b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 1367915 (Thread)

# Squawwpurrrrr

click if you must
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:04, archived)
# no, i shan't
its nice is that
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:05, archived)
# YAY and WOO
I like him , but I bet he could give you a nasty peck if he got annoyed
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:06, archived)
# I want one please
for 4.99 I think...
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:09, archived)
# the last time i threw up
after drinking was in whistlebinkies... in 1998

it's a dump.

(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:11, archived)
# You shouldn't drink so much then!
It is one of the major music venues in Edinburgh and we're gonna rock it big styleeeee! :)
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:13, archived)
# They're nice
in a crusty roll. But then, what isn't?
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:12, archived)
# another crusty roll?
That would just be dry and unsatisfying.


Also bricks would be terrible.

As would dog poo.

or a rat.

or marmite

...
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:17, archived)
# thats where you're wrong
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:17, archived)
# where exactly am I wrong?
I demand a greater level of specification!
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:19, archived)
# Just this morning
I had a brick and dog poo roll. It was lovely. I followed it with a crusty roll in a crusty roll. Then a rat roll.

Marmite is just the exception that proves the rule.
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:20, archived)
# I've never understood that phrase.
How can an exception prove a rule? Surely the mere existance of an exception causes the whole rule stucture to collapse?

bonkers.
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:25, archived)
# I've never heard the phrase
an exception proving a rule. An exception TO a rule, now that's a different matter...
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:26, archived)
# thats because you are thinking of rules
as a linear vector marker in a subcutaneous amalgum spore, instead of an oscillating carrot.
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:26, archived)
# yep.
I'm always worrying over subcutaneous vector markers instead of wobbly carrots.
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:28, archived)
# I believe that 'prove' in that expression
means something like 'test'.
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:28, archived)
# that makes sense then.
Oh the joys of the english language.

I'm just of to prove my dough before baking...
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:30, archived)
# here you go...
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:30, archived)
# aah!
From now on I shall use "the exception confirms the rule in the cases not excepted" instead.
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:36, archived)
# It's the old meaning of Prove:
To test something.

IE - (Orignally) The exception that proves the rule = the exception that tests the rule.

But the meaning of that saying has followed the change in the meaning of "to prove" - which makes no sense really, but we still use it.
/Bryson
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:30, archived)
# Woooooo!
But it'll hunt itself to death...
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:11, archived)
# kittens don't really hunt hawks
because hawks are a bit too shit-hard for kittens. I think it'll just terrorise the mouse population to near-extinction.
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:12, archived)
# And then they'll
move on to small rabbits, and then small children, and what a mess that will be.

Photoshit will then have a lot to answer for.
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:16, archived)
# I was thinking of the other way 'round.
I'm sure a hawk is rock enough to take a kitten...
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:16, archived)
# but why bother,
when mice are less hassle?
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:17, archived)
# They don't put up as good a fight, you see.
So when the hawk goes back to his hawky mates and they say "What've you caught today?" and the hawk says "A mouse" they fall about with hawky laughter. But if he says "Hey, a kitten" they look at him with new respect.

Or some such nonsense.
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:20, archived)
# can they be friends?
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 13:12, archived)
# They
may
(, Wed 11 Jun 2003, 14:00, archived)