 sj |
||
|
||
Duffers on the Mudcat Forum.
|
|
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: GUEST,Hafd Date: 26 May 02 - 06:18 PM And McGrath, your experince suggests that you've not been many others places else (at least for a sustained period). You (and many others, to be fair) constantly say how this is the best designed message board in the entire world. It's good, certainly, but not that good. You just like what you know, that's all, and that is perhaps the biggest problem of all around here. It's certainly getting very stale. Hafd |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Peter T. Date: 26 May 02 - 06:25 PM Then go away, and leave the rest of us to our miserable little site, you twerp. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: GUEST Date: 26 May 02 - 06:30 PM Tetchy ain't ya there Peter T? ...which "T" has come to symbolize to many here: troll, twit, trite and cliched, tit for tat passive/aggressive, and a whole host of other predictably reactionary responses from posts signed "yours, Peter T".
|
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Peter T. Date: 26 May 02 - 06:36 PM A person is known by the enemies he keeps. The pleasure is mine. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 May 02 - 06:45 PM As they say, Pete, don't touch it, you never know where it's been. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Peter T. Date: 26 May 02 - 07:34 PM As you know, McGrath, I always take your advice! yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: GUEST,GUEST.Pat Cooksey.Germany. Date: 26 May 02 - 07:37 PM I haveno idea what the term knowledgeable in the context of the Mudcat Forum means, I have spent more than 30 years singing and writing songs and have recently also become a duffer on this forum. My recent posting THE SICK NOTE/MURPHY AND THE BRICKS produced more information and positive feedback than I have learnt in the last 15 years. There are those out there, particularly in the UK, posting as GUESTS, who have an interest in silencing Mudcat, I recognise the style of one in particular on the MUDCAT FINANCES thread. Duffer or not I have no problem sorting the chaff from the wheat. My friends in the various singers clubs in Ireland find MUDCAT a valuable resourse, those who post on this site are but a handfull of those that view it. To Joe Offer and all involved, thanks, and keep up the good work. Pat. . |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: GUEST Date: 26 May 02 - 07:38 PM The self satitisfied occasionlly fall to earth |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: GUEST Date: 26 May 02 - 07:46 PM There are also thise who would wish to improve it, in terms of being a better resource |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 May 02 - 08:06 PM "There are those out there, particularly in the UK, posting as GUESTS, who have an interest in silencing Mudcat"
I don't know any evidence that the nameless ones who keep on popping up and making white noise are particularly from the UK. (Though, why would it be in any way relevant if they were?)
And I really doubt if any serious motive like "wishing to silence the Mudcat" comes into it. Just shit-stirring by shit-stirrers, I'd have thought. Otherwise surely they'd put a name to their thoughts. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Dave4Guild Date: 26 May 02 - 09:32 PM I have just spent 4 hours playing in a local club. As a soloist I may add, but I got so many people playing, and joining in and generally being part of a musical evening, I actually felt quite pleased with myself, NOT BECAUUSE OF WHAT I DID BUT BECAUSE I INVOLVED THE AUDIENCE. I then come home and find an argument on Mudcat about whether we are Duffers. GOOD. I probably am. But I am still doing the job. If GUEST has an argument with that, then fair play. He(She) may not be wrong. However, I seem to have some like-minded souls on Mudcat, and it is my privilege to communicate with them. Hopefully I will meet them at some festival or other during the year. Pat Cooksey, a friend of mine with whom I played for many years, has found it necessary to to say that there is a certain attitude from certain guests that he finds distasteful. I agree with him, but what matters is whether we share the music or not. This is what it is about, and not whether we are UK or USA or wherever Mudcatters. Let's play music together, let us share what we know, and let us stop this bickering. Regards, Dave Benett |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: GUEST Date: 26 May 02 - 09:51 PM Dave and Pat--you might want to check the source of this thread. It is a Mudcat member, whinging because someone in another forum was saying mean things about Mudcat. It is called trolling in Usenet parlance. You might want to look that up too before you come all holier than thou into the fray. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: DonD Date: 26 May 02 - 10:48 PM I beg to duffer! Before I came to his thread, I stopped at one about Leadbelly; I saw Leadbelly live and loved/love him. At 9:33 tonight, Whistleworks asked for a lyric. At 9:59 the amazing and always dependable Masato Sakurai provided the info requested. I may quibble with his transcription (make for may throught) but a duffer in any sense of the word -- I think not! I spent some time today with a friend's granddaughter, a second grader, who complained that she didn't like school because it was boring, she wasn't being taught anything she didn't already know. I could only offer her the hope that next year she'd be taught something she hadn't learne before and find it fun, and be eager each day to get there in the expectation of more new stuff and more fun. I've found a place where theer's always new stuff, and it's fun, and I'm eager to come back for more. But thanks for the intro to those other sites where I hope to learn new stuff, too. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: GUEST Date: 26 May 02 - 10:56 PM Ah, the pretty little lies we tell ourselves and one another when we need to make believe everything is JUST FINE, when it really isn't... |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Bill D Date: 26 May 02 - 11:09 PM ....funny thing about Mudcat--the 'duffers' and the experts and the in-between who hang out here seem to mostly get along fine.
...and think about this: it does not always require an expert for a good answer or a good insight. I don't know it all by any means, but there are a few things I know quite well. And when you get a few hundred or thousand of 'me', you can get good information pretty fast. This sort of a Delphic place-- when you reach enough people, you get something like 'truth'....if you are willing to sort & filter a bit......same thing, I'd wager, goes for rec.music.folk *grin*. (and at least here, you don't have to wade thru quite so many publicity blurbs for wannabe singer/songwriters.... ;>) In either place you have to listen awhile to know which experts to listen to...and you have to take even their answers with a grain of salt.
|
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: JenEllen Date: 26 May 02 - 11:17 PM So what Shambles is telling us is that there was something nasty about this site written on the bathroom wall and we're supposed to take it seriously? Pardon me if I decline. Thank you, DonD, for the delightful examples, both of your own experience and of learning in general. We all have our own ideas and incentives, and there isn't anyone being forced to read anything here. You do it to yourself, and you have every ability at your disposal to stop doing so if it displeases you. As for the duffers? Who cares? I would imagine duff-less people to be the most boring of all. Also probably the most prone to attack, but that is just my opinion. Luckily, there are people here who can manage a hefty balance of both information and fun. Like any other cafe, if you don't like what's on the menu, just don't order it. ~JE |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: GUEST Date: 27 May 02 - 12:04 AM My what a feeble wit you have, PeterT! up, yours. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: GUEST Date: 27 May 02 - 12:27 AM Dropped in for a stroll. This place has become droll In me best of days, could nevee have hoped for tha craze As tha shat stirred up by Shambles and Mr. T
Keep up the good work lads!
A troll-ing, A troll-ing, Since troll-ing's been my ru-in-in, I'll go no more a trolling with Sham or Peter T.
even a Troll needs to redeem some threads back to a musical grounding.
GUEST - and not one of the previously posted. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Bert Date: 27 May 02 - 12:46 AM Shambles said...There really is no excuse for carrying on with personal spats, making insults and name-calling (publicly) online... Yer right Shambles, I must apologise to Hrothgar and other members of the EFDSS. I'm sorry, my experiences with that group are many years out of date. I'm sure by now that they have grown out of the pomposity they exhibited in the Fifties and Sixties. Duffer Bert |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: wysiwyg Date: 27 May 02 - 01:11 AM How do I graduate from Duffdom to the higher order? What do I have to do, or become? How will I know when my duffiness has worn off? What about the line by John Lennon about being deeb and duff? Was he bragging or exhibiting self-hatred? Is there a Duffers Anonymous where we can work on this issue? (Like learning we cannot control duffiness but must submit it to a higher power....) These questions are keeping me awake at night and I need to know. ~S~ BTW, didja know that Duff Beer is very well regarded in the US? It's no Guinness but me and Homer like it right fine. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: GUEST Date: 27 May 02 - 03:24 AM I thought that you didn't drink, Susan? |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: GUEST,Davetnova Date: 27 May 02 - 04:07 AM I go to several pubs. Some for music, some for the beer, some for the craic and some to meet someone specifically. All these pubs are different, the people in them are different. But that doesn't make one bad and another good. If someone dont like Mudcat that's their preference, it doesn't make them a bad person or mudcat users evil. Lets see some tolerance its a big world. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Hrothgar Date: 27 May 02 - 04:57 AM No need to apologise to me, bert. As I said, I'm a member and I suspect I don't fit their pattern. I thimk that many of the attitudes there have been the same for a long, long, time. It's the occasional bit of treasure that matters - just like the Mudcat, in fact. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Haruo Date: 27 May 02 - 05:04 AM FWIW (which ain't much) and I don't say this judgmentally or in rancor, but I just looked at r.m.f and it looks like they have about six or eight threads a day. Two of which are devoted to the subject matter of this one. Even if you limited the comparison to hard folk music threads, this outfit's got the other one beat all to smithereens quantity wise, to the point where I'm not sure I can see the advantage in quality. Liland soc.culture.esperanto and sci.lang.japan; now there's Usenet :) |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Gervase Date: 27 May 02 - 05:34 AM Duffers is a tad unfair, I think. Sure, the Mudcat has its share of eejits and single-issue fanatics, but I've yet to see any example of someone being given duff information when they've posted a query - and I've seen plenty of extremely helpful and erudite answers to some pretty arcane questions. I don't pay much attention to rec-music.folk, but I dip in and out of uk.music.folk and sometimes cross-refer between here and there. The two forums have different aims and purposes, and both fulfil a need. As one of those who voted for the establishment of uk.m.f as a non-moderated usenet group back in 1995, I still have the wording of the charter proposal: " This new group will be for those interested in folk/roots/acoustic music here in the UK. Defining folk music has always been a precarious task. However, this new group will cover all of those types of music that you would expect to see in a folk - folk/blues club. Most of us who are into this kind of music have very catholic tastes and this is reflected by the booking policies of most clubs. I would expect to see discussion of: traditionalists such as Martin Carthy; classic folk rock as exemplified by Fairport Convention and Steeleye Span; contemporary groups and performers such as Edward II, the Poozies, the superb new young performers such as White & Cutting, Kerr & Carthy, etc., Christine Collister, Clive Gregson; world music performers who regularly perform in the UK. The new group will encourage the people to post details of: tours; folk club listings; WWW sites dedicated to folk/roots music; specialist music outlets; festivals; and musical instruments, etc. In short, this group will aim to be the natural home for all of those interested in UK-based folk music. A laudible charter, and no mention there of terrorism, the state of Israel, jam-making recipes, farting, mutual support or underwear - or any of those things that makes the Mudcat rather more than just a folk and blues forum. Each forum has its bonuses and drawbacks - and each can be irritating in its way. To quote from an email I had the other day from a regular on uk.m.f: Thanks, that's just the kind of insider information I as looking for. And thanks for taking the trouble to reply - I'm replying off-group just to say that I appreciate it, and that I wish more of the group were as helpful...They all seem to be too busy promoting gigs and CDs. And certainly there are far more trolls here than in the usenet music groups these days – but don't paint the Shambles as one. Both here and in uk.m.f his campaign against the absurd PEL laws has been heroic, and all of us in the UK should be bloody grateful to him. All he's doing is raising a topic for discussion, and we're discussing it. That's what happens in unmoderated forums. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Pied Piper Date: 27 May 02 - 06:25 AM I've been a member here for a few months and I've found it very stimulating and informative, like a lot of people on this forum I am involved in practical music making on a regular basis The great thing hear is the diversity and range of the topics discused.If I want to know some thing even vaguely music related I know I can post here and get a response that is nearly always positive and usefull.As the sites title suggests this place is a bit like a cafe (or pub?) one main difference, is that if some of the people who post here behaved that way in a real cafe they'd have had their lights punched out a long time ago. All the best PP |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: GUEST Date: 27 May 02 - 06:42 AM Gervase Agreed. However had the first post in this thread been posted by a dreaded GUEST. loads of people would have considered it a troll and doubtless become quite vitriolic. To my mind, thats the main problem here - not the words spoken, but who says them. Hence I decide to remain as a guest in protest. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 27 May 02 - 07:25 AM "So what Shambles is telling us is that there was something nasty about this site written on the bathroom wall and we're supposed to take it seriously?"
But it wasn't particularly "nasty". Anyone who gets excited and angry about that kind of "insult" must have led a remarkably sheltered life.
Shambles explained "One of the reasons I copied the comment here is that can never be a bad thing to find out how you may appear to others." That seems common sense to me.
One of the many reasons why it is helpful or people top use names when posting is that it makes it easier to put things in context. The idea that somehow graffiti written on a wall makes a clearer statement than the same words in the mouth of a friend strikes me as absurd.
The same words from a friend and from a stranger do not convey the same message. If I got a note from a friend saying "I know where you live" that would mean something entirely different from a note in a strange hand pushed though my letter box with exactly the same words, and with no name at the bottom.
Most people here are anonymous anyway, since there is no knowing what lies behnd the pseudonyms, unless people choose to open up. However from previous messages people learn to put comments in context. But overtly-anonymous posts without even a pseudonym of any kind from a GUEST do not permit ofvthis - and it is probably true that as a result they are more likely to stir up angry responses. (Leaving aside the case where a member might have built up a backlog of flaming and trolling in their own name or pseudonym.)
One consequence of this, and one reason for it, is that people tend to assume that the motive of the overtly-anonymous poster is to produce that result. I find it hard to imagine any motive for posting in this way that isn't in some way malicious, as well as unfriendly. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: GUEST Date: 27 May 02 - 07:38 AM McGrath, If someone put a note through your door, it would appear fairly self-evident that they knew where you lived. No? |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: GUEST Date: 27 May 02 - 07:43 AM McGrath, why are you going on and on and on about guests again? Shambles original post and Liland's response to it, and then you go off like a madman on the guest thing (which you seem to do at every opporunity, no matter how inappropriate the context). Get a grip. Its only an internet forum. No bogey man guest is coming to take you away. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: GUEST,Van Lingle Date: 27 May 02 - 12:25 PM I'm a duffer, carry a 14 handicap and I slog about the course with other duffers and we have a ball. Occassionally we fall in with a fine player and some of us are fortunate enough to learn something just being in his/her company. To put things back in a folkie vein "... and if they don't like me, they can leave me alone." vl |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: JenEllen Date: 27 May 02 - 01:08 PM McGrath, I'm sorry if you seem to have taken offense at my posting, but I stand by my initial sentiment. No, it wasn't particularly 'nasty', but when followed by the question of whether there is any truth behind it? Name or no name, that was the kind of rhetorical question that is going to spawn countless rhetorical postings. I also can't help but believe that was the intent, seeing as Shambles is a member who knows well enough the troubles around here. Shambles explained "One of the reasons I copied the comment here is that can never be a bad thing to find out how you may appear to others." That seems common sense to me. Common sense, perhaps, but a more effective action would have been to target specific people rather than divulge his new-found information in such a way that would certainly raise hackles. Given the current climate of Mudcat, and the rash of spiteful guest postings, I fail to see how this action can benefit anyone. Am I eternally grateful for Shambles using his own name to post? You betcha, but I don't have to agree that the posting was in good taste. ~JE |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 27 May 02 - 01:45 PM Take offence at your posting Jeri? I can't see how you can read that in my response - if it seems there it wasn't meant to be there. (That remark "Anyone who gets excited and angry about that kind of "insult" must have led a remarkably sheltered life", which could possibly be read that way, wasn't directed at you - after all, on the evidence of what you've posted, it wouldn't fit you.)
I disagreed with some of what you said, but that's not the same thing at all. I believe we should always try to avoid being disagreeable, but I don't think that disagreement is something we should back away from. And I like a bit of rhetoric.
This has been a reasonably good-natured thread, leaving aside a few posts intended to push it the other way, which haven't succeeded in doing so.
I would hope that one effect might have been to alert a few more people to the existence of rec. music. folk, in the same way as the quote Shambles posted must have in practice led a few people to discover the Mudcat. That's good in both cases. Different strokes for different folks. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: The Shambles Date: 27 May 02 - 01:48 PM The forum means a lot to me, as it does to many. I don't like the way personal insults are posted publicly in reaction and justified, when these could be easily dealt with by just ignoring them. As indeed my posting could have been.
Shooting the mesenger, whilst ignoring the message is also another less attractive trait. But if the forum wants to continue to indulge in these things, thought should be given to how this appears to less committed vistors to the forum.
It may not have been the most worthy post I have ever placed, but I did give it a lot of thought, as I have already explained. I suspect also that the comment may have been posted here anyway, even if I had not done it. Perhaps that was partly why the original comment was made? |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Jeri Date: 27 May 02 - 02:28 PM One problem I've noticed with irony is that people don't expect it from Americans. I believe Abby is one of those creatures McGrath spoke of not existing: an American who thinks ironically. Abby has since stated (paraphrasing) he'll be wearing his Mudcat T-shirt at Mystic, despite the possibility of attracting duffers. There should probably be a little winky-face after that for the irony impaired. It might have been to have e-mailed Abby to find out what he really meant before starting this thread. Shambles, what sort of "discussion" did you expect? You said "Shooting the mesenger, whilst ignoring the message is also another less attractive trait." When the messenger takes a small part of the message out of context and re-posts it somewhere else, adding his opinion about what it means as if it were fact, perhaps the messenger ought to just paint a target on his shirt. You didn't get shot because of the message - at least not Abby's message. You got shot because you edited it, put your own spin on it, and posted it somewhere where people would react. You over-reacted and expected everyone else to. One more thing. You said "It is the group identity/ loyalty aspect I find most unfortunate, whether on this forum or anywhere else." Isn't what you did a prime example of the damage group identity/loyalty can lead to when people get defensive about their group? (McGrath - that t'weren't me up there.) Please note, I'm sitting here very calmly, scratching insect bites. I'm not yelling at my computer nor foaming at the mouth. And yes - I'm done talking about this. Must go dig holes in my yard, feed the black flies, and mess with the guitar. Much more fun than being indignant. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: The Shambles Date: 27 May 02 - 03:36 PM One more thing. You said "It is the group identity/ loyalty aspect I find most unfortunate, whether on this forum or anywhere else." Isn't what you did a prime example of the damage group identity/loyalty can lead to when people get defensive about their group?
Yes exactly.
I posted a response to the message on r.m.f. The poster could have explained, if they wished. They did not really need to Jeri as you seem to know exactly what he meant, or did not mean to say and have also assumed the strength of my (over) reaction.
Shambles, what sort of "discussion" did you expect?
Pretty much this one, the usual Mudcat range of views. As I said it was not the most worthy of posts. Enough.
|
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: GUEST Date: 27 May 02 - 03:37 PM awww, can't we keep it going a bit more? |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Gareth Date: 27 May 02 - 06:42 PM Well, this may not be Oxford, or Cambridge, or Harvard, but in the last year I've learnt a lot. Muscally, of History, or how to get along without treading on too many toes. The level may or may not be at that level, or it may be at the level of Tom Sharp's "Fenland Polytechnic" To quote the late Arthur Ransome, from that clasic novel of his " Swallows and Amazons " ( at least I think that was the particular book )
" If Duffers will drown, and with that I will leave you, and may your Gods go with you. Gareth |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: GUEST Date: 27 May 02 - 06:48 PM Gareth, Just for the sake of accuracy, the Ransome quote is: "Better drowned than duffers. If not duffers won't drown" |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Malcolm Douglas Date: 27 May 02 - 08:19 PM I had hoped that, now that Roger (The Shambles) has discovered a mission in life, he might stop starting silly, troll-bait threads like this one; but, hey, I posted to it, so I can't talk. Most of the discussion here has been completely pointless and pretty much designed to attract the attentions of anonymous sneerers, but what did you expect? Abby (for whom I have a great deal of respect) comments: "Hey, guys, I was kidding, you know. Actually, there's a tremendous variety of people at Mudcat - some logorrheic idiots, some among the best savants of folk song available in the world. Some with as much wisdom and humor as you could enjoy your life seeking." There's more. Check out the newsgroup. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Art Thieme Date: 27 May 02 - 08:25 PM A SONG CHALLENGE: Someone, please write a song for this title: "THE MUDCAT DUFFERS" (to the tune of "The D-day Dodgers" Art Thieme |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 27 May 02 - 08:57 PM I'll leave that for someone else. But here's a cheerful song.
I'm a Duffer-cat and I'm all right.
I sing old songs, and I write rude words
I'm gentle as a sparrow,
He knocks them down,he picks them up,
I cuts them into pieces
He cuts them into pieces That'll larn 'em... |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Mr Happy Date: 27 May 02 - 09:01 PM distinctive t shirts for -ve guests/trollies/flamers/? |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Abby Sale Date: 27 May 02 - 09:52 PM Imagine my surprise seeing (as of now) 92 messages on this thread. Makes me wonder if I wasn't right. I'm also fairly complimented since I'm aware that the length of a thread correlates directly with its value. Still, Stephen L. Rich makes a good deal of sense to me. Hi Malcolm. Hi Jeri. Hrothgar: Yes, definition #2 is closest but you know, I lived in Scotland nine years and I was actually meaning the Scottish sense. That is, 'peat moss collectors.' (See Chambers Scots Dictionary). As vital as peat is in the Highlands & Islands, the collector makes a vital and valued contribution to the community. It was, of course, a high compliment. I'd guess that a significant number of people post or lurk here and also on r.m.f. and what can be seen in the one can be known in the other. If there's logorrhea here, there was a very odd vitriole there. Art: Hmmm. Odd how close that is to what I had in mind. I was thinking "We're all a-duffing, / Duffing, duffing, duffing..." (ie, collecting peat moss.) But here's the real issue: Since Mystic starts on June 6th, would it be justified to sing "The D-Day Dodgers" there that day on the theory that it's a sea song since they were transported to and from Italy by sea? That's the important thing. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Bill D Date: 27 May 02 - 11:10 PM a sea song? *grin*...you'd do fine in out monthly sing, Abby....that's the kind of creative justification we know and love. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Hrothgar Date: 28 May 02 - 07:07 AM I sea what you mean. |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: Nigel Parsons Date: 28 May 02 - 07:29 AM WYSIWYG point out that Duffers could be consumers of that marvellous concoction favoured by Homer (The yellow one, not the Greek). So to get back to music, I'll misquote Homer. The Duffers Anthem. Duff beer for me, Duff beer for you, You have a Duff, I will have two! Duff beer for you, Duff beer for me, You have a Duff, I will have three! Duff beer we drink, Duff beer we pour, You have a Duff, I will have four! Duff beer's the drink That keeps us alive...(continue ad nauseum!) Cheers! Nigel
|
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: GUEST,Homer .S Date: 28 May 02 - 09:02 AM aaaaaaaaaaaaaagh duuuuuuuuuffffff beeeeeeeeeeeer |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: wysiwyg Date: 28 May 02 - 12:09 PM *G* ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: Duffers on the Mudcat Forum. From: treewind Date: 28 May 02 - 12:45 PM Just seen this thread. An accusation of 'duffers' on mudcat coming from a USENET group? The words pot, kettle and black spring to mind.. Anahata |
| Share Thread: |