« Previous | Main | Next »


Eddie Mair | 12:58 UK time, Tuesday, 22 August 2006

At the risk of going on and on, we've finally perfected - we hope - the technology to allow you to hear the montage of Radio 4 voices saying "crap". It started last week when one of the big stories was a comment allegedly made by the Deputy Prime Minister about the President of the United States of America. One of my colleagues - I cannot mention her name - scoured the airwaves and compiled the following. Obviously, if you don't want to be offended by reading the word crap, it's too late. If you want to avoid creating further offence by hearing it, repeatedly, then in the name of humanity don't click on this link. Now where is Ofcom's number....?



  1. At 01:10 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Timothy wrote:

    Nice one Eric Church - dials set to FUN, can you link your offering with CC tonight - that would be my challenge :-)

  2. At 01:14 PM on 22 Aug 2006, whisht wrote:

    Soooooo..... we've had the blog titles so far being:

    "Shi ite"?
    (sorry for the offence to all concerned but I'm weak).

  3. At 01:14 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    Oh that is just great! Any chance of talking to those nice people in IT to make it a downloadable file s well? That way I can change my email notification to play this, as most email tends to be crap nowadays.....

  4. At 01:20 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    Of course, I don't include your newsletter in my last statement! That could never be described as crap:D

  5. At 01:37 PM on 22 Aug 2006, John H. wrote:

    Am I the only one feeling as though if I'd just been sold this, I'd be disappointed?

  6. At 01:38 PM on 22 Aug 2006, John H. wrote:

    Having said that, I'm still chuckling at whisht's suggesting: "Shi ite" lol

  7. At 01:43 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Stephen wrote:

    While I expect the likes of this from some of the contributers, did my ears deceive me or was Brian Perkins one of the crappers?

  8. At 01:48 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Johanna wrote:

    Some of them seemed to be really enjoying saying it! I think there was a bit of Brian Perkins there!!

  9. At 01:53 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Cathy Harrison wrote:

    Elegantly put, Stephen.

  10. At 01:59 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Michael wrote:

    I suspect its my IT department stopping me doing things which might actually not be work, it doesnt work for me.

  11. At 01:59 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Lissa, PM Blog Producer wrote:

    Dear PM Listeners

    Bear with us while we get our heads round this blogging lark. We're still learning.

    For those who've complained that we forgot about the PM caption competition, we're setting up a rotating daily strapline with all your best suggestions summing up PM in 10 words or fewer. Some of them are already up there. More to come.

    In reply to Mark Drew (post 67, 17 August), the delay in comments being published isn't our clumsy attempt to censor you...it's just that when you or Eddie post stuff up it goes into a giant queuing system for everything the BBC is publishing. Normally it's really quick. Sometimes there's a ten minute delay and occasionally it completely jams up. This also explain why sometimes the blog will say there are 50 comments but you can only see 40.


    Lissa, PM Blog Producer

  12. At 02:00 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Roberto Carlos Alvarez-Galloso,CPUR wrote:

    This title made me laugh. The Deputy Prime Minister put it elegantly. Of course, Bush used the S... word.

    All of this reminds me of a webpage that I saw in which Bush farted during one of his speeches. There were also bloopers by Bush in the websites.

    Just type in the words "Bush Farts" and the readers will have a lot to laugh and discuss about. There is even a book of dedicated "Bushisms".

  13. At 02:01 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Roberto Carlos Alvarez-Galloso,CPUR wrote:

    I also did not mean to use the word "Bush Farts", it was the webpage I found In The Google and Yahoo Serach Engines.

  14. At 02:05 PM on 22 Aug 2006, tobias wrote:

    If I were to undertake this in work time I would be considered time wasting (as I am now writing this). Then again I don't work in the media.

    I really did think the blog would provide further insight into current conflicts/crises, akin to that of the rather instersting blog from the Newsnight team. Perhaps I should re-calibrate my sights and aim, well, for the balls I suppose.

    Still, my missing Big Brother has been reduced somewhat.

    P.S. Not heard the 'crap montage' as yet (says it all), the realplayer refuses to co-operate.

  15. At 02:15 PM on 22 Aug 2006, The Stainless Steel Cat wrote:

    Isn't it great how Charlotte Green can make "crap" sound like "honey"?

    Eddie, I think you should interview Charlotte G rather than Charlotte C tonight, or just replace the entire show with her reading the 'phone book (or the blog comments!)

  16. At 02:21 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Jack Scribbs wrote:

    What was today's newsletter all about??

  17. At 02:24 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Chris Linfoot wrote:

    Oh goody. Real Audio.

    There'll be a PM podcast next.

    Oh wait...

  18. At 02:28 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Tim.C wrote:


    Can we now have the follow up audio montage of everyone saying 'balls' ?

    And especially for tobias

    "Big Brother house. This is Davina. You're live on channel 4, please don't swear."


  19. At 02:35 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Sara wrote:

    I do so agree with Tobias - it is all a bit time-wasting, but just as addictive as Big Brother in that I keep checking out the comments in the hope that something interesting is happening. At the moment it isn't, but perhaps someone will say something exciting soon. I miss BB!

    By the way, this is my first ever blog comment. Will there ever be another?

    And can someone please tell me why I should be looking forward to what Charlotte Church may have to say? Is she topical?

  20. At 02:45 PM on 22 Aug 2006, John H. wrote:

    I'm afraid I got totally fed up with BB after the first couple and have taken some satisfaction in not watching it since. But having been quite into the second series, I know what Sara means about this being similarly addictive.

    To liven things up, we probably need to persuade Tobias (or A. N. Other) to say something that we can all take offence to and then the rest of us can get back to that ding-dong stuff.

    And another thing - I'm finding this quite challenging to the pompous and superior attitude I've always had to chat rooms and discussion lists. Oh dear.

  21. At 02:47 PM on 22 Aug 2006, James wrote:

    Just listened to the "Crap" thing. Jolly funny I thought. I agree, Charlotte Green would be much better than Charlotte Church.

  22. At 02:54 PM on 22 Aug 2006, numbercruncher wrote:

    All is pure to the pure - why does no-one assume they are just referring to the card game?

  23. At 02:55 PM on 22 Aug 2006, The Stainless Steel Cat wrote:

    From the newsletter: "Set your dials to FUN!"

    Sadly, my dial doesn't have a "FUN" setting, but it does go up to ELEPHANT.

  24. At 02:56 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    Well, I can honestly say that the only time I ever watched BB was during the first time, when I thought it was about as interesting as watching paint dry. I could maybe understand from a sociological standpoint the interest in watching the first series, as the people inside had no idea whether it was just a handful of viewers out there observing, or the whole country, hence were acting "normally". Since then, as far as I can tell by hearing my co-workers talk about it, it appears that all the "contestants" are entering to have their 15 minutes of fame, a la Andy Wharhol, and bid to outdo each other in the "outrageous" stakes. I mean, can someone please tell me: Why Jade Goody? Just why????

    Eddie, can you tell us more about why Ms Church is going to be on the show tonight? I'm interested to know whether this is your bid to re-engineer yourself as a chat-show host.....

  25. At 03:00 PM on 22 Aug 2006, James wrote:

    How about a suggest a guest spot for Eddie to interview.

  26. At 03:01 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    By the way, my dial goes up to 11. Its one louder!!

  27. At 03:08 PM on 22 Aug 2006, andycragg wrote:

    PM is a chat-show. Isn't it?

    I bet Eddie keeps Charlotte till the end, to keep us listening to the intellectual bits. For our own good.

    (er, am I the only one looking forward to the Ms Church face-off? )

  28. At 03:13 PM on 22 Aug 2006, liam wrote:

    I think the company Firewall has torched the Real Audio stream :(. That means I'm going to have to wait 'till I get home before I can listen to the crap...

    Looking back on the earlier blogs, I still believe that all "chat rooms" decend into "yelling rooms" at some point!

  29. At 03:17 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Dougal wrote:

    Help me people, I am stuck playing craps. So far I have Eddie Mair, Charlotte Green, Nick Clarke, ?, Tim Brooke Taylor, ?, Barry Cryer. Who are the two '?'s?

    Tobias, are you related to a Mrs Trellis at all?

    mmm, cant wait to hear Charlotte Church sing crap on PM.

  30. At 03:17 PM on 22 Aug 2006, andycragg wrote:

    For those without RealPlayer, here is a transcript of the montage :

    "crap, crap, crap, crap, crap-crap, crap."

  31. At 03:23 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Mrs Trellis from North Wales wrote:

    Dear Jonathan
    I'm most put out by your unmentionable montage of Radio 4 voices.
    I expected something more worthy like an 'mp3' or ringtone thingy.
    My steam PC refuses to play your 'ram'.
    Mrs T. (Currently in Hove)

  32. At 03:25 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Millicent Ladygarden wrote:

    Is this any way to educate the yoof of today.

    Tsk tsk..... they already have enough trouble not getting fails in their A levels - why make them flunk interviews they are uselessly ill equipped for by filling their heads with crap.

    Should I hear this ram file as a ringtone I shall resort to physical violence and subpoena Mssrs Muir et al in my defence.

    Also the thought of Ms Church without a face is equally revolting and disturbing - I do hope the sound will be dubbed as the face off occurs - I've only just got over the noise of the rectal exam.

  33. At 03:32 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Fent Poorly wrote:

    PM: "After a day's work, not quite relaxing enough, yet not suitably refreshing, either"

  34. At 03:43 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Valery H wrote:

    Forgive me if anyone else has entered the craps game since Dougal at No 29 - but I think I heard Joan Bakewell in there (4th from the left)? - allegedly.

    ..oh and there could be a joke in there about Charlotte Church only singing crap on PM, but I couldn't possibly crack it.

    Go for it Eric!

  35. At 03:51 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Lissa, PM Blog producer wrote:

    re Michael's problems with listening to the crap audio (comment no. 10)...this is the link to the Real Player audio software download.


  36. At 04:19 PM on 22 Aug 2006, tobias wrote:

    I have a summary of the blog:

    PM, "Like a curates egg, good in parts half boiled in others."

  37. At 04:39 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    Hmmm It seems quiet here today... Maybe too quiet! I think everyone's just lurking, waiting for the show to begin so we can all talk about Eddie behind his back....

    So, does the fact that Lissa is the Producer for the blog mean that you've decided not to let Rupert near the computer again?

  38. At 04:40 PM on 22 Aug 2006, whisht wrote:

    How to admit this...? I've been listening to another programme... I know I know forgive me.
    But it is on Radio 4.

    They've been talking about accents. The question being 'What is the "funniest" accent?'

    Luckily someone's spent a research budget on this and can tell us. Except its not that easy (which is fine by me but I'm a consultant). All I can remember is that its not a Firth accent.

    And that for one-liners the funniest accent was Received Pronounciation. Maybe because its clear and 'deadpan'..?

    Which of course made me think "crap".

    and why we found this recording so funny...

    [promise i won't stray away again...]

  39. At 04:47 PM on 22 Aug 2006, tobias wrote:

    Accent of funniness? Brummie, obviously, now where's my fee?

  40. At 04:47 PM on 22 Aug 2006, andycragg wrote:

    The funniest accent was the Brummie accent for long jokes - least funny for long jokes was RP.

    Now I understand why no-one laughs at my long jokes .

  41. At 04:53 PM on 22 Aug 2006, andycragg wrote:

    There's a real genuine chat for this subject :


    people there have conversations and there are pictures ...

  42. At 04:55 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Sam Infield wrote:

    Cr*p, the BBC, this is what we do.

  43. At 04:58 PM on 22 Aug 2006, tobias wrote:

    I have just been thinking about Eddie and PM. I find the morning news, Today, a little too overbearing. The presenters are full on and go at it hammer and tongs. We should 'flip reverse' these two shows. I like a good ruck in the afternoon and would receive this form of journalism far better, shouting at the radio in assent (or dissent more commonly).

    Eddie and his dulcet tones can ease me into the morning far better, with maybe some eggs benedict and a few slivers of smoked salmon? What do you think? We could then talk about the show... all day. Come on, I'm selling this aren't I!?

  44. At 05:06 PM on 22 Aug 2006, andycragg wrote:

    pee-kwan-say? What is Erics accent?

  45. At 05:11 PM on 22 Aug 2006, John H. wrote:

    I think Tobias (43) makes an interesting point about Today and PM - and I could probably deal with a reversal. However, I have to say that I was convinced the BBC had made a mistake when they put Chris Moyles on R1's breakfast show. I was sure that his style would be just too much in the morning. Almost immediately, I realised I was wrong and the only problem I have with it now is trying to juggle his breakfast show with a bit of Today. (I suspect I shan't be allowed to post on here any more...)

    Personally, I do appreciate the more contemplative nature of PM in the "drive time" slot. Again, I sometimes juggle with thingy and wotshername on R5, but I enjoy the reactive element to the reporting of the day's events. I know there it a perennial debate about "reporting news" vs "endless opinion" but I recognise that I often need the context to be given to me for me to appreciate the point of some stories. It's a good time to get and I'm usually open enough to it at that time of the day.

  46. At 05:14 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    As to Eddie in the morning, I agree. Along with more Salmond, we need more irony in our breakfast diet.

    I also miss Eddie on Sundays, a perfect follow on from Cook....

  47. At 05:20 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Lola wrote:

    Tobias: The only thing that got smoked yesterday was you!

    I bet you accent is a slightly sillier version of Brian Sewell - if that's possible.

  48. At 05:20 PM on 22 Aug 2006, whisht wrote:

    You're all at it??!!??

    andy - thankyou - which thread?

    I looked at this before in order to remind me what the lovely (if un-funny Firth sounding) researcher had said but couldn't find the right conversation.

    I'll admit it - I actually find this stuff interesting. Y'see, what is intrinsically "odd" or funny about the brummie accent? Its no more 'odd' than any other. My guess is there's a historical basis/bigotry (same as the Irish being thought of as being "thick")

    oops. got serious. sorry.

    accent set to "FUN"

    [actually the last time someone capitalised that word to me they meant something entirely different]

  49. At 05:22 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Rosalind wrote:

    Listening to PM I am pottering to and from the kitchen and the drawing room and there is a fascinating half sentence lag between the kitchen where I can't get digital and the drawing room where I can.
    Slum clearing in Delhi also interesting, London cleared a whole lot to make Regent Street, and no-one tracked where the poor went to. Just crowded into the back lanes I suppose. And no-one really was caring then. Nothing new.

  50. At 05:27 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Sara wrote:

    I should be on my way home hearing what Charlotte Church has to say, but instead I'm still here, having another blog.

    Re Today and PM role reversal: would Eddie like to have to get up that early? He might be grumpy and curdle my eggs. What do you think, Eddie? I would rather you stay just where you are and soothe me after a tediously long day reading blogs.

  51. At 05:33 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Rosalind wrote:

    And I hate. hate, hate "in this moment in time". Sorry but WHY do people say it instead of "now"?

  52. At 05:34 PM on 22 Aug 2006, andycragg wrote:

    whisht : the word.of.mouth people seem to be very contemplatative (unlike this lot) - so expect a thread to appear about accents, er, soon.

    Hey, I've just spotted some photos - now its a photo blog (pholog? phlog?) eh? Nice. There's a lack of hair all round.

  53. At 05:36 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Tim.C wrote:

    Slum clearing in Delhi

    Sorry, but this just made me think of how world in general fails to deal with poverty and the poor with any real effort.

    Let's move them out first, then we'll worry about where we're going to put them.

    Personally, I think our civilisation is much more likely to destroy itself because of the way we (don't) deal with poverty, than any of the other big scares - nuclear war/accident, global warming, terrorism.

    Sorry for adding a comment here without any humour.


  54. At 05:43 PM on 22 Aug 2006, andycragg wrote:

    Now there's a new chance to add comments to PM's ever-expanding media empire :


  55. At 05:45 PM on 22 Aug 2006, andycragg wrote:

    Just as I thought - leave us listening until a quarter to six before telling us about Charlotte.


  56. At 05:46 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Dougal wrote:

    Ah, crap. We don't get to listen to any crap singing after all *glum*

  57. At 05:47 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Stephen wrote:

    Where's Charlotte Gone?
    Mr Mair, has just denied that Ms Church will appear tonight. Is Eric actually a distinct person over whom Eddie has no control?
    We should be told!
    Actually, why do I care, I had no desire to listen to her!?
    I think I need to go and lie down

  58. At 05:48 PM on 22 Aug 2006, John W wrote:

    It's Corrie Corfield who does it for me, but Charlotte Green is a pretty close second...

  59. At 05:48 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Stephen wrote:

    Oh and to all grammarians, I already know there is spurious punctuation, but it is the end of a tiring day, so tough noogies!

  60. At 05:55 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    I think we need to get to the bottom of this... Eric definitely promised (or should that be threatened?) Charlotte Church, but Eddie has categorically denied she'll be making an appearance. Maybe Eric is Eddie's evil twin brother (you know, just like all the villains in shows like Star Trek, Knight Rider, etc). I bet he even has an "evil" goatee beard as well!

  61. At 05:58 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Stephen wrote:

    Or are they really Eddie Jeckell and Eric Hyde?

  62. At 06:04 PM on 22 Aug 2006, alan watson wrote:

    Remember the child who cried 'wolf' just too often?
    It also proves the finding that the public don't trust blogs!!
    I'm going back to Drive on 5!!

  63. At 06:48 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Hugh Jarce wrote:

    Have returned home and the crap montage was splendid... many thanks. Crucial broadcasting on tonights PM with Hitler(yes Adolf .. no not that one) knew my Father ..... very resonant of many conversations with my IT colleagues in Bangalore. Many a phone call, clarifying and seeking agreement from the enthusiastic chap at the other end, ends with the sad reality that he did not understand a word I have said to him. .... Anyway if you can understand this can anyone tell me if people are allowed to have a surname of Hitler ? .. or does a world-wide ban exist of sorts

  64. At 07:55 PM on 22 Aug 2006, Rachel Gooch wrote:

    I'm appalled to discover that there are people out there who don't appreciate our Eddie. In this thread he is accused of being flippant - God forbid!


  65. At 01:39 AM on 23 Aug 2006, Rufus A Bairzarce wrote:

    I say, you chaps!
    Have you noticed how the timings are displayed on the messages?
    Before 10:00 am they are shown as "09:55 AM" etc. but from 1:00 pm they are shown as "01:00 PM".
    Putting aside my personal dislike for capital letters for ante or post meridiem, I feel that the inclusion of the "0" in this configuration is superfluous, if not downright wrong.
    I am prepared to believe that anyone with a working knowledge of the mysteries of the "24 hour clock" may find the "0" useful up to 10 o'clock in the fore-noon, but, thereafter, I fancy it would be a positive danger.
    My £1.00 digital pocket-watch is able to cope with the distinction between the 12 and 24 hour clock systems. I wonder whether the BBC specified this idiosyncratic format and how much was paid for the software which time stamps the messages. I'll bet it was more than a quid.
    I think we should be told.

  66. At 07:19 AM on 23 Aug 2006, SimonP wrote:

    Just picked this up again after having to stop reading last night to go to bed.

    Not sure about the role reversal with Today. Can't beat John Humphries for keeping me awake whilst driving to work.

    I have to admit to the occasional flirtation with In Tune over on R3 depending on the kind of day in the office. Could the BBC combine the two?

  67. At 08:29 AM on 23 Aug 2006, Fearless Fred wrote:

    Rufus, I think you'll find that's a £01.00 watch

  68. At 08:37 AM on 23 Aug 2006, Frances O wrote:

    It's all very well to go on about Charlotte Green's voice, but where are the gorgeously-voiced MEN on R4? There isn't a continuity announcer that has a similar effect - for me, anyway. Huh!

  69. At 08:48 AM on 23 Aug 2006, Frances O wrote:

    Reading Rosalind's post reminds me of a question I occasionally ponder in idle moments... when not blogging...

    Why is there a time delay in listening to digital radio? Surely this is the way we will all be listening in the digital future (well, those of us who can afford to replace all our radios, huh)

    Does this mean that once we're all digitised I won't be able to set my digital clocks by the pips?

  70. At 09:55 AM on 23 Aug 2006, windy Miller wrote:

    I've wondered about the pips too - is the long analogue pip the correct time, or the digital one..........

  71. At 11:06 AM on 23 Aug 2006, andycragg wrote:

    Am I the first one to be censored? I posted the phone number for Ofcom and it stayed up for a while - now its gone.

    Also a link to the PM site on Flickr has vanished.

    I think we should be told etc. Come to think of it, the text in this text box is green ... :)

  72. At 11:15 AM on 23 Aug 2006, andycragg wrote:

    The analogue time is more accurate than the digital one - we'll all be living in the past in the digital age!

  73. At 11:23 AM on 23 Aug 2006, Windy Miller wrote:

    Ah, the past....life was so much simpler then...we used to listen to the Wireless, and that nice Eddie Mair used to present PM.....'course its all changed nowadays! You young digital agers don't know you're born.....(cont p94)

  74. At 11:34 AM on 23 Aug 2006, Tim.C wrote:

    The delay on the digital transmission is because it has to be converted from analogue to digital, and this takes a finite amount of time.

    You'll find the same thing with TV.

    As for the pips - I assumed that they would be correct on both. The sound of the pips doesn't have to be digitised as it's the same everyday meaning it can be fiddled.
    But I've just had to edit this, as a quick search came up with pages saying that they are indeed wrong on digital.
    I will be checking next time they're transmitted - 12:00 ?

    Interestingly, the analogue pips are also slightly behind - just not enough to matter.
    And maybe more fun, if you set your watch with Big Ben you'll be even further behind.
    If you are near there, try it. Stand where you can hear Big Ben and a radio.
    You 'll discover the pips a considerably sooner than the actual sound you hear from Big Ben. Even when Big Ben is transmitted on air, it will come from the radio BEFORE you hear it for real !!

    There's almost certainly a web page somewhere explaining all this - probably even one on the BBC site.

    Sorry for the long post. For some reason I'm doing a lot of typing this morning. Probably because I should be doing something else far more important.

    Word of the day - PROCRASTINATION


  75. At 11:41 AM on 23 Aug 2006, Tim.C wrote:

    I have found this page which has some interesting points on this.

    (I did look for a page on the BBC site, but haven't found one as good)

    Digital pips - National Maritime Museum web page


  76. At 11:50 AM on 23 Aug 2006, Windy Millar wrote:

    PM - News with nowt taken out!

  77. At 12:01 PM on 23 Aug 2006, Ed Iglehart wrote:

    * At 11:06 AM on 23 Aug 2006,
    * andycragg wrote:

    Am I the first one to be censored?

    No. I was censored yesterday when I referred to a certain Iranian's stainless steel [censored] genitalia....
    And after all that rubbish about interfering with leather spheres....

  78. At 12:36 PM on 23 Aug 2006, Nick Burch wrote:

    Loved the "Crap Tapes". Could you get IT to do a loop of Charlotte saying it for 30 seconds and ask WG Snuffy Walden to rattle off a suitable uplifting ditty and there's one fantastic theme tune for PM. WG's probably unemployed now that the West Wing's finished.

  79. At 12:45 PM on 23 Aug 2006, Pedantte wrote:

    "There was an incident - it passed of peacefully - at Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport this morning. Speaking on behalf of the airport is someone called Mirjam Snoerwang.

    I'll leave that with you."

    Given the grammarcide committed earlier in that sentence, I assume the 'funny foreigner's name as reported is merely the result of an inability either to type, to spell or to be bothered to recall a person's name with anything approaching the precision to which licence payers were at one time accustomed, and that the gift of the error to me, or us, is a false gift.

  80. At 12:49 PM on 23 Aug 2006, John H. wrote:


  81. At 01:07 PM on 23 Aug 2006, Valery Pedant wrote:

    Hmm - quite. (John H at No 79)

    Also, I note that it gets quite complicated making off the cuff comments, because being until yesterday virginal in Blogworld, I made a simpler (but shorter?) post about this sp on the Sneorwang thread.

    Does it matter? Does one have to read them all simultaneously? In fact how about an analogue thread and a digital one, would that make it easier to keep up?

    Great excuse for another daily diversion though, thanks.

  82. At 01:26 PM on 23 Aug 2006, andycragg wrote:

    I'm sure Eric wil be, even now, being fully trained by the BBC Pronunciation Department in the correct way to say Mirjam Snoerwang - including, I expect, any regional variation.

    I look forward to hearing it ...

  83. At 01:45 PM on 23 Aug 2006, John H. wrote:

    Indeed, Valery (80 - post, not age). I went in search of your post because I wondered if you'd commented on it as a spelling mistake. Oddly, your message was there, wasn't there and then was again. How odd. (Is it all working as it should, Lissa?)

    With regard to the Pedantte's "grammarcide". I'm okay with language pedantry - it gives us something to do and provides all sorts of reasons to feel superior. Tho' I suspect I won't be alone in thinking that some of the comments on here about Eric's accent are more illustrative of stupidty than anything else. But what on earth is wrong with parenthetical hyphens (PHs)? They're well established and they work just fine. I've never actually seen a study on contrastive paratheses, but my instinct is that they were just a tad more inclusive than your normal bracketed variety. Once you get into PHs, then you can get away with those and the odd dash. I didn't illustrate this - I thought it might be going too far for some on here.

  84. At 02:45 PM on 23 Aug 2006, Valery Pedant wrote:

    My thoughts too John (probably not aged 81), I would appear to have been replaced by Morag R at 22, who made a similar comment. I note yours at 37 (I think, I can't re-check as it takes so long to scroll up and down the Craps thread) and wonder if they are so inundated with posts that they have decided to bring on substitutes to keep the scrolling to a minimum?

    I think we should be told Lissa?

    btw who complained about parenthetical hyphens - my favourite flavour - and why?

  85. At 02:55 PM on 23 Aug 2006, John H. wrote:

    I was trying to be generous in attempting to understand Pedantte's "grammarcide" comment. It couldn't be the spelling error you pointed out, because who would call a spelling error "grammarcide". It wasn't the sense of the sentence that so enraged Pedantte, so I decided to interpret it as a reference to the PHs (also my favourite!). I was concerned about concluding that "grammarcide" might be a reference to punctuation, but sometimes you gotta go with the flow.

    I think I may be 81 and aging rapidly. I suspect it is the stress associated with posting here when more important things are waiting to be done.

  86. At 03:06 PM on 23 Aug 2006, John H. wrote:

    In case you're not scanning both threads Valery, Tim C. has just posted this on Snoerwang.

    "The page of comments here will be dynamically generated from some form of database.

    Basically, that means that if the page loading is interupted or stops for some reason you'll only get some of the posts.

    This has happened for me a few times, however a quick refresh/reload gets all the posts back."

    As a theory, it's good enough for me.

  87. At 03:09 PM on 23 Aug 2006, Valery Pedant wrote:

    With you on the stress problem John H - a kind of stress post trauma thing perhaps?

    Why do I care if they've stolen my post on Snoerwang? Although I did in the same post make another reference - to a certain J B and a missing c**p - perhaps she complained?

    Must go off and live life out of Blogworld...

  88. At 03:34 PM on 23 Aug 2006, Valery Pedant wrote:

    Time flies, 83 already, but back again and as you will have seen, scanning both threads (although we were told not to call them that in one of the er - threads, but I know not yet why).

    So just to tie all the... cords? together, if lost posts go to Wales, do they tie up with lost chords?

  89. At 04:15 PM on 23 Aug 2006, Pedantte wrote:

    Of/off was the atrocity. PHs are fine and dandy, as are Mairish accents.

  90. At 04:17 PM on 23 Aug 2006, John H. wrote:

    "...as are Mairish accents."

    Unless they're at night. Then they can be quite scary.

  91. At 05:24 PM on 23 Aug 2006, Valery Pedant wrote:

    Having a fairly Mairish accent myself, I've never been told that it scares anyone - day or night.

    Just popped back to check that I hadn't disappeared again.....

  92. At 06:01 PM on 23 Aug 2006, Liz wrote:

    Didnt catch what happened to the FTSE today, any chance of an update????

  93. At 06:17 PM on 23 Aug 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    I said 'crap' in a letter to the editor to The Independent on Monday and got it printed.

  94. At 08:30 PM on 23 Aug 2006, John H. wrote:

    Well done David!

    Sorry, that probably sounds a bit patronising, but your post looks a bit sad sitting there on its own.

    (Of course, there's probably nobody to oversee the addition of new posts...)

  95. At 02:26 AM on 24 Aug 2006, lambert strether wrote:

    And speaking of "Bush farts":

    There is now a a "Pull My Finger" Farting Bush Doll.

    American marketing genius and techology march on!

  96. At 10:46 AM on 24 Aug 2006, David McNickle wrote:

    Now that we have audio, can we hear the eider duck?

  97. At 12:05 PM on 24 Aug 2006, Valery Pedant wrote:

    Oh C**p, I had intended to keep off this today, particularly since the sun is shining here today in Mairland, and there are weeds to be pulled and posts to be straightened....

This post is closed to new comments.

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.