In The Interest Of Balance-Pertinent Criticism Of SOTCAA Posted Thu Aug 9 17:15:17 BST 2001 by 'Suzanne Danielle'

Due to an excess of maudlin and bordering-on-the-sycophantic comments being bandied about on the "important annoyncement" thread, regarding the forthcoming demise (or not, hopefully) of SOTCAA, Methinks it only fair to open this thread for readers to post in with some ideas about the less appealing facets of this site. One would be appalling self-regard, of course, as shown in those cringeworthy exchanges betwixt Mr Joe and Mr Barfe . Another would be nowhere near enough Ben Sinister postings-hes so humorous, intelligent and sexy!

BTW, If anyone were to post in with "Theyre a pack of cunts", it probably wouldnt be welcomed as an enlightening piece of constructive criticism.


Subject: Re: In The Interest Of Balance-Pertinent Criticism Of SOTCAA [ Previous Message ]
Posted By 'Ian the Smegmeister' on Thu Aug 9 19:02:56 BST 2001:

They're a pack of cunts.


Subject: Re: In The Interest Of Balance-Pertinent Criticism Of SOTCAA [ Previous Message ]
Posted By 'George Luckless' on Thu Aug 9 19:12:33 BST 2001:

Hi Suzanne. Tell me, what was Pat Mower like in bed? Did his nostrils continue to dialate even after his abrupt demotion from the '10 Sexiest/best dressed men on television' hot-list?


Subject: Re: In The Interest Of Balance-Pertinent Criticism Of SOTCAA [ Previous Message ]
Posted By 'eim glint' on Thu Aug 9 19:12:37 BST 2001:

*high-pitched giggle*

The articles are good, but there are rarely new ones written.

P.S. Not trying to be nit-pickety, but "Of" should really have been written "of", in the interests of correct grammar preservation.


Subject: Re: In The Interest Of Balance-Pertinent Criticism Of SOTCAA [ Previous Message ]
Posted By 'eim glint' on Thu Aug 9 19:15:57 BST 2001:

Oh, you *swine*.

Post Script:
The "of" matter: technically it's up to you whether or not upper or lowercase is used, but I find it useful to "lower", as I say, words which have no impact, e.g.

This Thread Is fucking Crap


Subject: Re: In The Interest Of Balance-Pertinent Criticism Of SOTCAA [ Previous Message ]
Posted By 'George Luckless' on Thu Aug 9 19:17:34 BST 2001:

>what was Pat Mower like in bed? Did his nostrils continue to dialate

DIALATE? How about DILATE? No I prefer the former. Why not?

What ever happened to Arthur 'why not' Brown? (was that his name?)


Subject: Re: In The Interest Of Balance-Pertinent Criticism Of SOTCAA [ Previous Message ]
Posted By 'Squidy' on Thu Aug 9 19:23:41 BST 2001:

Arnold Brown. Two stereotypes for the price of one. Probably the best deal in the West End today.

Arthur Brown set his head on fire and sang that song that starts "I am the god of hell fire and I bring you.... FIRE".

Interestingly, both have connections with The Young Ones. Ok, so it's not so interesting.


Subject: Re: In The Interest Of Balance-Pertinent Criticism Of SOTCAA [ Previous Message ]
Posted By 'actually quite angry' on Thu Aug 9 19:27:04 BST 2001:

Why is it that so many people have a problem with a few sentimental postings from people wishing to express their fondness for this website? Maybe the same people who condemn SOTCAA for being too negative?

How this website could be improved: Getting rid of all the emotionless, robotic Newmanoids who feel compelled to write about how they puked up over other people's candid reactions.


Subject: Re: In The Interest Of Balance-Pertinent Criticism Of SOTCAA [ Previous Message ]
Posted By 'George Luckless' on Thu Aug 9 19:35:50 BST 2001:

>Interestingly, both have connections with The Young Ones. Ok, so it's not so interesting.

Don't worry about. At least we're both having a go. Cheers!


Subject: Re: In The Interest Of Balance-Pertinent Criticism Of SOTCAA [ Previous Message ]
Posted By 'Anonymous' on Thu Aug 9 20:49:18 BST 2001:

>Due to an excess of maudlin and bordering-on-the-sycophantic comments being bandied about on the "important annoyncement" thread, regarding the forthcoming demise (or not, hopefully) of SOTCAA, Methinks it only fair to open this thread for readers to post in with some ideas about the less appealing facets of this site. One would be appalling self-regard, of course, as shown in those cringeworthy exchanges betwixt Mr Joe and Mr Barfe . Another would be nowhere near enough Ben Sinister postings-hes so humorous, intelligent and sexy!

The over-use of the words "joy", "joyful" and "joyless".

Although mainly on this forum, those.


Subject: Re: In The Interest Of Balance-Pertinent Criticism Of SOTCAA [ Previous Message ]
Posted By Peter on Fri Aug 10 01:19:02 BST 2001:

I think you can spot an arguement has ended when someone mentions 'a twinkle in the eye'. How you supposed to argue against that? This does annoy me slightly. Only slightly.


Subject: Re: In The Interest Of Balance-Pertinent Criticism Of SOTCAA [ Previous Message ]
Posted By 'Rich' on Fri Aug 10 09:29:23 BST 2001:

>I think you can spot an arguement has ended when someone mentions 'a twinkle in the eye'. How you supposed to argue against that? This does annoy me slightly. Only slightly.

i agree. this accusation (joylessness, no 'twinkle') has been levelled at big train and i just cant see it. they seem to be having a whale of a time to me


Subject: Re: In The Interest Of Balance-Pertinent Criticism Of SOTCAA [ Previous Message ]
Posted By 'They stole my pearls away' on Fri Aug 10 09:44:33 BST 2001:

Every time I try to do a twinkle in the eye, it comes out like a knowing wink.


Subject: Re: In The Interest Of Balance-Pertinent Criticism Of SOTCAA [ Previous Message ]
Posted By 'ollie' on Sat Aug 11 04:26:50 BST 2001:

>i agree. this accusation (joylessness, no 'twinkle') has been levelled at big train and i just cant see it. they seem to be having a whale of a time to me.

i know the big train thread came and went amid much argument, but i saw a trailer for it on play uk the other day, it was florence nightingale swearing, apparently it was supposed to be funny, but it wasn't.



Subject: Re: In The Interest Of Balance-Pertinent Criticism Of SOTCAA [ Previous Message ]
Posted By 'Music for Comedians' on Sat Aug 11 04:38:11 BST 2001:


>How this website could be improved: Getting rid of all the emotionless, robotic Numanoids who feel compelled to write about how they puked up over other people's candid reactions.

All right ill go then but first has anyone got Bezerker on blue vinyl?


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