Anonymous Posted Tue Aug 8 08:08:39 BST 2000 by Jon

(Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat (Anonymous) is a twat


Subject: Re: Anonymous [ Previous Message ]
Posted By Richard on Tue Aug 8 09:33:39 BST 2000:

Iain Lee and Frankie Howerd write this website.


Subject: Re: Anonymous [ Previous Message ]
Posted By Richard Herring on Tue Aug 8 09:59:48 BST 2000:

I don't really see the problem with revealing the names of the people who do this web site. To most people having their names wouldn't make that much difference as they are not exactly notorious. I think it weakens them a bit not to say who they are, but I know that they're painfully shy.
I'm not sure how many of them there are. There's a reasonably accurate cartoon of two of them in (I think) the comment section.

I think by remaining anonymous that they will just create a furore of specualtion that will result in their unmasking, but if they just signed their names at the bottom, no-one would give a toss either way.
Hey, maybe it's a massive PR exercise for the site!!


Subject: Re: Anonymous [ Previous Message ]
Posted By Mogwai on Tue Aug 8 10:23:08 BST 2000:

*surveys "Anonymous's" laborious handiwork with something approaching awe*

Wow, An. Are you this tedious, bitter and obsessive in real life, too?


Subject: Re: Anonymous [ Previous Message ]
Posted By Arma on Tue Aug 8 10:25:11 BST 2000:

> There's a reasonably accurate cartoon of two of them in (I think) the comment section.

It's the famous Playmobil men! (with facial features drawn in felt pen)


Subject: Re: Anonymous [ Previous Message ]
Posted By PJ on Tue Aug 8 12:56:53 BST 2000:

Hi.
I stay up till 3 in the morning to post needlessly dull e-mails about writers of web-sites, and expect everybody to be shocked and annoyed by my Chris Morris style attack on what i beleive they hold dear.
What actually happens in my postings don't work, because i'm too stupid to realise that Rob S has blocked the names of the writers, and people just see i've sent these things, tut to themselves, look a bit irritated, and say "oh, not this arsehole again".
I am, of course, a wanker.
Thanks,
Anonymous.


Subject: Re: Anonymous [ Previous Message ]
Posted By Gee on Tue Aug 8 16:01:55 BST 2000:

If you only knew a little programing language you'd crack it (well get round it.) I only know a little C (that's a programing language not an insult) but that's enough to sort this little problem out. But of course I'm not going to tell you how to do it.


Subject: Re: Anonymous [ Previous Message ]
Posted By Richard on Tue Aug 8 16:55:56 BST 2000:

There are many ways to get around this. I'm not going to mention them either.

The Corpses are Flavio Briatore and King Juan-Carlos of Spain.


Subject: Re: Anonymous [ Previous Message ]
Posted By Jon on Tue Aug 8 17:33:07 BST 2000:

The Corpses are Alec Guinness and Robin Day, who have faked their own deaths to avoid exposure.


Subject: Re: Anonymous [ Previous Message ]
Posted By James on Wed Aug 9 12:32:26 BST 2000:

The Corpses are TV's Kate Copstick and a Siamese tiger.

(One for the Oink! community there).


Subject: Re: Anonymous [ Previous Message ]
Posted By TJ on Wed Aug 9 12:45:44 BST 2000:

>The Corpses are TV's Kate Copstick and a Siamese tiger.
>
>(One for the Oink! community there).


I *wanted* to put that, but I couldn't remember what the animal was!!!


Subject: Re: Anonymous [ Previous Message ]
Posted By James on Wed Aug 9 13:03:29 BST 2000:

>I *wanted* to put that, but I couldn't remember what the animal was!!!

If that's genuine, TJ, then I'm scared. We *shouldn't* be able to remember any of this stuff. I suspect my brain is now part-papier-mache.


Subject: Re: Anonymous [ Previous Message ]
Posted By TJ on Wed Aug 9 14:19:29 BST 2000:

It's genuine.


Be afraid. Be very afraid.


Subject: Re: Anonymous [ Previous Message ]
Posted By James on Wed Aug 9 18:18:26 BST 2000:

This has started to nag at what's left of my mind, so I've just been and checked... it's actually a Columbian tiger ("who likes to dress up a very very lot"). Also, 'Copstick' should be misspelt.


[ Add Your Comment On This Subject ]
[ Add Your Comment Quoting Message ]