

Who is Art, and why does life imitate him?

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:43:11 +0100, Martin Clark 
wrote:

>the Omrud wrote...
>(Count Arthur Strong)
>
>>Why?
>
>To see how many there are?

'E just said, didn'e? Arf a strong. Fifty percent of a strong. Point
five of a strong. Forty fahsand eighty fahsanfs of a strong.

When are we gettin' the uvver arf, that's what I wanta know (then I
can be careful to miss it)

lff

"the Omrud"  wrote in message 
news:YGtfk.28170$E41.5037@text.news.virginmedia.com...
> Ian Piper wrote:
>> On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 +0100, the Omrud  
>> said:
>>
>>> Why?
>>
>> Because it is ingenious, finely-observed and oddly edgy. I think it is 
>> brilliant. My wife hates it.
>>
>> But what's your point? Is he going to be on The Archers?
>
> I posted when it came on.  It's about the only time in the last 40 years 
> I'd rather sit in silence than listen to Radio 4.   I do often switch over 
> to Radio 3, but not because I can't bear to have the R4 programme on.
>
I'm with you there. I'm now taking care not to be stuck in the car between 
6.30-7pm on a Wednesday evening, because hurriedly looking for another 
station whilst driving can be dangerous.

I think 40 years ago it might well have been funny. When I first heard it, I 
got a vague feeling it was a repeat of some very old programme that I'd 
probably missed back in the 60s or 70s sometime.

ally

Ian Piper wrote:
> On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 +0100, the Omrud  
> said:
> 
>> Why?
> 
> Because it is ingenious, finely-observed and oddly edgy. I think it is 
> brilliant. My wife hates it.

YAusAICM5points

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:49:14 +0100, "a l l y"
 wrote:

>
>"the Omrud"  wrote in message 
>news:YGtfk.28170$E41.5037@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>> Ian Piper wrote:
>>> On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 +0100, the Omrud  
>>> said:
>>>
>>>> Why?
>>>
>>> Because it is ingenious, finely-observed and oddly edgy. I think it is 
>>> brilliant. My wife hates it.
>>>
>>> But what's your point? Is he going to be on The Archers?
>>
>> I posted when it came on.  It's about the only time in the last 40 years 
>> I'd rather sit in silence than listen to Radio 4.   I do often switch over 
>> to Radio 3, but not because I can't bear to have the R4 programme on.
>>
>I'm with you there. I'm now taking care not to be stuck in the car between 
>6.30-7pm on a Wednesday evening, because hurriedly looking for another 
>station whilst driving can be dangerous.
>
>I think 40 years ago it might well have been funny. When I first heard it, I 
>got a vague feeling it was a repeat of some very old programme that I'd 
>probably missed back in the 60s or 70s sometime.

It sort of feels like how I remember the oeuvre of the late Harry
Worth.  I never found that funny either, although I suspect he was
considered a comedy genius by some.
-- 
Stephen

Into my heart an air that kills From yon far country blows:
What are those blue remembered hills, What spires, what farms are those?
That is the land of lost content, I see it shining plain,
The happy highways where I went And cannot come again.

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 07:17:34 +0100, Stephen 
wrote:

>On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:49:14 +0100, "a l l y"
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"the Omrud"  wrote in message 
>>news:YGtfk.28170$E41.5037@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>>> Ian Piper wrote:
>>>> On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 +0100, the Omrud  
>>>> said:
>>>>
>>>>> Why?
>>>>
>>>> Because it is ingenious, finely-observed and oddly edgy. I think it is 
>>>> brilliant. My wife hates it.
>>>>
>>>> But what's your point? Is he going to be on The Archers?
>>>
>>> I posted when it came on.  It's about the only time in the last 40 years 
>>> I'd rather sit in silence than listen to Radio 4.   I do often switch over 
>>> to Radio 3, but not because I can't bear to have the R4 programme on.
>>>
>>I'm with you there. I'm now taking care not to be stuck in the car between 
>>6.30-7pm on a Wednesday evening, because hurriedly looking for another 
>>station whilst driving can be dangerous.
>>
>>I think 40 years ago it might well have been funny. When I first heard it, I 
>>got a vague feeling it was a repeat of some very old programme that I'd 
>>probably missed back in the 60s or 70s sometime.
>
>It sort of feels like how I remember the oeuvre of the late Harry
>Worth.  I never found that funny either, although I suspect he was
>considered a comedy genius by some.

There are lots of programmes people love that I find boring.  Monty
Python mostly.   Only Fools and Horses. My Family. It might be easier
to name the ones I like.
Last of the Summer Wine, but mainly the scenes with the women in them.
Open All Hours, and I wish the participants had stayed in that as all
of them were better there than anywhere else.  
Some of Waiting For God, but it's not actually funny.

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 07:17:34 +0100, Stephen 
wrote:

>On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:49:14 +0100, "a l l y"
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"the Omrud"  wrote in message 
>>news:YGtfk.28170$E41.5037@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>>> Ian Piper wrote:
>>>> On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 +0100, the Omrud  
>>>> said:
>>>>
>>>>> Why?
>>>>
>>>> Because it is ingenious, finely-observed and oddly edgy. I think it is 
>>>> brilliant. My wife hates it.
>>>>
>>>> But what's your point? Is he going to be on The Archers?
>>>
>>> I posted when it came on.  It's about the only time in the last 40 years 
>>> I'd rather sit in silence than listen to Radio 4.   I do often switch over 
>>> to Radio 3, but not because I can't bear to have the R4 programme on.
>>>
>>I'm with you there. I'm now taking care not to be stuck in the car between 
>>6.30-7pm on a Wednesday evening, because hurriedly looking for another 
>>station whilst driving can be dangerous.
>>
>>I think 40 years ago it might well have been funny. When I first heard it, I 
>>got a vague feeling it was a repeat of some very old programme that I'd 
>>probably missed back in the 60s or 70s sometime.
>
>It sort of feels like how I remember the oeuvre of the late Harry
>Worth.  I never found that funny either, although I suspect he was
>considered a comedy genius by some.

Where did it originate? It sounds to me like one of those things that
might have begun life as a two-minute sketch which in itself might
have been terribly funny but was expanded into a full-blown series
which, in my opinion, is not.

Wasn't this how People Like Us, Giles Wemmbley Hogg, Alan Partridge
and Gary Richardson[1] began?

Nick O
[1]Ordered deliberately for ironic effect
-- 
real e-mail is nickodell (at) bigfoot (dot) com

"Stephen"  wrote in message 
news:5mot7451q1esp5i30og4077rl1tl0iq0f8@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:49:14 +0100, "a l l y"
>  wrote:
>

>>
>>I think 40 years ago it might well have been funny. When I first heard it, 
>>I
>>got a vague feeling it was a repeat of some very old programme that I'd
>>probably missed back in the 60s or 70s sometime.
>
> It sort of feels like how I remember the oeuvre of the late Harry
> Worth.  I never found that funny either, although I suspect he was
> considered a comedy genius by some.
> -- 
Harry Worth! Yes, we used to watch that from time to time, and I'm sure he 
was at least a bit funnier than CAS.

ally

In message <Hjqfk.27944$E41.6663@text.news.virginmedia.com>, the Omrud 
 writes
>Why?
>
See the other thread m'lud.  Was that the prog where someone counted up 
the unsuitable words for a letter to FedUp? If so its definitely time it 
came off.

Sincerely Chris
-- 
Chris McMillan
http://www.chinavision.org.uk/
http://www.oneplusone.org.cn

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 07:17:34 +0100, Stephen 
wrote:

>It sort of feels like how I remember the oeuvre of the late Harry
>Worth.  I never found that funny either, although I suspect he was
>considered a comedy genius by some.

Was he the one who had a regular series of sketches where he
encountered a  jobworth bureaucrat, and you ended up sympathising with
them?

-- 
Jo

"Jo Lonergan"  wrote in message 
news:it3u74tbq7adgd280578661q3nj8ku1gsg@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 07:17:34 +0100, Stephen 
> wrote:
>
>>It sort of feels like how I remember the oeuvre of the late Harry
>>Worth.  I never found that funny either, although I suspect he was
>>considered a comedy genius by some.
>
> Was he the one who had a regular series of sketches where he
> encountered a  jobworth bureaucrat, and you ended up sympathising with
> them?
>
> -- 
> Jo

I think that was Charlie Drake as 'The Worker'. Perhaps they both had 
similar themes.
Steve Hague

"Stephen"  wrote in message
news:5mot7451q1esp5i30og4077rl1tl0iq0f8@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:49:14 +0100, "a l l y"
>  wrote:
>
>>
>>"the Omrud"  wrote in message
>>news:YGtfk.28170$E41.5037@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>>> Ian Piper wrote:
>>>> On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 +0100, the Omrud 
>>>> said:
>>>>
>>>>> Why?

To make Ed Reardon seem funny by comparison?

>>>> Because it is ingenious, finely-observed and oddly edgy. I think it is
>>>> brilliant. My wife hates it.
>>>>
>>>> But what's your point? Is he going to be on The Archers?
>>>
>>> I posted when it came on.  It's about the only time in the last 40 years
>>> I'd rather sit in silence than listen to Radio 4.   I do often switch
>>> over
>>> to Radio 3, but not because I can't bear to have the R4 programme on.
>>>
>>I'm with you there. I'm now taking care not to be stuck in the car between
>>6.30-7pm on a Wednesday evening, because hurriedly looking for another
>>station whilst driving can be dangerous.
>>
>>I think 40 years ago it might well have been funny. When I first heard it,
>>I
>>got a vague feeling it was a repeat of some very old programme that I'd
>>probably missed back in the 60s or 70s sometime.
>
> It sort of feels like how I remember the oeuvre of the late Harry
> Worth.  I never found that funny either, although I suspect he was
> considered a comedy genius by some.

Indeed - one person who I know considers him thus is Mark Radcliffe, who 
also produces the Count's show.[1] Coincidence, or something more sinister?

[1] Despite having given up other production work some years ago.

        Chris
-- 
"It's always hard meeting your heroes. Especially when they punch you in the 
face."

http://thehitparade.blogspot.com

More of my blathering is available at
http://faynights.users.btopenworld.com

On 2008-07-17 07:17:28 +0100, BrritSki  said:

> Ian Piper wrote:
>> On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 +0100, the Omrud  said:
>> 
>>> Why?
>> 
>> Because it is ingenious, finely-observed and oddly edgy. I think it is 
>> brilliant. My wife hates it.
> 
> YAusAICM5points

YAAFTANTSKOOY


Ian.
--

Jo Lonergan wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:31:04 -0700 (PDT), Bob E
>  wrote:
> 
>> On 16 Jul, 22:25, the Omrud  wrote:
>>> Ian Piper wrote:
>>>> On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 +0100, the Omrud 
>>>> said:
>>>>> Why?
>>>> But what's your point? Is he going to be on The Archers?
>>> I posted when it came on.  It's about the only time in the last 40 years
>>> I'd rather sit in silence than listen to Radio 4.   I do often switch
>>> over to Radio 3, but not because I can't bear to have the R4 programme on.
> 
> Not even Quote Unquote?

Nope.  I can't remember anything else I've been actually unable to 
listen to.

-- 
David

badriya wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 07:17:34 +0100, Stephen 
> wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:49:14 +0100, "a l l y"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> "the Omrud"  wrote in message 
>>> news:YGtfk.28170$E41.5037@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>>>> Ian Piper wrote:
>>>>> On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 +0100, the Omrud  
>>>>> said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Why?
>>>>> Because it is ingenious, finely-observed and oddly edgy. I think it is 
>>>>> brilliant. My wife hates it.
>>>>>
>>>>> But what's your point? Is he going to be on The Archers?
>>>> I posted when it came on.  It's about the only time in the last 40 years 
>>>> I'd rather sit in silence than listen to Radio 4.   I do often switch over 
>>>> to Radio 3, but not because I can't bear to have the R4 programme on.
>>>>
>>> I'm with you there. I'm now taking care not to be stuck in the car between 
>>> 6.30-7pm on a Wednesday evening, because hurriedly looking for another 
>>> station whilst driving can be dangerous.
>>>
>>> I think 40 years ago it might well have been funny. When I first heard it, I 
>>> got a vague feeling it was a repeat of some very old programme that I'd 
>>> probably missed back in the 60s or 70s sometime.
>> It sort of feels like how I remember the oeuvre of the late Harry
>> Worth.  I never found that funny either, although I suspect he was
>> considered a comedy genius by some.
> 
> There are lots of programmes people love that I find boring.  Monty
> Python mostly.   Only Fools and Horses. My Family. It might be easier
> to name the ones I like.
> Last of the Summer Wine, but mainly the scenes with the women in them.
> Open All Hours, and I wish the participants had stayed in that as all
> of them were better there than anywhere else.  
> Some of Waiting For God, but it's not actually funny.

Boring is tolerable.  Lots of R4 programmes are a bit boring.  We can't 
expect them to hit the funny-bone jackpot every time.  I often find 
Front Row rather boring.

-- 
David

a l l y wrote:
> "Stephen"  wrote in message 
> news:5mot7451q1esp5i30og4077rl1tl0iq0f8@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:49:14 +0100, "a l l y"
>>  wrote:
>>
> 
>>> I think 40 years ago it might well have been funny. When I first heard it, 
>>> I
>>> got a vague feeling it was a repeat of some very old programme that I'd
>>> probably missed back in the 60s or 70s sometime.
>> It sort of feels like how I remember the oeuvre of the late Harry
>> Worth.  I never found that funny either, although I suspect he was
>> considered a comedy genius by some.
>> -- 
> Harry Worth! Yes, we used to watch that from time to time, and I'm sure he 
> was at least a bit funnier than CAS.

I was sitting up in my pyjamas watching Tonight and waiting to see Harry 
Worth (whom, at the age of 7, I found funny enough) when the BBC closed 
down its TV service because some American president had been shot.  I 
can still see Cliff Mitchelmore looking shocked.

-- 
David

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 17:35:35 GMT, the Omrud
 wrote:

>Why?


God only knows.

This programme is puerile.

-- 
John

"the Omrud"  wrote in message 
news:sJOfk.28845$E41.11296@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>a l l y wrote:
>> "Stephen"  wrote in message 
>> news:5mot7451q1esp5i30og4077rl1tl0iq0f8@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:49:14 +0100, "a l l y"
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>
>>>> I think 40 years ago it might well have been funny. When I first heard 
>>>> it, I
>>>> got a vague feeling it was a repeat of some very old programme that I'd
>>>> probably missed back in the 60s or 70s sometime.
>>> It sort of feels like how I remember the oeuvre of the late Harry
>>> Worth.  I never found that funny either, although I suspect he was
>>> considered a comedy genius by some.
>>> -- 
>> Harry Worth! Yes, we used to watch that from time to time, and I'm sure 
>> he was at least a bit funnier than CAS.
>
> I was sitting up in my pyjamas watching Tonight and waiting to see Harry 
> Worth (whom, at the age of 7, I found funny enough) when the BBC closed 
> down its TV service because some American president had been shot.  I can 
> still see Cliff Mitchelmore looking shocked.
>
Ooh you were posh! We only had a radio when that happened. I think it was 
the following year we got a telly. My parents were fed up with me spending 
so much time at my friend's house (they had a TV).

ally

the Omrud wrote:
> badriya wrote:
>> There are lots of programmes people love that I find boring.  Monty
>> Python mostly.   Only Fools and Horses. My Family. It might be easier
>> to name the ones I like.
>> Last of the Summer Wine, but mainly the scenes with the women in them.
>> Open All Hours, and I wish the participants had stayed in that as all
>> of them were better there than anywhere else.  Some of Waiting For 
>> God, but it's not actually funny.
> 
> Boring is tolerable.  Lots of R4 programmes are a bit boring.  We can't 
> expect them to hit the funny-bone jackpot every time.  I often find 
> Front Row rather boring.

There's another one.  Scooby Trevithick.  That's seriously boring.  But 
it doesn't make me scream and reach for the Off switch.

-- 
David

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 21:21:28 GMT, the Omrud
 wrote:

>a l l y wrote:
>> "Stephen"  wrote in message 
>> news:5mot7451q1esp5i30og4077rl1tl0iq0f8@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:49:14 +0100, "a l l y"
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>> 
>>>> I think 40 years ago it might well have been funny. When I first heard it, 
>>>> I
>>>> got a vague feeling it was a repeat of some very old programme that I'd
>>>> probably missed back in the 60s or 70s sometime.
>>> It sort of feels like how I remember the oeuvre of the late Harry
>>> Worth.  I never found that funny either, although I suspect he was
>>> considered a comedy genius by some.
>>> -- 
>> Harry Worth! Yes, we used to watch that from time to time, and I'm sure he 
>> was at least a bit funnier than CAS.
>
>I was sitting up in my pyjamas watching Tonight and waiting to see Harry 
>Worth (whom, at the age of 7, I found funny enough) when the BBC closed 
>down its TV service because some American president had been shot.  I 
>can still see Cliff Mitchelmore looking shocked.

So which American president was that? At least two have been shot in
my lifetime.

Nick O
-- 
real e-mail is nickodell (at) bigfoot (dot) com

Nick Odell wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 21:21:28 GMT, the Omrud
>  wrote:
> 
>> I was sitting up in my pyjamas watching Tonight and waiting to see Harry 
>> Worth (whom, at the age of 7, I found funny enough) when the BBC closed 
>> down its TV service because some American president had been shot.  I 
>> can still see Cliff Mitchelmore looking shocked.
> 
> So which American president was that? At least two have been shot in
> my lifetime.

Hmmm.  I don't think the BBC would have closed down its TV channels by 
the time the second one was shot.  And I rather think Harry Worth had 
been pensioned off by then.

-- 
David

In message <JFOfk.28841$E41.7792@text.news.virginmedia.com>, the Omrud 
 writes
[]
>>>> I posted when it came on.  It's about the only time in the last 40 years
>>>> I'd rather sit in silence than listen to Radio 4.   I do often switch
>>>> over to Radio 3, but not because I can't bear to have the R4 programme on.
>>  Not even Quote Unquote?
>
>Nope.  I can't remember anything else I've been actually unable to 
>listen to.
>
Well, "unable" is quite strong, but IKWYM. I am not aware of having 
caught any of this CAS (consensus here seems to be that it's similar to 
the flu in the desirability of catching it anyway ... sorry). I find 
Q/unQ slightly on the positive side of enjoyable. Of the things I do 
seem to catch, the one I'm most likely to turn off - certainly if I have 
some alternative to hand - is Question Time; I _sometimes_ let it run 
long enough to check whether there's more than one out of four 
politicians on the panel, but since there almost always is/are, I don't 
usually even wait that long. (Political debate has to happen; I just 
find it, in that format anyway, somewhat tedious, at least if two or 
more of the participants are from the two main parties.)
-- 
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL(+++)IS-P--Ch+(p)Ar+T[?]H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for thoughts on PCs. **

<Smith & Wesson...the original point and click interface>
(Stolen from another .sig)

In message , badriya 
 writes
[]
>There are lots of programmes people love that I find boring.  Monty
>Python mostly.   Only Fools and Horses. My Family. It might be easier
>to name the ones I like.

Fans of most of those tend to overpraise them; there are extremely funny 
moments in them (well, I haven't seen much of Family), but a lot of 
dross - or, at least, run of the mill material - too.

>Last of the Summer Wine, but mainly the scenes with the women in them.

Has a tendency to descend into slapstick (which can be funny but usually 
isn't to me, especially when the audience is so audible in the dales), 
but has great moments (often around Clegg's lines, IMO).

>Open All Hours, and I wish the participants had stayed in that as all
>of them were better there than anywhere else.

I used to find the cruelty in that quite painful. Of course that was to 
some extent part of the comedy, but I wished it hadn't been. (I agree 
all were on good form.)

>Some of Waiting For God, but it's not actually funny.

Oh, some of that is wickedly so. IMO far superior - partly perhaps for 
there being a lot less of it - to the Meldrew programme (though I've 
probably said before that I think the Meldrew _character_ is much 
maligned).
-- 
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL(+++)IS-P--Ch+(p)Ar+T[?]H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for thoughts on PCs. **

<Smith & Wesson...the original point and click interface>
(Stolen from another .sig)

In message <wHOfk.28842$E41.3433@text.news.virginmedia.com>, the Omrud 
 writes
[]
>Boring is tolerable.  Lots of R4 programmes are a bit boring.  We can't 
>expect them to hit the funny-bone jackpot every time.  I often find 
>Front Row rather boring.
>
I _usually_ do, though I don't turn it off. Mainly, I slightly resent 
that it has a daily slot, whereas I don't _think_ any "science" prog. 
gets more than something weekly; of course it _could_ be that there is 
one that just happens to be on at a time I don't hear, but I don't think 
so. (Even if there is, I don't think FR should have the slot it does at 
least five days a week.)
-- 
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL(+++)IS-P--Ch+(p)Ar+T[?]H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for thoughts on PCs. **

<Smith & Wesson...the original point and click interface>
(Stolen from another .sig)

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> In message <JFOfk.28841$E41.7792@text.news.virginmedia.com>, the Omrud 
>  writes
> []
>>>>> I posted when it came on.  It's about the only time in the last 40 
>>>>> years
>>>>> I'd rather sit in silence than listen to Radio 4.   I do often switch
>>>>> over to Radio 3, but not because I can't bear to have the R4 
>>>>> programme on.
>>>  Not even Quote Unquote?
>>
>> Nope.  I can't remember anything else I've been actually unable to 
>> listen to.
>>
> Well, "unable" is quite strong, but IKWYM. I am not aware of having 
> caught any of this CAS (consensus here seems to be that it's similar to 
> the flu in the desirability of catching it anyway ... sorry). 

The only time I've heard an episode of it when I was laid up in bed so 
badly with the flu that I couldn't find the energy to turn it off (this 
is when it was in a late-morning slot).

There was, I have to confess, a single quite good joke at about 20 
minutes in.  But with every subsequent broadcast I've stumbled across 
I've not had the stamina to wait and see if this success rate is repeated.

"the Omrud"  wrote in message
news:wHOfk.28842$E41.3433@text.news.virginmedia.com...
> badriya wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 07:17:34 +0100, Stephen 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:49:14 +0100, "a l l y"
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> "the Omrud"  wrote in message
>>>> news:YGtfk.28170$E41.5037@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>>>>> Ian Piper wrote:
>>>>>> On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 +0100, the Omrud
>>>>>>  said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why?
>>>>>> Because it is ingenious, finely-observed and oddly edgy. I think it
>>>>>> is brilliant. My wife hates it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But what's your point? Is he going to be on The Archers?
>>>>> I posted when it came on.  It's about the only time in the last 40
>>>>> years I'd rather sit in silence than listen to Radio 4.   I do often
>>>>> switch over to Radio 3, but not because I can't bear to have the R4
>>>>> programme on.
>>>>>
>>>> I'm with you there. I'm now taking care not to be stuck in the car
>>>> between 6.30-7pm on a Wednesday evening, because hurriedly looking for
>>>> another station whilst driving can be dangerous.
>>>>
>>>> I think 40 years ago it might well have been funny. When I first heard
>>>> it, I got a vague feeling it was a repeat of some very old programme
>>>> that I'd probably missed back in the 60s or 70s sometime.
>>> It sort of feels like how I remember the oeuvre of the late Harry
>>> Worth.  I never found that funny either, although I suspect he was
>>> considered a comedy genius by some.
>>
>> There are lots of programmes people love that I find boring.  Monty
>> Python mostly.   Only Fools and Horses. My Family. It might be easier
>> to name the ones I like.
>> Last of the Summer Wine, but mainly the scenes with the women in them.
>> Open All Hours, and I wish the participants had stayed in that as all
>> of them were better there than anywhere else.  Some of Waiting For God,
>> but it's not actually funny.
>
> Boring is tolerable.  Lots of R4 programmes are a bit boring.  We can't
> expect them to hit the funny-bone jackpot every time.  I often find Front
> Row rather boring.
>
> -- 
> David

I sometimes think that Open Country is meant to be boring. It's so soporific
that if something slightly interesting were to sneak in the listener would
panic. You occasionally come across a person who has the ability to suck all
the oxygen out of the air around you the moment they open their mouth, but
OC seems to have an endless supply of them.
Steve Hague

a l l y wrote:
> "the Omrud"  wrote in message 
> news:YGtfk.28170$E41.5037@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>> Ian Piper wrote:
>>> On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 +0100, the Omrud  
>>> said:
>>>
>>>> Why?
>>> Because it is ingenious, finely-observed and oddly edgy. I think it is 
>>> brilliant. My wife hates it.
>>>
>>> But what's your point? Is he going to be on The Archers?
>> I posted when it came on.  It's about the only time in the last 40 years 
>> I'd rather sit in silence than listen to Radio 4.   I do often switch over 
>> to Radio 3, but not because I can't bear to have the R4 programme on.
>>
> I'm with you there. I'm now taking care not to be stuck in the car between 
> 6.30-7pm on a Wednesday evening, because hurriedly looking for another 
> station whilst driving can be dangerous.
> 
> I think 40 years ago it might well have been funny. When I first heard it, I 
> got a vague feeling it was a repeat of some very old programme that I'd 
> probably missed back in the 60s or 70s sometime.
> 


Yes, that's how it sounds to me - but not for long, as I really can't 
stand it and run for the off-switch.
It sounds very dated, and also very self-indulgent, as if the main 
character was more interested in enjoying himself than in entertaining 
his listeners.


-- 
Marjorie

"Marjorie"  wrote in message 
news:qfydnUqfg9OM9R3VnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
>>
>
>
> Yes, that's how it sounds to me - but not for long, as I really can't 
> stand it and run for the off-switch.
> It sounds very dated, and also very self-indulgent, as if the main 
> character was more interested in enjoying himself than in entertaining his 
> listeners.
>
Yes, exactly. I keep waiting for something actually to happen, for the story 
to progress, for one of the other characters to do something interesting, 
but this boring loudmouth keeps stopping any of that from happening. If I 
ran a pub, and he stood at the bar boring my regulars, I'd bar him.

ally

a l l y wrote:
> "Marjorie"  wrote in message 
> news:qfydnUqfg9OM9R3VnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
>>
>> Yes, that's how it sounds to me - but not for long, as I really can't 
>> stand it and run for the off-switch.
>> It sounds very dated, and also very self-indulgent, as if the main 
>> character was more interested in enjoying himself than in entertaining his 
>> listeners.
>>
> Yes, exactly. I keep waiting for something actually to happen, for the story 
> to progress, for one of the other characters to do something interesting, 
> but this boring loudmouth keeps stopping any of that from happening. If I 
> ran a pub, and he stood at the bar boring my regulars, I'd bar him.

Isn't that the point?

Anyway, I don't normally agree with britttststtski but I'm with him and 
Ian Piper on this one. So, that's just three of us then?

Colin

>>Boring is tolerable.  Lots of R4 programmes are a bit boring. 
>>We can't expect them to hit the funny-bone jackpot every time. 
>>I often find Front Row rather boring.
>>
> I _usually_ do, though I don't turn it off. Mainly, I slightly 
> resent that it has a daily slot, whereas I don't _think_ any 
> "science" prog. gets more than something weekly; of course it 
> _could_ be that there is one that just happens to be on at a 
> time I don't hear, but I don't think so. (Even if there is, I 
> don't think FR should have the slot it does at least five days 
> a week.)

I agree. 100%. I was delighted when its equally boring 
predecessor, 'Kaleidoscope', which was originally billed as an 
arts *and sciences* magazine but never got to grips with the 
sciences bit, was dropped, and deeply disappointed when it was 
succeeded by 'Front Row', which goes out at a time when any 
serious arts enthusiast ought to be **in** the front row of a 
theatre or cinema or concert hall somewhere.

<swerve> I've never quite understood the timing of 'Ski Sunday' 
either, this being the day when the largest number of skiers are 
actually out skiing and not at home watching the telly.

Anne B

In article , Colin Blackburn 
generously decided to share with us..

Snippetry..
 
> Anyway, I don't normally agree with britttststtski but I'm with him and 
> Ian Piper on this one. So, that's just three of us then?

I like it too.. though this series is a repeat and it's not quite so 
good when you know where it's going to go..

-- 
Gid

Current Project: Bragdy'r Ddraenen Wen 
(if it ever stops raining for long enough)

Anne Burgess wrote:
>>> Boring is tolerable.  Lots of R4 programmes are a bit boring. 
>>> We can't expect them to hit the funny-bone jackpot every time. 
>>> I often find Front Row rather boring.
>>>
>> I _usually_ do, though I don't turn it off. Mainly, I slightly 
>> resent that it has a daily slot, whereas I don't _think_ any 
>> "science" prog. gets more than something weekly; of course it 
>> _could_ be that there is one that just happens to be on at a 
>> time I don't hear, but I don't think so. (Even if there is, I 
>> don't think FR should have the slot it does at least five days 
>> a week.)
> 
> I agree. 100%. I was delighted when its equally boring 
> predecessor, 'Kaleidoscope', which was originally billed as an 
> arts *and sciences* magazine but never got to grips with the 
> sciences bit, was dropped, and deeply disappointed when it was 
> succeeded by 'Front Row', which goes out at a time when any 
> serious arts enthusiast ought to be **in** the front row of a 
> theatre or cinema or concert hall somewhere.

Ah, excellent.  I was going to bring up the Kaleidoscope/science 
complaint, but you beat me to it.  Although I have a feeling that it's 
20 years ago now.

-- 
David

"Colin Blackburn"  wrote in message 
news:6ebb6fF69bc9U1@mid.individual.net...
>a l l y wrote:
>> "Marjorie"  wrote in message 
>> news:qfydnUqfg9OM9R3VnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
>>>
>>> Yes, that's how it sounds to me - but not for long, as I really can't 
>>> stand it and run for the off-switch.
>>> It sounds very dated, and also very self-indulgent, as if the main 
>>> character was more interested in enjoying himself than in entertaining 
>>> his listeners.
>>>
>> Yes, exactly. I keep waiting for something actually to happen, for the 
>> story to progress, for one of the other characters to do something 
>> interesting, but this boring loudmouth keeps stopping any of that from 
>> happening. If I ran a pub, and he stood at the bar boring my regulars, 
>> I'd bar him.
>
> Isn't that the point?

Dunno. Is it?
>
> Anyway, I don't normally agree with britttststtski but I'm with him and 
> Ian Piper on this one. So, that's just three of us then?
>
There must be a lot more of you, otherwise they wouldn't keep running the 
programme.

ally

Steve Hague wrote:

> 
> I sometimes think that Open Country is meant to be boring. It's so soporific
> that if something slightly interesting were to sneak in the listener would
> panic. You occasionally come across a person who has the ability to suck all
> the oxygen out of the air around you the moment they open their mouth, but
> OC seems to have an endless supply of them.

It's an odd concept for a radio programme, isn't it? I know that "the 
pictures are better on radio" and all that, but when they're describing 
an actual scene, and not just leaving it to your your imagination, it's 
very tedious. There's just no comparison with something like "Coast" on 
TV, which worked very well.

-- 
Marjorie

Ian Piper wrote:
> On 2008-07-17 07:17:28 +0100, BrritSki  said:
> 
>> Ian Piper wrote:
>>> On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 +0100, the Omrud 
>>>  said:
>>>
>>>> Why?
>>>
>>> Because it is ingenious, finely-observed and oddly edgy. I think it 
>>> is brilliant. My wife hates it.
>>
>> YAusAICM5points
> 
> YAAFTANTSKOOY
>

Que ?

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 10:44:22 +0100, Marjorie
 wrote:

>Steve Hague wrote:
>
>> 
>> I sometimes think that Open Country is meant to be boring. It's so soporific
>> that if something slightly interesting were to sneak in the listener would
>> panic. You occasionally come across a person who has the ability to suck all
>> the oxygen out of the air around you the moment they open their mouth, but
>> OC seems to have an endless supply of them.
>
>It's an odd concept for a radio programme, isn't it? I know that "the 
>pictures are better on radio" and all that, but when they're describing 
>an actual scene, and not just leaving it to your your imagination, it's 
>very tedious. There's just no comparison with something like "Coast" on 
>TV, which worked very well.

If I catch Open Country in its afternoon slot I find it quite missable
but if I happen to wake up early on a Saturday morning then it's
absolutely perfect for bring me gently round. Erme - it _is_on
Saturday mornings isn't it?

Nick O
-- 
real e-mail is nickodell (at) bigfoot (dot) com

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 13:47:58 +0100, "a l l y"
 wrote:

>
>"Colin Blackburn"  wrote in message 
>news:6ebb6fF69bc9U1@mid.individual.net...
>>a l l y wrote:
>>> "Marjorie"  wrote in message 
>>> news:qfydnUqfg9OM9R3VnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
>>>>
>>>> Yes, that's how it sounds to me - but not for long, as I really can't 
>>>> stand it and run for the off-switch.
>>>> It sounds very dated, and also very self-indulgent, as if the main 
>>>> character was more interested in enjoying himself than in entertaining 
>>>> his listeners.
>>>>
>>> Yes, exactly. I keep waiting for something actually to happen, for the 
>>> story to progress, for one of the other characters to do something 
>>> interesting, but this boring loudmouth keeps stopping any of that from 
>>> happening. If I ran a pub, and he stood at the bar boring my regulars, 
>>> I'd bar him.
>>
>> Isn't that the point?
>
>Dunno. Is it?
>>
>> Anyway, I don't normally agree with britttststtski but I'm with him and 
>> Ian Piper on this one. So, that's just three of us then?
>>
>There must be a lot more of you, otherwise they wouldn't keep running the 
>programme.
>

If this were Tesco or Argos we were talking about then I'd agree with
you. But this is the BBC and from what I've been hearing on FedUp
recently I think their reaction on learning that nobody likes
something would be to commission another series... and another...
until the audience finally gives in.

Nick O
-- 
real e-mail is nickodell (at) bigfoot (dot) com

"the Omrud"  wrote
>
> I was sitting up in my pyjamas watching Tonight and waiting to see Harry 
> Worth (whom, at the age of 7, I found funny enough) when the BBC closed 
> down its TV service because some American president had been shot.  I can 
> still see Cliff Mitchelmore looking shocked.

I was 9 years old and at school in Chicago.  They sent us all home, and I 
was very put out to find that the usual cartoons weren't on the TV.
-- 
Sid
Make sure Matron is away when you reply

"John" <67vnue6o@knwfv> wrote
>
> God only knows.
>
> This programme is puerile.

Oh, thanks, John.  Thanks very much.  I'll be singing that couplet to myself 
to the Beach Boys tune *all* boodly evening, now.

Just when you thought it was safe to go back into umra, eh?
-- 
Sid
Make sure Matron is away when you reply

"Anne Burgess"  wrote

> I agree. 100%.

Only 100%?  You'll never get on with a lukewarm attitude like that, you 
know.
-- 
Sid
Make sure Matron is away when you reply

On 18 Jul, 12:02, "Anne Burgess"  wrote:

>  I've never quite understood the timing of 'Ski Sunday'
> either, this being the day when the largest number of skiers are
> actually out skiing and not at home watching the telly.

Countryfile on Sunday mornings when we get out to enjoy the
countryside. Why not put this on in the evening to replace some of the
cookery/ body makeover/ buying houses drivel?

Gardeners' Question Time on Sunday afternoons when gardeners should be
out in the garden.

On 18 Jul, 08:19, "Steve Hague"  wrote:

> I sometimes think that Open Country is meant to be boring.

Well there you go.
I love OC. One of my favourite programmes.
Two of my friends were on the one about the Malvern Hills last summer
- one an archaeologist and one a geologist.

Is anyone old enough to remember "The Countryside in ... [ <insert
season>]".
Martha Woodford was one of the presenters. Late 1970s if I remember -
the golden age when we had Weekending and Saturday Night Theatre -
wonderful.

On 16 Jul, 23:48, Jo Lonergan  wrote:

> >Why not post it on the Radio 4 newsgroup?
> >Or at least put OT (off topic) in the title.
> >I thought we had a new replacement for the elderly gentleman, Colonel
> >Danby/ Ollie.
>
> Since when has discussing the 18.30 comedy programme been an
> aberration around here? Hardly a week passes, IME.

Sorry Jo. I should've added a smiley, but I thought it was implied.
Just the thought of Ollie being replaced by CAS.

Bob E wrote:
> On 18 Jul, 12:02, "Anne Burgess"  wrote:
> 
>>  I've never quite understood the timing of 'Ski Sunday'
>> either, this being the day when the largest number of skiers are
>> actually out skiing and not at home watching the telly.
> 
> Countryfile on Sunday mornings when we get out to enjoy the
> countryside. Why not put this on in the evening to replace some of the
> cookery/ body makeover/ buying houses drivel?
> 
> Gardeners' Question Time on Sunday afternoons when gardeners should be
> out in the garden.

Ah, now, I am often working in my greenhouse listening to this, 
particularly in the spring.  I'm in my greenhouse potting up and things 
like that because it's often raining on a Sunday afternoon.

-- 
Jane
The potter in the purple socks

http://www.clothandclay.co.uk/umra/cookbook/contents.htm for recipes 
supplied by umrats

In message 
, Bob 
E  writes
>On 18 Jul, 08:19, "Steve Hague"  wrote:
>
>> I sometimes think that Open Country is meant to be boring.
>
>Well there you go.
>I love OC. One of my favourite programmes.
>Two of my friends were on the one about the Malvern Hills last summer
>- one an archaeologist and one a geologist.
>
>Is anyone old enough to remember "The Countryside in ... [ <insert
>season>]".
>Martha Woodford was one of the presenters. Late 1970s if I remember -
>the golden age when we had Weekending and Saturday Night Theatre -
>wonderful.

YADNAOU  or  YAPAAOD (You Are Pushing Against An Open Door)
-- 
Mike McMillan,
The email address is spam trapped but any genuine communications may be sent to
mike dot mcmillan at ntlworld dot com

"Let's all calm down shall we? Let's forget there is a llama in here at all."
(Lynda Snell, 010603)

Tel: (+44) 0118 9265450. website: <http://homepage.ntlworld.com/mike.mcmillan/>

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:13:42 +0100, "Siderius Nuncius"
 wrote:

>
>"John" <67vnue6o@knwfv> wrote
>>
>> God only knows.
>>
>> This programme is puerile.
>
>Oh, thanks, John.  Thanks very much.  I'll be singing that couplet to myself 
>to the Beach Boys tune *all* boodly evening, now.
>
>Just when you thought it was safe to go back into umra, eh?

LOL

In message , Nick Odell 
<gurzhfvp.jbexfubc@ntlworld.com.invalid> writes
>On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 13:47:58 +0100, "a l l y"
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Colin Blackburn"  wrote in message
>>news:6ebb6fF69bc9U1@mid.individual.net...
>>>a l l y wrote:
>>>> "Marjorie"  wrote in message
>>>> news:qfydnUqfg9OM9R3VnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, that's how it sounds to me - but not for long, as I really can't
>>>>> stand it and run for the off-switch.
>>>>> It sounds very dated, and also very self-indulgent, as if the main
>>>>> character was more interested in enjoying himself than in entertaining
>>>>> his listeners.
>>>>>
>>>> Yes, exactly. I keep waiting for something actually to happen, for the
>>>> story to progress, for one of the other characters to do something
>>>> interesting, but this boring loudmouth keeps stopping any of that from
>>>> happening. If I ran a pub, and he stood at the bar boring my regulars,
>>>> I'd bar him.
>>>
>>> Isn't that the point?
>>
>>Dunno. Is it?
>>>
>>> Anyway, I don't normally agree with britttststtski but I'm with him and
>>> Ian Piper on this one. So, that's just three of us then?
>>>
>>There must be a lot more of you, otherwise they wouldn't keep running the
>>programme.
>>
>
>If this were Tesco or Argos we were talking about then I'd agree with
>you. But this is the BBC and from what I've been hearing on FedUp
>recently I think their reaction on learning that nobody likes
>something would be to commission another series... and another...
>until the audience finally gives in.
>
Nick, you're not me by any hcance are you?  I said this to McT in almost 
those words earlier in the thread.

Sincerely Chris
>Nick O

-- 
Chris McMillan
http://www.chinavision.org.uk/
http://www.oneplusone.org.cn

In message <TtXfk.35$X72.3@newsfe29.ams2>, Steve Hague 
 writes
>
>"the Omrud"  wrote in message
>news:wHOfk.28842$E41.3433@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>> badriya wrote:
>>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 07:17:34 +0100, Stephen 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:49:14 +0100, "a l l y"
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "the Omrud"  wrote in message
>>>>> news:YGtfk.28170$E41.5037@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>>>>>> Ian Piper wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 +0100, the Omrud
>>>>>>>  said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why?
>>>>>>> Because it is ingenious, finely-observed and oddly edgy. I think it
>>>>>>> is brilliant. My wife hates it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But what's your point? Is he going to be on The Archers?
>>>>>> I posted when it came on.  It's about the only time in the last 40
>>>>>> years I'd rather sit in silence than listen to Radio 4.   I do often
>>>>>> switch over to Radio 3, but not because I can't bear to have the R4
>>>>>> programme on.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I'm with you there. I'm now taking care not to be stuck in the car
>>>>> between 6.30-7pm on a Wednesday evening, because hurriedly looking for
>>>>> another station whilst driving can be dangerous.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think 40 years ago it might well have been funny. When I first heard
>>>>> it, I got a vague feeling it was a repeat of some very old programme
>>>>> that I'd probably missed back in the 60s or 70s sometime.
>>>> It sort of feels like how I remember the oeuvre of the late Harry
>>>> Worth.  I never found that funny either, although I suspect he was
>>>> considered a comedy genius by some.
>>>
>>> There are lots of programmes people love that I find boring.  Monty
>>> Python mostly.   Only Fools and Horses. My Family. It might be easier
>>> to name the ones I like.
>>> Last of the Summer Wine, but mainly the scenes with the women in them.
>>> Open All Hours, and I wish the participants had stayed in that as all
>>> of them were better there than anywhere else.  Some of Waiting For God,
>>> but it's not actually funny.
>>
>> Boring is tolerable.  Lots of R4 programmes are a bit boring.  We can't
>> expect them to hit the funny-bone jackpot every time.  I often find Front
>> Row rather boring.
>>
>> --
>> David
>
>I sometimes think that Open Country is meant to be boring.
 >
Especially when they manage to bring in the Olympics (and an obscure 
sport at that) into the countryside.  Clutching at straws or what?

Sincerely Chris


-- 
Chris McMillan
http://www.chinavision.org.uk/
http://www.oneplusone.org.cn

In message 
, Bob 
E  writes
>On 18 Jul, 08:19, "Steve Hague"  wrote:
>
>> I sometimes think that Open Country is meant to be boring.
>
>Well there you go.
>I love OC. One of my favourite programmes.
>Two of my friends were on the one about the Malvern Hills last summer
>- one an archaeologist and one a geologist.
>
>Is anyone old enough to remember "The Countryside in ... [ <insert
>season>]".
>Martha Woodford was one of the presenters.
 >
Along with Martin Muncaster.  Anyone remember him?  Probably more for 
his TV work than his radio stuff.
 >
> Late 1970s if I remember
 >
It ran for many years, before Martha it was Wynford Vaughan Thomas.

Sincerely Chris

-- 
Chris McMillan
http://www.chinavision.org.uk/
http://www.oneplusone.org.cn

In message <qfydnUufg9OP-h3VnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet>, Marjorie 
 writes
>Steve Hague wrote:
>
>>  I sometimes think that Open Country is meant to be boring. It's so 
>>soporific
>> that if something slightly interesting were to sneak in the listener would
>> panic. You occasionally come across a person who has the ability to suck all
>> the oxygen out of the air around you the moment they open their mouth, but
>> OC seems to have an endless supply of them.
>
>It's an odd concept for a radio programme, isn't it? I know that "the 
>pictures are better on radio" and all that, but when they're describing 
>an actual scene, and not just leaving it to your your imagination, it's 
>very tedious.

Oh I don't know.  I like it. When its talking *about* the countryside 
properly rather than listening to people talking about themselves rather 
than the countryside they're walking through.  There's been quite a 
number of progs in the past few months where they've interviewed poets 
and the like which to me isn't countryside per se.

Sincerely Chris
-- 
Chris McMillan
http://www.chinavision.org.uk/
http://www.oneplusone.org.cn

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:07:27 +0200, BrritSki 
wrote:

>Ian Piper wrote:
>> On 2008-07-17 07:17:28 +0100, BrritSki  said:
>> 
>>> Ian Piper wrote:
>>>> On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 +0100, the Omrud 
>>>>  said:
>>>>
>>>>> Why?
>>>>
>>>> Because it is ingenious, finely-observed and oddly edgy. I think it 
>>>> is brilliant. My wife hates it.
>>>
>>> YAusAICM5points
>> 
>> YAAFTANTSKOOY
>>
>
>Que ?

You Are A Fantastic Tying Artist: Now Tie Some Knots On Our Yacht?
-- 
Stephen

Into my heart an air that kills From yon far country blows:
What are those blue remembered hills, What spires, what farms are those?
That is the land of lost content, I see it shining plain,
The happy highways where I went And cannot come again.

In article <333a574c-282f-48a3-a98c-9a4f7e917c00@s50g2000hsb.googlegr[...]>,
Bob E  wrote:
> Gardeners' Question Time on Sunday afternoons when gardeners should be
> out in the garden.

But at 2pm they should be letting their lunch settle, (or doing the washing
up..) before hurrying out into the garden at 2:30 to put into practice
whatever they've learnt. That timing seems fine to us.

Rosemary


-- 
Rosemary Miskin     ZFC Pm   miskin@orpheusmail.co.uk
Loughborough, UK             http://miskin.orpheusweb.co.uk

>> I agree. 100%.
>
> Only 100%?  You'll never get on with a lukewarm attitude like 
> that, you know.
> Sid

Well, you know, I have always been averse to getting deep into 
hot water.

Anne B

In message 
, Bob 
E  writes
>On 18 Jul, 12:02, "Anne Burgess"  wrote:
>
>>  I've never quite understood the timing of 'Ski Sunday'
>> either, this being the day when the largest number of skiers are
>> actually out skiing and not at home watching the telly.

Depends; I always thought that SS wasn't for "real" skiers, but for 
people who'd like to be.
[]
-- 
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL(+++)IS-P--Ch+(p)Ar+T[?]H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for thoughts on PCs. **

"I never trust a woman until she rejects me" - Woody Allen, 1999

In message 
, Bob 
E  writes
[]
>Is anyone old enough to remember "The Countryside in ... [ <insert
>season>]".
>Martha Woodford was one of the presenters. Late 1970s if I remember -
>the golden age when we had Weekending and Saturday Night Theatre -
>wonderful.

I don't remember that, but I do remember when the Omnibus was preceded 
by Tom Forrest (I think) giving a little bit about what was going on in 
the countryside at the time of year. ISTR some umrats scorned it and 
were glad when it stopped, but (probably partly because I'm a townie) I 
liked it.
-- 
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL(+++)IS-P--Ch+(p)Ar+T[?]H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for thoughts on PCs. **

"I never trust a woman until she rejects me" - Woody Allen, 1999

In message , Siderius Nuncius 
 writes
>
>"the Omrud"  wrote
>>
>> I was sitting up in my pyjamas watching Tonight and waiting to see Harry
>> Worth (whom, at the age of 7, I found funny enough) when the BBC closed
>> down its TV service because some American president had been shot.  I can
>> still see Cliff Mitchelmore looking shocked.
>
>I was 9 years old and at school in Chicago.  They sent us all home, and I
>was very put out to find that the usual cartoons weren't on the TV.

I don't remember that, but I do remember when they took off the omnibus 
one Sunday morning (and screwed up virtually all programming for about 
the next fortnight, too) because of some car crash in Paris. (And in 
case there are UMRAts who were fond of the person involved: I'm _not_ 
trying to start another Maggie-style thread!)
-- 
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL(+++)IS-P--Ch+(p)Ar+T[?]H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for thoughts on PCs. **

"I never trust a woman until she rejects me" - Woody Allen, 1999

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 21:57:07 +0100, Stephen 
wrote:

>On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:07:27 +0200, BrritSki 
>wrote:
>
>>Ian Piper wrote:
>>> On 2008-07-17 07:17:28 +0100, BrritSki  said:
>>> 
>>>> Ian Piper wrote:
>>>>> On 2008-07-16 18:35:35 +0100, the Omrud 
>>>>>  said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Why?
>>>>>
>>>>> Because it is ingenious, finely-observed and oddly edgy. I think it 
>>>>> is brilliant. My wife hates it.
>>>>
>>>> YAusAICM5points
>>> 
>>> YAAFTANTSKOOY
>>>
>>
>>Que ?
>
>You Are A Fantastic Tying Artist: Now Tie Some Knots On Our Yacht?

Oh, it _that_ what it is? I'd got as far as You Are A Financial Times
Adviser, Nsomething Tsomething Some Kind Of Old Yob, but it didn't
seem somehow very consistent.

lff

"Linda Fox"  wrote in message 
news:9l8284tbjh0r74m07lpucbip4sca5qc8ac@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>> YAAFTANTSKOOY
>>>>
>>>
>>>Que ?
>>
>>You Are A Fantastic Tying Artist: Now Tie Some Knots On Our Yacht?
>
> Oh, it _that_ what it is? I'd got as far as You Are A Financial Times
> Adviser, Nsomething Tsomething Some Kind Of Old Yob, but it didn't
> seem somehow very consistent.
>

And there was me thinking it was my own personal twitter-style food blog:

Yesterday Ally Ate Fruit, Turnips And Nuts. Today She'll Keep Only Orange 
Yoghourt.

ally

On 18 Jul, 17:07, "Siderius Nuncius"  wrote:
> "the Omrud"  wrote
>
>
>
> > I was sitting up in my pyjamas watching Tonight and waiting to see Harry
> > Worth (whom, at the age of 7, I found funny enough) when the BBC closed
> > down its TV service because some American president had been shot.  I can
> > still see Cliff Mitchelmore looking shocked.
>
> I was 9 years old and at school in Chicago.  They sent us all home, and I
> was very put out to find that the usual cartoons weren't on the TV.

I remember the BBC symbol of the earth turning was left on our screens
all night.
I must have been 11 at the time and wondering why the death of a
president of a foreign country should be thought to be so important.
Then the penny dropped and the fledgling conspiracy theorist in me
realised we never won the war as we had been told. We were merely a
puppet state to the U.S. TSR2, Concorde,....

>>>  I've never quite understood the timing of 'Ski Sunday'
>>> either, this being the day when the largest number of skiers 
>>> are
>>> actually out skiing and not at home watching the telly.
>
> Depends; I always thought that SS wasn't for "real" skiers, 
> but for people who'd like to be.

Or people who fantasise about being skiers?

If a "real" skier is someone who from time to time actually 
straps planks to their feet and uses them to slide down a 
hillside, then may I, as a "real" skier, say that I find 'Ski 
Sunday' pretty boring?

Anne B

In message , Anne Burgess 
 writes
>>>>  I've never quite understood the timing of 'Ski Sunday'
>>>> either, this being the day when the largest number of skiers
>>>> are
>>>> actually out skiing and not at home watching the telly.
>>
>> Depends; I always thought that SS wasn't for "real" skiers,
>> but for people who'd like to be.
>
>Or people who fantasise about being skiers?
>
>If a "real" skier is someone who from time to time actually
>straps planks to their feet and uses them to slide down a
>hillside, then may I, as a "real" skier, say that I find 'Ski
>Sunday' pretty boring?
[]
Ah, I suspected as much. I don't _think_ the thought was originally mine 
(though it was me that raised it here): it's a programme usually showing 
sunny scenes of people doing something they enjoy, with jolly music; it 
- originally, anyway - tended to be shown in the depths of the (usually 
not sunny) British winter. And thus harmless, cosy even.
-- 
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL(+++)IS-P--Ch+(p)Ar+T[?]H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for thoughts on PCs. **

"I never trust a woman until she rejects me" - Woody Allen, 1999

Anne Burgess wrote:
>>>>  I've never quite understood the timing of 'Ski Sunday'
>>>> either, this being the day when the largest number of skiers 
>>>> are
>>>> actually out skiing and not at home watching the telly.
>> Depends; I always thought that SS wasn't for "real" skiers, 
>> but for people who'd like to be.
> 
> Or people who fantasise about being skiers?
> 
> If a "real" skier is someone who from time to time actually 
> straps planks to their feet and uses them to slide down a 
> hillside, then may I, as a "real" skier, say that I find 'Ski 
> Sunday' pretty boring?
>
<languid wave>

But I do like the Downhills though....

In article <oHnoFPNcwOgIFw+t@chris.mcmillan>, chris mcmillan
 wrote:
> Especially when they manage to bring in the Olympics (and an obscure 
> sport at that) into the countryside.  Clutching at straws or what?

Living in the area, I rather enjoyed that!  Trips to Old John were a feature
of my childhood, and it was nice when we moved back here to take my sons on
the same trips.

Rosemary
 

-- 
Rosemary Miskin     ZFC Pm   miskin@orpheusmail.co.uk
Loughborough, UK             http://miskin.orpheusweb.co.uk

On Jul 16, 7:35 pm, the Omrud  wrote:
> Why?

It's better than The Bearded Ladies.

(Possibly this has been stated already by anotherat. (Or possibly
IAAOU (but I doubt it)). I've been away and will be away for a cuppla
weeks more. No need to call the umrabulance. (Ooh, that was a bit of
twist too far. Sorry))

On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 05:30:50 -0700 (PDT), Ralph B
 wrote:

>On Jul 16, 7:35 pm, the Omrud  wrote:
>> Why?
>
>It's better than The Bearded Ladies.

I reckon once it slips below the tolerability threshold, such
comparisons become meaningless.  I suspect that I will be adding Fags,
Mags and Bags to the list of such shows.
-- 
Stephen

Into my heart an air that kills From yon far country blows:
What are those blue remembered hills, What spires, what farms are those?
That is the land of lost content, I see it shining plain,
The happy highways where I went And cannot come again.

On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 14:41:22 +0100, Stephen 
scrawled in the dust...

>I suspect that I will be adding Fags,
>Mags and Bags to the list of such shows.

I wasn't sure about that one when I first heard it in another time-slot but
it grew on me. I think the philosophy of 'Shop' is closely related to some
other philosophy but my unforgettery is suffering from stress at the
moment.
-- 
Penny
There are unexpected holes in my ignorance.
umra Nicknames & Abbreviations http://www.umra.freeuk.com/nicks.html

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> In message 
> , Bob 
> E  writes
>> On 18 Jul, 12:02, "Anne Burgess"  wrote:
>>
>>>  I've never quite understood the timing of 'Ski Sunday'
>>> either, this being the day when the largest number of skiers are
>>> actually out skiing and not at home watching the telly.
> 
> Depends; I always thought that SS wasn't for "real" skiers, but for 
> people who'd like to be.
> []

Many, many, many years ago, when I still lived with my parents, Ski 
Sunday would occasionally be on the telly. I think we liked the theme 
tune. ;o)


-- 
Kimbo xx (Never been a real skier, never wanted to be)

Books, by Kimbo!
Used and collectible books at sensible prices.
Buy direct at www.booksbykimbo.com
Find me on Ebid http://uk.ebid.net/stores/Books-by-Kimbo

In message , Kim Andrews 
 writes
>J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> In message 
>>, 
>>Bob  E  writes
>>> On 18 Jul, 12:02, "Anne Burgess"  wrote:
>>>
>>>>  I've never quite understood the timing of 'Ski Sunday'
>>>> either, this being the day when the largest number of skiers are
>>>> actually out skiing and not at home watching the telly.
>>  Depends; I always thought that SS wasn't for "real" skiers, but for 
>>people who'd like to be.
>> []
>
>Many, many, many years ago, when I still lived with my parents, Ski 
>Sunday would occasionally be on the telly. I think we liked the theme 
>tune. ;o)
>
>
I had it on a collection of sporting theme tunes; it's something by 
Bach. (And I think it's a bit distorted in places - Mike?) [I think I 
like the Wimbledon one best from that collection - very old-school BBC, 
almost Coates.]
-- 
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL(+++)IS-P--Ch+(p)Ar+T[?]H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for thoughts on PCs. **

Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go. - Oscar Wilde

Bob E wrote:
> On 18 Jul, 08:19, "Steve Hague"  wrote:
> 
>> I sometimes think that Open Country is meant to be boring.
> 
> Well there you go.
> I love OC. One of my favourite programmes.
> Two of my friends were on the one about the Malvern Hills last summer
> - one an archaeologist and one a geologist.
> 
> Is anyone old enough to remember "The Countryside in ... [ <insert
> season>]".
> Martha Woodford was one of the presenters. Late 1970s if I remember -
> the golden age when we had Weekending and Saturday Night Theatre -
> wonderful.

Ah, Weekending.  I still miss Weekending.

-- 
David, in SW France

Stephen wrote:
> On Sun, 2