I like Constant Readers. edit: or Faithful Readers.
I also like "What Number Are We On, Again?", or whatever the exact wording was.
17 is definitely Nilly's.
If you take sexual advantage of her, you're going to burn in a very special level of hell. A level they reserve for child molesters and people who talk at the theater.
Book ,'Our Mrs. Reynolds'
Bureaucracy 2: Like Sartre, Only Longer
A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.
Current Stompy Feet: ita, Jon B, DXMachina, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych
juliana - Jul 09, 2003 6:16:33 am PDT #3032 of 10005
I’d be lying if I didn’t say that I miss them all tonight…
Wolfram - Jul 09, 2003 6:21:19 am PDT #3033 of 10005
Visilurking
constant readers
I can't remember who this was from but I want to say Stephen King? Also I like:
Natter 14: What Number Are We On, Again? or Hormone bomb.
Jim - Jul 09, 2003 6:23:09 am PDT #3034 of 10005
Ficht nicht mit Der Raketemensch!
constant reader is an 18th/19th century fictional cliche. A variation on (Jane Eyre Spoiler) Reader, I married him .
Lyra Jane - Jul 09, 2003 6:25:30 am PDT #3035 of 10005
Up with the sun
It was also the title of a column Dorothy Parker wrote for --- ?The New Yorker? Vogue? It featured her famous review of The House on Pooh Corner: "Tonstant Weader fwowed up."
Cindy - Jul 09, 2003 6:41:56 am PDT #3036 of 10005
Nobody
There's a lurvely post in Press that doesn't quite belong there.
May I suggest, "When come back, post here."
Should we consider including newbie introductions in the scope of Beep Me? I've never cared to use introduction threads at boards that have them, but a lot of people are used to them.
I don't really care whether or not we do this; it's just a thought. In addition to Allyson's post that I quoted above, see the (misplaced) discussion in BBaBB, starting with: Jon B. "Buffistas Building a Better Board" Jul 9, 2003 5:07:29 am PDT
(Oh and probably further discussion (not that there needs to be any) should be moved here.)
Jon B. - Jul 09, 2003 6:46:14 am PDT #3037 of 10005
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
Should we consider including newbie introductions in the scope of Beep Me?
Please no. I mean, I like it when newbies introduce themselves, but it really belongs in natter, or wherever they're participating.
I liked your response to the post, Cindy, but it looks like a bunch of people are saying "let it be."
Cindy - Jul 09, 2003 7:37:48 am PDT #3038 of 10005
Nobody
Please no. I mean, I like it when newbies introduce themselves, but it really belongs in natter, or wherever they're participating.
That's my preference, too. I can understand why they're saying 'let it be', because I think if you're new, even if you're read the FAQ and thread slugs, it's a reasonable and understandable thing for a newbie to introduce herself in Press. I just thought rather than ever having this conversation again, we could make a place.
t /Litella
sumi - Jul 09, 2003 7:40:12 am PDT #3039 of 10005
Art Crawl!!!
I think that the next natter thread should be Natter 14: Hormone Bomb.
Fred Pete - Jul 09, 2003 7:42:35 am PDT #3040 of 10005
Ann, that's a ferret.
In view of all the celebrity deaths lately:
Natter 14: Everyone Out of the Dead Pool.
Or "What Number Are We on Again?"
Nilly - Jul 09, 2003 7:50:24 am PDT #3041 of 10005
Swouncing
I love you guys for the mathiness offers! And 17 is the best random number!
Natter 14: Hormone Bomb.
I think that when it was discussed once on WX, for one of the Buffy thread names, people were worried it may not be a work appropriate name.
Natter 14: What Number Are We on Again?
Gets my vote, because it can only be used after a thread number that we sort-of-skipped, like this 13/12b one.