Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Discuss anything that happened in recent games. This is the place to post any words you got that beat Dictionary Corner, or numbers games that evaded Rachel.

Moderator: James Robinson

Post Reply
User avatar
Ben Hunter
Kiloposter
Posts: 1770
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:54 pm
Location: S Yorks

Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Ben Hunter » Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:33 pm

Janet Street Porter is looking likely to become the first female octochamp for five years, but will Kelsey Grammar stop her?
Last edited by Ben Hunter on Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Junaid Mubeen
Series 59 Champion
Posts: 574
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 4:26 pm

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Junaid Mubeen » Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:35 pm

FUMAROLES as a beater in rd 1

Howard Somerset
Kiloposter
Posts: 1955
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:02 am
Location: UK

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Howard Somerset » Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:37 pm

Surprised that neither when for the much more obvious (100-4)x7 in r5

User avatar
Mark Kudlowski
Enthusiast
Posts: 450
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 3:15 pm

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Mark Kudlowski » Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:38 pm

Numbers 1 (quickest): (100-4)x7

User avatar
Chris Davies
Series 61 Champion
Posts: 404
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:50 pm

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Chris Davies » Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:38 pm

Junaid Mubeen wrote:FUMAROLES as a beater in rd 1
Excellent.
MERINO as a beater in Round 2.

ERUPTION - round 11.
DERACINE - round 12.
Last edited by Chris Davies on Tue Mar 31, 2009 3:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Mark Kudlowski
Enthusiast
Posts: 450
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 3:15 pm

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Mark Kudlowski » Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:40 pm

Howard Somerset wrote:Surprised that neither when for the much more obvious (100-4)x7 in r5
That's when you know your numbers with many prime factors, as well as your dozens tables !

Allan Harmer
Enthusiast
Posts: 391
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 3:32 pm
Location: Petersfield (Hants)

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Allan Harmer » Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:40 pm

SOLITUDE is a noun so I guess SOLITUDES is allowed - I would have gone for it in Round 3 but it is probably a mass noun and not allowable

Junaid Mubeen
Series 59 Champion
Posts: 574
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 4:26 pm

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Junaid Mubeen » Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:43 pm

Mark Kudlowski wrote:
Howard Somerset wrote:Surprised that neither when for the much more obvious (100-4)x7 in r5
That's when you know your numbers with many prime factors, as well as your dozens tables !
Er...actually it's just working down from 700 and realising that the difference is conveniently also a multiple of 7, rather than identifying 672 as a multiple of 7 automatically. However most contestants refuse to add before multiplying, leading to more contrived solutions like we've just seen.

User avatar
Ben Hunter
Kiloposter
Posts: 1770
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:54 pm
Location: S Yorks

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Ben Hunter » Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:46 pm

ARSONIST as beater in that round with INSOFAR.

User avatar
Joseph Bolas
Fanatic
Posts: 2446
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:19 am
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Joseph Bolas » Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:48 pm

Ben Hunter wrote:ARSONIST as beater in that round with INSOFAR.
There was only one 'S' Ben in the selection.

User avatar
Ben Hunter
Kiloposter
Posts: 1770
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:54 pm
Location: S Yorks

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Ben Hunter » Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:48 pm

THERAPODS returns.

Edit: therapods isn't a word, what was that word Kate Richardson got? I'm seeing all kinds of shit today.

Allan Harmer
Enthusiast
Posts: 391
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 3:32 pm
Location: Petersfield (Hants)

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Allan Harmer » Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:54 pm

Ben Hunter wrote:THERAPODS returns.

Edit: therapods isn't a word, what was that word Kate Richardson got? I'm seeing all kinds of shit today.
I think it was THEROPODS Ben

User avatar
Mark Kudlowski
Enthusiast
Posts: 450
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 3:15 pm

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Mark Kudlowski » Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:55 pm

Numbers 2: ((5 x 3) + 4)) x 3 x 4

User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7630
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Matt Morrison » Tue Mar 31, 2009 3:05 pm

3rd numbers alternate

(75+7-2) = 80
80 x 7 = 560, +1 = 561

Howard Somerset
Kiloposter
Posts: 1955
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:02 am
Location: UK

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Howard Somerset » Tue Mar 31, 2009 3:10 pm

Junaid Mubeen wrote:Er...actually it's just working down from 700 and realising that the difference is conveniently also a multiple of 7, rather than identifying 672 as a multiple of 7 automatically. However most contestants refuse to add before multiplying, leading to more contrived solutions like we've just seen.
Agreed. Exactly my approach, Junaid.

Jojo Apollo
Devotee
Posts: 781
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:29 am

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Jojo Apollo » Tue Mar 31, 2009 3:14 pm

Chris Davies wrote:
Junaid Mubeen wrote:FUMAROLES as a beater in rd 1
Excellent.
MERINO as a beater in Round 2.

ERUPTION - round 11.
DERACINE - round 12.
:lol: Great stuff lads.

I thought I had a 14 max game there :oops:

Dinos Sfyris
Series 80 Champion
Posts: 2707
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:07 am
Location: Sheffield

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Dinos Sfyris » Tue Mar 31, 2009 3:49 pm

Chris Davies wrote:ERUPTION - round 11.
DERACINE - round 12.
IAWTP... By which I mean I spotted them too. Not sure how I could disagree. Surprised DC didn't get ERUPTION unless it was edited out.

User avatar
Kirk Bevins
God
Posts: 4923
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
Location: York, UK

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Kirk Bevins » Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:38 pm

Dinos Sfyris wrote:
Chris Davies wrote:ERUPTION - round 11.
DERACINE - round 12.
IAWTP... By which I mean I spotted them too. Not sure how I could disagree. Surprised DC didn't get ERUPTION unless it was edited out.
I had all that were mentioned and got beaten in round 1 when I had lots of obscure 7s. When Cate said FORMULAS, I repeated "fuck" numerous times out loud as I'd then spotted FUMAROLES (learning FORMULAE = FUMAROLE). So annoying when you learn a word then fail to spot it. I blame tiredness. So I got a 14 max game but actually spotted 15 maxes, albeit getting FUMAROLES too late. Agonisingly close. :twisted:

User avatar
Brian Moore
Devotee
Posts: 582
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 6:11 pm
Location: Exeter

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Brian Moore » Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:50 pm

I thought I'd done well with a DC-beating CADENCE in R12, but I see that's been beaten here already. It wasn't a vintage DC day today - surprising, given the intellectual capacity and rigour of Jon Gaunt (as evidenced by his cogently argued homilies).

I've really warmed to Cate - it would be nice to see her in the finals as an octochamp.

User avatar
JimBentley
Legend
Posts: 2781
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:39 pm
Location: Redcar, UK
Contact:

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by JimBentley » Tue Mar 31, 2009 8:26 pm

Brian Moore wrote:I've really warmed to Cate - it would be nice to see her in the finals as an octochamp.
Totally, totally agree. She might've seemed stern to begin with, but now I think she's lovely.

Dinos Sfyris
Series 80 Champion
Posts: 2707
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:07 am
Location: Sheffield

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Dinos Sfyris » Tue Mar 31, 2009 8:27 pm

JimBentley wrote:
Brian Moore wrote:I've really warmed to Cate - it would be nice to see her in the finals as an octochamp.
Totally, totally agree. She might've seemed stern to begin with, but now I think she's lovely.
Thirded. Even though I kind of slated her in my recap last week. But maybe it was just nerves.

Junaid Mubeen
Series 59 Champion
Posts: 574
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 4:26 pm

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Junaid Mubeen » Tue Mar 31, 2009 8:31 pm

Dinos Sfyris wrote:
JimBentley wrote:
Brian Moore wrote:I've really warmed to Cate - it would be nice to see her in the finals as an octochamp.
Totally, totally agree. She might've seemed stern to begin with, but now I think she's lovely.
Thirded. Even though I kind of slated her in my recap last week. But maybe it was just nerves.
Erm...fourthed. Will actually be gutted if she loses tomorrow.

User avatar
Rosemary Roberts
Devotee
Posts: 555
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:36 pm

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Rosemary Roberts » Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:42 pm

Dinos Sfyris wrote:I kind of slated her in my recap last week. But maybe it was just nerves.
You've done dozens of recaps - you can't still be nervous !?

Allan Harmer
Enthusiast
Posts: 391
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 3:32 pm
Location: Petersfield (Hants)

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Allan Harmer » Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:46 pm

Junaid Mubeen wrote:
Erm...fourthed. Will actually be gutted if she loses tomorrow.
fifthed ;) - after her initial nerves she is playing way above the standard of her first few games and is visibly enjoying it now. She is no pushover now that her confidence has considerably increased. Credit where it is due!

User avatar
Richard Priest
Devotee
Posts: 670
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 4:30 pm
Location: Newcastle-under-Lyme

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Richard Priest » Tue Mar 31, 2009 10:23 pm

Ben Hunter wrote:Janet Street Porter is looking likely to become the first female octochamp for five years, but will Kelsey Grammar stop her?
It would be 2 years actually - Jean Webby in series 56.

Cate's play has improved tremendously since her first couple of games, I thought she was brilliant today. Perhaps my presence in the audience for her fourth and fifth games inspired her ;)

Dinos Sfyris
Series 80 Champion
Posts: 2707
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:07 am
Location: Sheffield

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Dinos Sfyris » Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:00 pm

Rich Priest wrote:Perhaps my presence in the audience for her fourth and fifth games inspired her ;)
You heard it here first. Cate was touched by a priest.

User avatar
Phil Reynolds
Postmaster General
Posts: 3322
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK
Contact:

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Phil Reynolds » Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:10 pm

Dinos Sfyris wrote:
Rich Priest wrote:Perhaps my presence in the audience for her fourth and fifth games inspired her ;)
You heard it here first. Cate was touched by a priest.
I presume this is unusual only insofar™ as she is (a) female (b) aged over 15.

As others have said, I've warmed to Cate with each successive game. It's noticeable that she only wears her stern, unsmiling face when she's actually concentrating on the game; as soon as Jeff asks her to talk about her life and interests, she relaxes and smiles.

User avatar
Brian Moore
Devotee
Posts: 582
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 6:11 pm
Location: Exeter

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Brian Moore » Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:19 pm

Phil Reynolds wrote:insofar™ as
How long before it turns into insofaras™ ? (Do you ever get 'insofar' without 'as'?)

User avatar
Phil Reynolds
Postmaster General
Posts: 3322
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK
Contact:

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Phil Reynolds » Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:27 pm

Brian Moore wrote:
Phil Reynolds wrote:insofar™ as
How long before it turns into insofaras™ ? (Do you ever get 'insofar' without 'as'?)
I sometimes wonder the same thing about the expression "...and the rest is history". You hardly ever hear anyone say it in that form now; almost invariably, it's "...and the rest, as they say, is history". It's as if the words "as they say" have become part of the expression; so really we should now be saying "...and the rest, as they say, as they say, is history."

User avatar
Kirk Bevins
God
Posts: 4923
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
Location: York, UK

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Kirk Bevins » Wed Apr 01, 2009 4:43 pm

Brian Moore wrote:
Phil Reynolds wrote:insofar™ as
How long before it turns into insofaras™ ? (Do you ever get 'insofar' without 'as'?)
This reminds me of "committing suicide". You never heard someone doing suicide without committing it.

User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9452
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Charlie Reams » Wed Apr 01, 2009 4:53 pm

Kirk Bevins wrote: This reminds me of "committing suicide". You never heard someone doing suicide without committing it.
SUICIDE is a verb in the ODE, as you probably know. Although I've never heard it used that way personally.

User avatar
Phil Reynolds
Postmaster General
Posts: 3322
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK
Contact:

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Phil Reynolds » Wed Apr 01, 2009 5:03 pm

Kirk Bevins wrote:This reminds me of "committing suicide". You never heard someone doing suicide without committing it.
Or "having sex". You never hear of someone doing sex without having it.

User avatar
Ben Hunter
Kiloposter
Posts: 1770
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:54 pm
Location: S Yorks

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Ben Hunter » Wed Apr 01, 2009 5:34 pm

Phil Reynolds wrote:
Kirk Bevins wrote:This reminds me of "committing suicide". You never heard someone doing suicide without committing it.
Or "having sex". You never hear of someone doing sex without having it.
You tend to hear lyrics like "I wanna sex you" in rubbish modern hip-hop pop songs.

User avatar
Ian Fitzpatrick
Enthusiast
Posts: 488
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:23 pm
Location: Wimborne, Dorset

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Ian Fitzpatrick » Wed Apr 01, 2009 5:36 pm

Ben Hunter wrote:
Phil Reynolds wrote:
Kirk Bevins wrote:This reminds me of "committing suicide". You never heard someone doing suicide without committing it.
Or "having sex". You never hear of someone doing sex without having it.
You tend to hear lyrics like "I wanna sex you" in rubbish modern hip-hop pop songs.
There are lyrics???
I thought I was good at Countdown until I joined this forum

User avatar
Kirk Bevins
God
Posts: 4923
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:18 pm
Location: York, UK

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Kirk Bevins » Wed Apr 01, 2009 5:36 pm

Ben Hunter wrote:
You tend to hear lyrics like "I wanna sex you" in rubbish modern hip-hop pop songs.
Haha, you listen to modern hip-hop pop songs!

User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7630
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Matt Morrison » Wed Apr 01, 2009 5:36 pm

Ben Hunter wrote:
Phil Reynolds wrote:
Kirk Bevins wrote:This reminds me of "committing suicide". You never heard someone doing suicide without committing it.
Or "having sex". You never hear of someone doing sex without having it.
You tend to hear lyrics like "I wanna sex you" in rubbish modern hip-hop pop songs.
and from Borat.

User avatar
Rosemary Roberts
Devotee
Posts: 555
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:36 pm

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Rosemary Roberts » Wed Apr 01, 2009 5:58 pm

Ben Hunter wrote:You tend to hear lyrics like "I wanna sex you" in rubbish modern hip-hop pop songs.
I've sexed guineapigs before now ...

... but no animals were harmed in the course of this activity.

User avatar
Phil Reynolds
Postmaster General
Posts: 3322
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK
Contact:

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Phil Reynolds » Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:11 pm

Rosemary Roberts wrote:
Ben Hunter wrote:You tend to hear lyrics like "I wanna sex you" in rubbish modern hip-hop pop songs.
I've sexed guineapigs before now
Indeed. So when a hip-hop "artist" proclaims "I wanna sex you", he is in effect saying, "I wish to determine your gender on the basis of empirical observation. Kindly show me your genitals." Nothing wrong with that.

User avatar
JimBentley
Legend
Posts: 2781
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:39 pm
Location: Redcar, UK
Contact:

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by JimBentley » Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:56 pm

Ah, but what if - like rubbish proto-boyband Color Me Badd sang on their early-90s no. 1 - they want to "sex you up?"

User avatar
Ben Hunter
Kiloposter
Posts: 1770
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:54 pm
Location: S Yorks

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Ben Hunter » Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:59 pm

Kirk Bevins wrote:
Ben Hunter wrote:
You tend to hear lyrics like "I wanna sex you" in rubbish modern hip-hop pop songs.
Haha, you listen to modern hip-hop pop songs!
Just the rubbish ones.

User avatar
Phil Reynolds
Postmaster General
Posts: 3322
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK
Contact:

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Phil Reynolds » Wed Apr 01, 2009 7:10 pm

JimBentley wrote:Ah, but what if - like rubbish proto-boyband Color Me Badd sang on their early-90s no. 1 - they want to "sex you up?"
I presume this is akin to announcing their intention to "wake you up", but with an additional surprise element.

Dinos Sfyris
Series 80 Champion
Posts: 2707
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:07 am
Location: Sheffield

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Dinos Sfyris » Thu Apr 02, 2009 12:06 am

Phil Reynolds wrote:
Rosemary Roberts wrote:I've sexed guineapigs before now
Indeed. So when a hip-hop "artist" proclaims "I wanna sex you", he is in effect saying, "I wish to determine your gender on the basis of empirical observation. Kindly show me your genitals." Nothing wrong with that.
:lol:

User avatar
Derek Hazell
Kiloposter
Posts: 1535
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:52 am
Location: Swindon
Contact:

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Derek Hazell » Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:41 am

Brian Moore wrote:
Phil Reynolds wrote:insofar™ as
How long before it turns into insofaras™ ? (Do you ever get 'insofar' without 'as'?)
Well before your nice little 9 becomes valid, we can apparently also have "inasmuch" for 8 (pending the right letters obviously).

I saw it in this week's Radio Times, and checking a dictionary it seems to be legitimate, although I don't have the Countdown dictionary to hand.
Living life in a gyratory circus kind of way.

User avatar
Jon Corby
Moral Hero
Posts: 7990
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Jon Corby » Fri Apr 03, 2009 10:45 am

Derek Hazell wrote:
Brian Moore wrote:
Phil Reynolds wrote:insofar™ as
How long before it turns into insofaras™ ? (Do you ever get 'insofar' without 'as'?)
Well before your nice little 9 becomes valid, we can apparently also have "inasmuch" for 8 (pending the right letters obviously).

I saw it in this week's Radio Times, and checking a dictionary it seems to be legitimate, although I don't have the Countdown dictionary to hand.
It's been a Tea Time Teaser before :)

User avatar
Derek Hazell
Kiloposter
Posts: 1535
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:52 am
Location: Swindon
Contact:

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Derek Hazell » Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:03 am

Jon Corby wrote:It's been a Tea Time Teaser before :)
Oh okay wiseguy, I thought I finally had a chance to get in first on something :P
Living life in a gyratory circus kind of way.

User avatar
Jon Corby
Moral Hero
Posts: 7990
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Jon Corby » Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:10 am

Derek Hazell wrote:
Jon Corby wrote:It's been a Tea Time Teaser before :)
Oh okay wiseguy, I thought I finally had a chance to get in first on something :P
:( I wasn't being a wiseguy, I was confirming it was valid.

I'm so misunderstood :(

User avatar
Phil Reynolds
Postmaster General
Posts: 3322
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 3:43 pm
Location: Leamington Spa, UK
Contact:

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Phil Reynolds » Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:16 am

Derek Hazell wrote:
Jon Corby wrote:It's been a Tea Time Teaser before :)
Oh okay wiseguy, I thought I finally had a chance to get in first on something :P
"Inasmuch" is perfectly valid. Which is more than can be said for "wiseguy".

User avatar
Charlie Reams
Site Admin
Posts: 9452
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:33 pm
Location: Cambridge
Contact:

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Charlie Reams » Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:40 am

Jon Corby wrote: It's been a Tea Time Teaser before :)
So has SEAHORSE...

User avatar
Derek Hazell
Kiloposter
Posts: 1535
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:52 am
Location: Swindon
Contact:

Re: Spoilers for Tuesday, 31st March

Post by Derek Hazell » Fri Apr 03, 2009 11:42 am

Phil Reynolds wrote:
Derek Hazell wrote:
Jon Corby wrote:It's been a Tea Time Teaser before :)
Oh okay wiseguy, I thought I finally had a chance to get in first on something :P
"Inasmuch" is perfectly valid. Which is more than can be said for "wiseguy".
Indeed, but if you continue with such posts I am sure they will add it just for you ;)
Living life in a gyratory circus kind of way.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests