Welcome. This site is an archived version of the previous UpTheSaddlers forum (December 2004 to May 2018). To visit the new UTS website, please click here.

No-one signs!!!!!!!

Threads that have run on UpTheSaddlers that might or might not be worth keeping...
User avatar
PerStener
UTS Veteran
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:19 pm
Location: Skärplinge, Sweden

Sat Jul 21, 2007 3:03 pm

Purple Toucan Saddler wrote:
PerStener wrote:Theres a post on the official website's messageboard that we are going to sign a Aston Villa midfielder on Monday..

Pretty strange if the will let him go.. they signed a new 2 year contract with him in December last year... It's probably just a wind up so I wouldn't put any thoughts into it to be honest...

The person making that post have mentioned a name which is Isaiah Osbourne.

The post includes following text:

isiah osboure is said to have completed a free transfer form villa park.

martin o'neill said "Isiah has interest from clubs and looks to be n his way out" << daily star

the deal is set to be confirmed on monday


Well please try harder to be silly in the future and then I will be happy.

Can you also confirm, was your post a joke or not, as we don't want the same kind of confusion that Phil has caused if you start saying you were joking when you start to look like an idiot if it doesn't come off :lol:



I'm not making it up... I visited the message forum on the official website and found this information posted there.
I don't know if the post on the official website message forum it's a wind up though..

User avatar
Purple Toucan Saddler
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2005 10:23 am
Location: To infinity (and beyond)

Sat Jul 21, 2007 3:04 pm

PerStener wrote:
Purple Toucan Saddler wrote:
PerStener wrote:Theres a post on the official website's messageboard that we are going to sign a Aston Villa midfielder on Monday..

Pretty strange if the will let him go.. they signed a new 2 year contract with him in December last year... It's probably just a wind up so I wouldn't put any thoughts into it to be honest...

The person making that post have mentioned a name which is Isaiah Osbourne.

The post includes following text:

isiah osboure is said to have completed a free transfer form villa park.

martin o'neill said "Isiah has interest from clubs and looks to be n his way out" << daily star

the deal is set to be confirmed on monday


Well please try harder to be silly in the future and then I will be happy.

Can you also confirm, was your post a joke or not, as we don't want the same kind of confusion that Phil has caused if you start saying you were joking when you start to look like an idiot if it doesn't come off :lol:



I'm not making it up... I visited the message forum on the official website and found this information posted there.
I don't know if the post on the official website message forum it's a wind up though..


You will now be held personally responsible if it is :twisted:

User avatar
PerStener
UTS Veteran
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:19 pm
Location: Skärplinge, Sweden

Sat Jul 21, 2007 3:07 pm

Purple Toucan Saddler wrote:
PerStener wrote:
Purple Toucan Saddler wrote:
PerStener wrote:Theres a post on the official website's messageboard that we are going to sign a Aston Villa midfielder on Monday..

Pretty strange if the will let him go.. they signed a new 2 year contract with him in December last year... It's probably just a wind up so I wouldn't put any thoughts into it to be honest...

The person making that post have mentioned a name which is Isaiah Osbourne.

The post includes following text:

isiah osboure is said to have completed a free transfer form villa park.

martin o'neill said "Isiah has interest from clubs and looks to be n his way out" << daily star

the deal is set to be confirmed on monday


Well please try harder to be silly in the future and then I will be happy.

Can you also confirm, was your post a joke or not, as we don't want the same kind of confusion that Phil has caused if you start saying you were joking when you start to look like an idiot if it doesn't come off :lol:



I'm not making it up... I visited the message forum on the official website and found this information posted there.
I don't know if the post on the official website message forum it's a wind up though..


You will now be held personally responsible if it is :twisted:


Thats fine with me...... I think :x :lol:

User avatar
geoffwhiting
Site Addict
 
Posts: 4448
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:02 pm
Location: on the Walsall/Chasetown border

Sat Jul 21, 2007 3:09 pm

stafflers wrote:The php message board software is very stable and can cope with large numbers of posts. UTS is big in terms of football sites, but I'm a member of a couple of non-football related message boards with far higher usage than this.

The recent troubles have had, in my view, very little to do with number of posts etc - the note from admin mentioned a hackattack. Threads like this do not cause a problem. In many ways they actually help, because while a thread like this is in full swing posts on other threads tend to dip so I would guess the post per day ratio tends to be fairly static. In any event it is unlikely that any swing towards more posts would cause problems.



The post from Admin did indeed mention Hackattack. However, when the Site was back up and running, the Admin message was (I believe) that memory had been doubled, with the addition of a potential suicide threat if that didn't do the trick! :D

The site has been stable since then, as far as I have observed, so it's probably the likely explanation that it was indeed a memory-based problem that we were having. I have to say that I have no other evidence to confirm this though, at least not at this stage. Maybe Steve can enlighten me/us.

Someone above suggested that it was up to us moderators only to see that the rules of the site are not broken, and that is obviously our main function, but I think it goes beyond that, especially in circumstances that might be threatening the site's ability to function without problems. Technical dificulties have caused this site to crash several times recently, so if there are ways of preventing such events, why would we not involve ourselves in that when we have the facilities available to us to do so?

Until I am told otherwise from "above" that I should not regard this as part of my function, I shall consider it to be so. FOURTEEN pages of this thread, of which I'd guesstimate 85%-90% is drivel, is a waste of resources, but I am glad to see that it appears (currently at least) to have stalled (except we're now up to FIFTEEN).
Last edited by geoffwhiting on Sat Jul 21, 2007 3:32 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Geordiesaddler
UTS Legend
 
Posts: 1568
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:02 am
Location: Whitley Bay.

Sat Jul 21, 2007 3:21 pm

PerStener wrote:Theres a post on the official website's messageboard that we are going to sign a Aston Villa midfielder on Monday..

Pretty strange if the will let him go.. they signed a new 2 year contract with him in December last year... It's probably just a wind up so I wouldn't put any thoughts into it to be honest...

The person making that post have mentioned a name which is Isaiah Osbourne.

The post includes following text:

isiah osboure is said to have completed a free transfer form villa park.

martin o'neill said "Isiah has interest from clubs and looks to be n his way out" << daily star

the deal is set to be confirmed on monday


Get In!!!!!!

What a signing!

PS, is it Osborn, Osbourn or Osbourne???

User avatar
PerStener
UTS Veteran
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:19 pm
Location: Skärplinge, Sweden

Sat Jul 21, 2007 3:28 pm

Geordiesaddler wrote:
PerStener wrote:Theres a post on the official website's messageboard that we are going to sign a Aston Villa midfielder on Monday..

Pretty strange if the will let him go.. they signed a new 2 year contract with him in December last year... It's probably just a wind up so I wouldn't put any thoughts into it to be honest...

The person making that post have mentioned a name which is Isaiah Osbourne.

The post includes following text:

isiah osboure is said to have completed a free transfer form villa park.

martin o'neill said "Isiah has interest from clubs and looks to be n his way out" << daily star

the deal is set to be confirmed on monday


Get In!!!!!!

What a signing!

PS, is it Osborn, Osbourn or Osbourne???


Osbourne

User avatar
Whitti Steve
Past UTS Benefactor
 
Posts: 5703
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 9:33 am
Location: Here

Sat Jul 21, 2007 4:04 pm

geoffwhiting wrote:
stafflers wrote:The php message board software is very stable and can cope with large numbers of posts. UTS is big in terms of football sites, but I'm a member of a couple of non-football related message boards with far higher usage than this.

The recent troubles have had, in my view, very little to do with number of posts etc - the note from admin mentioned a hackattack. Threads like this do not cause a problem. In many ways they actually help, because while a thread like this is in full swing posts on other threads tend to dip so I would guess the post per day ratio tends to be fairly static. In any event it is unlikely that any swing towards more posts would cause problems.



The post from Admin did indeed mention Hackattack. However, when the Site was back up and running, the Admin message was (I believe) that memory had been doubled, with the addition of a potential suicide threat if that didn't do the trick! :D

The site has been stable since then, as far as I have observed, so it's probably the likely explanation that it was indeed a memory-based problem that we were having. I have to say that I have no other evidence to confirm this though, at least not at this stage. Maybe Steve can enlighten me/us.

Someone above suggested that it was up to us moderators only to see that the rules of the site are not broken, and that is obviously our main function, but I think it goes beyond that, especially in circumstances that might be threatening the site's ability to function without problems. Technical dificulties have caused this site to crash several times recently, so if there are ways of preventing such events, why would we not involve ourselves in that when we have the facilities available to us to do so?

Until I am told otherwise from "above" that I should not regard this as part of my function, I shall consider it to be so. FOURTEEN pages of this thread, of which I'd guesstimate 85%-90% is drivel, is a waste of resources, but I am glad to see that it appears (currently at least) to have stalled (except we're now up to FIFTEEN).


Perhaps a lot is drivel, but if we hadn't written it here, it would only be elsewhere :wink:

User avatar
geoffwhiting
Site Addict
 
Posts: 4448
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:02 pm
Location: on the Walsall/Chasetown border

Sat Jul 21, 2007 4:28 pm

Aldridge Steve wrote:
geoffwhiting wrote:
stafflers wrote:The php message board software is very stable and can cope with large numbers of posts. UTS is big in terms of football sites, but I'm a member of a couple of non-football related message boards with far higher usage than this.

The recent troubles have had, in my view, very little to do with number of posts etc - the note from admin mentioned a hackattack. Threads like this do not cause a problem. In many ways they actually help, because while a thread like this is in full swing posts on other threads tend to dip so I would guess the post per day ratio tends to be fairly static. In any event it is unlikely that any swing towards more posts would cause problems.



The post from Admin did indeed mention Hackattack. However, when the Site was back up and running, the Admin message was (I believe) that memory had been doubled, with the addition of a potential suicide threat if that didn't do the trick! :D

The site has been stable since then, as far as I have observed, so it's probably the likely explanation that it was indeed a memory-based problem that we were having. I have to say that I have no other evidence to confirm this though, at least not at this stage. Maybe Steve can enlighten me/us.

Someone above suggested that it was up to us moderators only to see that the rules of the site are not broken, and that is obviously our main function, but I think it goes beyond that, especially in circumstances that might be threatening the site's ability to function without problems. Technical dificulties have caused this site to crash several times recently, so if there are ways of preventing such events, why would we not involve ourselves in that when we have the facilities available to us to do so?

Until I am told otherwise from "above" that I should not regard this as part of my function, I shall consider it to be so. FOURTEEN pages of this thread, of which I'd guesstimate 85%-90% is drivel, is a waste of resources, but I am glad to see that it appears (currently at least) to have stalled (except we're now up to FIFTEEN).


Perhaps a lot is drivel, but if we hadn't written it here, it would only be elsewhere :wink:


OK, maybe they can put it elsewhere then, but perhaps think first and be more sensible about it when they do.

User avatar
Exile
Jobsworth
 
Posts: 23623
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 7:06 pm
Location: ヽ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ノ

Sat Jul 21, 2007 9:53 pm

PerStener wrote:
Geordiesaddler wrote:
PerStener wrote:Theres a post on the official website's messageboard that we are going to sign a Aston Villa midfielder on Monday..

Pretty strange if the will let him go.. they signed a new 2 year contract with him in December last year... It's probably just a wind up so I wouldn't put any thoughts into it to be honest...

The person making that post have mentioned a name which is Isaiah Osbourne.

The post includes following text:

isiah osboure is said to have completed a free transfer form villa park.

martin o'neill said "Isiah has interest from clubs and looks to be n his way out" << daily star

the deal is set to be confirmed on monday


Get In!!!!!!

What a signing!

PS, is it Osborn, Osbourn or Osbourne???


Osbourne


Osborne, surely? :mrgreen:

We-ARE-Walsall
Site Addict
 
Posts: 8041
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 10:23 am
Location: Fighting for the town.

Sat Jul 21, 2007 9:56 pm

an Osbourne, osborn , or whatever, used to play for one of our local rivals, its doomed from the start i tell ya

User avatar
Diddy_P
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 12:45 pm
Location: Liuving life to the full in Chezzo :D

Sat Jul 21, 2007 11:38 pm

OZZY OSBOURNE 8)

User avatar
Cheesebag
Site Addict
 
Posts: 4801
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: At poo poo's house, apparently ;)

Sun Jul 22, 2007 7:23 am

geoffwhiting wrote:
stafflers wrote:The php message board software is very stable and can cope with large numbers of posts. UTS is big in terms of football sites, but I'm a member of a couple of non-football related message boards with far higher usage than this.

The recent troubles have had, in my view, very little to do with number of posts etc - the note from admin mentioned a hackattack. Threads like this do not cause a problem. In many ways they actually help, because while a thread like this is in full swing posts on other threads tend to dip so I would guess the post per day ratio tends to be fairly static. In any event it is unlikely that any swing towards more posts would cause problems.



The post from Admin did indeed mention Hackattack. However, when the Site was back up and running, the Admin message was (I believe) that memory had been doubled, with the addition of a potential suicide threat if that didn't do the trick! :D

The site has been stable since then, as far as I have observed, so it's probably the likely explanation that it was indeed a memory-based problem that we were having. I have to say that I have no other evidence to confirm this though, at least not at this stage. Maybe Steve can enlighten me/us.

Someone above suggested that it was up to us moderators only to see that the rules of the site are not broken, and that is obviously our main function, but I think it goes beyond that, especially in circumstances that might be threatening the site's ability to function without problems. Technical dificulties have caused this site to crash several times recently, so if there are ways of preventing such events, why would we not involve ourselves in that when we have the facilities available to us to do so?

Until I am told otherwise from "above" that I should not regard this as part of my function, I shall consider it to be so. FOURTEEN pages of this thread, of which I'd guesstimate 85%-90% is drivel, is a waste of resources, but I am glad to see that it appears (currently at least) to have stalled (except we're now up to FIFTEEN).


Geoff, You do realise that the more you get wound up about this, the longer the thread will run. :?

User avatar
Whitti Steve
Past UTS Benefactor
 
Posts: 5703
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 9:33 am
Location: Here

Sun Jul 22, 2007 7:29 am

Cheesebag wrote:
geoffwhiting wrote:
stafflers wrote:The php message board software is very stable and can cope with large numbers of posts. UTS is big in terms of football sites, but I'm a member of a couple of non-football related message boards with far higher usage than this.

The recent troubles have had, in my view, very little to do with number of posts etc - the note from admin mentioned a hackattack. Threads like this do not cause a problem. In many ways they actually help, because while a thread like this is in full swing posts on other threads tend to dip so I would guess the post per day ratio tends to be fairly static. In any event it is unlikely that any swing towards more posts would cause problems.



The post from Admin did indeed mention Hackattack. However, when the Site was back up and running, the Admin message was (I believe) that memory had been doubled, with the addition of a potential suicide threat if that didn't do the trick! :D

The site has been stable since then, as far as I have observed, so it's probably the likely explanation that it was indeed a memory-based problem that we were having. I have to say that I have no other evidence to confirm this though, at least not at this stage. Maybe Steve can enlighten me/us.

Someone above suggested that it was up to us moderators only to see that the rules of the site are not broken, and that is obviously our main function, but I think it goes beyond that, especially in circumstances that might be threatening the site's ability to function without problems. Technical dificulties have caused this site to crash several times recently, so if there are ways of preventing such events, why would we not involve ourselves in that when we have the facilities available to us to do so?

Until I am told otherwise from "above" that I should not regard this as part of my function, I shall consider it to be so. FOURTEEN pages of this thread, of which I'd guesstimate 85%-90% is drivel, is a waste of resources, but I am glad to see that it appears (currently at least) to have stalled (except we're now up to FIFTEEN).


Geoff, You do realise that the more you get wound up about this, the longer the thread will run. :?


Dont answer him Geoff - he is only trying to provoke another response :lol:

User avatar
Exile
Jobsworth
 
Posts: 23623
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 7:06 pm
Location: ヽ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ノ

Sun Jul 22, 2007 8:08 am

Aldridge Steve wrote:
Cheesebag wrote:
geoffwhiting wrote:
stafflers wrote:The php message board software is very stable and can cope with large numbers of posts. UTS is big in terms of football sites, but I'm a member of a couple of non-football related message boards with far higher usage than this.

The recent troubles have had, in my view, very little to do with number of posts etc - the note from admin mentioned a hackattack. Threads like this do not cause a problem. In many ways they actually help, because while a thread like this is in full swing posts on other threads tend to dip so I would guess the post per day ratio tends to be fairly static. In any event it is unlikely that any swing towards more posts would cause problems.



The post from Admin did indeed mention Hackattack. However, when the Site was back up and running, the Admin message was (I believe) that memory had been doubled, with the addition of a potential suicide threat if that didn't do the trick! :D

The site has been stable since then, as far as I have observed, so it's probably the likely explanation that it was indeed a memory-based problem that we were having. I have to say that I have no other evidence to confirm this though, at least not at this stage. Maybe Steve can enlighten me/us.

Someone above suggested that it was up to us moderators only to see that the rules of the site are not broken, and that is obviously our main function, but I think it goes beyond that, especially in circumstances that might be threatening the site's ability to function without problems. Technical dificulties have caused this site to crash several times recently, so if there are ways of preventing such events, why would we not involve ourselves in that when we have the facilities available to us to do so?

Until I am told otherwise from "above" that I should not regard this as part of my function, I shall consider it to be so. FOURTEEN pages of this thread, of which I'd guesstimate 85%-90% is drivel, is a waste of resources, but I am glad to see that it appears (currently at least) to have stalled (except we're now up to FIFTEEN).


Geoff, You do realise that the more you get wound up about this, the longer the thread will run. :?


Dont answer him Geoff - he is only trying to provoke another response :lol:


I agree :mrgreen:

User avatar
stafflers
UTS Regular
 
Posts: 185
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 8:00 am
Location: Don't Ask. INOYFB

Sun Jul 22, 2007 10:06 am

Exile wrote:
Aldridge Steve wrote:
Cheesebag wrote:
geoffwhiting wrote:
stafflers wrote:The php message board software is very stable and can cope with large numbers of posts. UTS is big in terms of football sites, but I'm a member of a couple of non-football related message boards with far higher usage than this.

The recent troubles have had, in my view, very little to do with number of posts etc - the note from admin mentioned a hackattack. Threads like this do not cause a problem. In many ways they actually help, because while a thread like this is in full swing posts on other threads tend to dip so I would guess the post per day ratio tends to be fairly static. In any event it is unlikely that any swing towards more posts would cause problems.



The post from Admin did indeed mention Hackattack. However, when the Site was back up and running, the Admin message was (I believe) that memory had been doubled, with the addition of a potential suicide threat if that didn't do the trick! :D

The site has been stable since then, as far as I have observed, so it's probably the likely explanation that it was indeed a memory-based problem that we were having. I have to say that I have no other evidence to confirm this though, at least not at this stage. Maybe Steve can enlighten me/us.

Someone above suggested that it was up to us moderators only to see that the rules of the site are not broken, and that is obviously our main function, but I think it goes beyond that, especially in circumstances that might be threatening the site's ability to function without problems. Technical dificulties have caused this site to crash several times recently, so if there are ways of preventing such events, why would we not involve ourselves in that when we have the facilities available to us to do so?

Until I am told otherwise from "above" that I should not regard this as part of my function, I shall consider it to be so. FOURTEEN pages of this thread, of which I'd guesstimate 85%-90% is drivel, is a waste of resources, but I am glad to see that it appears (currently at least) to have stalled (except we're now up to FIFTEEN).


Geoff, You do realise that the more you get wound up about this, the longer the thread will run. :?


Dont answer him Geoff - he is only trying to provoke another response :lol:


I agree :mrgreen:


Yes. That's what I was thinking :|

User avatar
geoffwhiting
Site Addict
 
Posts: 4448
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:02 pm
Location: on the Walsall/Chasetown border

Sun Jul 22, 2007 4:11 pm

Cheesebag wrote:
geoffwhiting wrote:
stafflers wrote:The php message board software is very stable and can cope with large numbers of posts. UTS is big in terms of football sites, but I'm a member of a couple of non-football related message boards with far higher usage than this.

The recent troubles have had, in my view, very little to do with number of posts etc - the note from admin mentioned a hackattack. Threads like this do not cause a problem. In many ways they actually help, because while a thread like this is in full swing posts on other threads tend to dip so I would guess the post per day ratio tends to be fairly static. In any event it is unlikely that any swing towards more posts would cause problems.



The post from Admin did indeed mention Hackattack. However, when the Site was back up and running, the Admin message was (I believe) that memory had been doubled, with the addition of a potential suicide threat if that didn't do the trick! :D

The site has been stable since then, as far as I have observed, so it's probably the likely explanation that it was indeed a memory-based problem that we were having. I have to say that I have no other evidence to confirm this though, at least not at this stage. Maybe Steve can enlighten me/us.

Someone above suggested that it was up to us moderators only to see that the rules of the site are not broken, and that is obviously our main function, but I think it goes beyond that, especially in circumstances that might be threatening the site's ability to function without problems. Technical dificulties have caused this site to crash several times recently, so if there are ways of preventing such events, why would we not involve ourselves in that when we have the facilities available to us to do so?

Until I am told otherwise from "above" that I should not regard this as part of my function, I shall consider it to be so. FOURTEEN pages of this thread, of which I'd guesstimate 85%-90% is drivel, is a waste of resources, but I am glad to see that it appears (currently at least) to have stalled (except we're now up to FIFTEEN).


Geoff, You do realise that the more you get wound up about this, the longer the thread will run. :?


Perhaps, but not necessarily, I have this button you see Cheesey, and may be about to use it, particularly when someone is taking the pee ! :wink:

User avatar
Magic Man Fan
Site Addict
 
Posts: 10977
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 6:30 pm
Location: Warning. Some posts may cause offence...to the over sensitive or slow.

Sun Jul 22, 2007 4:43 pm

geoffwhiting wrote:
Cheesebag wrote:
geoffwhiting wrote:
stafflers wrote:The php message board software is very stable and can cope with large numbers of posts. UTS is big in terms of football sites, but I'm a member of a couple of non-football related message boards with far higher usage than this.

The recent troubles have had, in my view, very little to do with number of posts etc - the note from admin mentioned a hackattack. Threads like this do not cause a problem. In many ways they actually help, because while a thread like this is in full swing posts on other threads tend to dip so I would guess the post per day ratio tends to be fairly static. In any event it is unlikely that any swing towards more posts would cause problems.



The post from Admin did indeed mention Hackattack. However, when the Site was back up and running, the Admin message was (I believe) that memory had been doubled, with the addition of a potential suicide threat if that didn't do the trick! :D

The site has been stable since then, as far as I have observed, so it's probably the likely explanation that it was indeed a memory-based problem that we were having. I have to say that I have no other evidence to confirm this though, at least not at this stage. Maybe Steve can enlighten me/us.

Someone above suggested that it was up to us moderators only to see that the rules of the site are not broken, and that is obviously our main function, but I think it goes beyond that, especially in circumstances that might be threatening the site's ability to function without problems. Technical dificulties have caused this site to crash several times recently, so if there are ways of preventing such events, why would we not involve ourselves in that when we have the facilities available to us to do so?

Until I am told otherwise from "above" that I should not regard this as part of my function, I shall consider it to be so. FOURTEEN pages of this thread, of which I'd guesstimate 85%-90% is drivel, is a waste of resources, but I am glad to see that it appears (currently at least) to have stalled (except we're now up to FIFTEEN).


Geoff, You do realise that the more you get wound up about this, the longer the thread will run. :?


Perhaps, but not necessarily, I have this button you see Cheesey, and may be about to use it, particularly when someone is taking the pee ! :wink:


As I said on the other board geoff I don't see how you can. As far as I can see there's nothing on here that goes against the AUP.

You don't like it so don't read it but lots of people have commented on this thread as it reminds them why they like UTS. It's a matter of opinion geoff but it's nothing offensive and I really don't think memory is a problem now admin has upgraded. Text in this form takes up very little bandwith, it's pictures that cause problems. Of course if admin wants to set guidelines for pages of "rubbish", he can. :D

User avatar
geoffwhiting
Site Addict
 
Posts: 4448
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:02 pm
Location: on the Walsall/Chasetown border

Sun Jul 22, 2007 8:33 pm

Oops sorry guys, I locked it earlier after responding to Cheesey's pee-take, then got heavily involved in work that's on a tight deadline (yes, honestly) and totally forgot to go back and unlock it again.

I just finished the work, logged back on and saw the reaction.

Sincere apologies, it was never meant to stay locked for more than half an hour or so ! :oops:

We-ARE-Walsall
Site Addict
 
Posts: 8041
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 10:23 am
Location: Fighting for the town.

Sun Jul 22, 2007 8:33 pm

Who locked the second thread then :D

User avatar
Exile
Jobsworth
 
Posts: 23623
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 7:06 pm
Location: ヽ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ノ

Sun Jul 22, 2007 8:34 pm

Blazing_Saddler wrote:Who locked the second thread then :D


Not me.

We-ARE-Walsall
Site Addict
 
Posts: 8041
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 10:23 am
Location: Fighting for the town.

Sun Jul 22, 2007 8:35 pm

I guessed that, cos you would have told me to behave if it was you !

User avatar
geoffwhiting
Site Addict
 
Posts: 4448
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:02 pm
Location: on the Walsall/Chasetown border

Sun Jul 22, 2007 8:45 pm

Blazing_Saddler wrote:Who locked the second thread then :D


I promise you it was NOT me. In fact I was working all afternoon until about 15 minutes ago, so only saw "Part 2" when I logged back on this evening.

The original lock was only put on as a joke after I'd responded to Cheesey. You'll see from the smiley that it was only a light-hearted response. I never expected to forget to go back and unlock it again. :?

We-ARE-Walsall
Site Addict
 
Posts: 8041
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 10:23 am
Location: Fighting for the town.

Sun Jul 22, 2007 8:47 pm

Fair enough, i believe you of course , it's quite funny really :D

User avatar
Exile
Jobsworth
 
Posts: 23623
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 7:06 pm
Location: ヽ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ノ

Sun Jul 22, 2007 8:49 pm

Blazing_Saddler wrote:Fair enough, i believe you of course , it's quite funny really :D


in a Phil 'meant it all along' sort of way? :twisted:

User avatar
Kiansmom
Site Addict
 
Posts: 1277
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2006 9:18 am

Sun Jul 22, 2007 8:50 pm

Exile wrote:
Blazing_Saddler wrote:Fair enough, i believe you of course , it's quite funny really :D


in a Phil 'meant it all along' sort of way? :twisted:


Where is Phil? he's been very quiet

We-ARE-Walsall
Site Addict
 
Posts: 8041
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 10:23 am
Location: Fighting for the town.

Sun Jul 22, 2007 8:50 pm

Exile wrote:
Blazing_Saddler wrote:Fair enough, i believe you of course , it's quite funny really :D


in a Phil 'meant it all along' sort of way? :twisted:


exactly that yes !

User avatar
geoffwhiting
Site Addict
 
Posts: 4448
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:02 pm
Location: on the Walsall/Chasetown border

Sun Jul 22, 2007 8:52 pm

Exile wrote:
Blazing_Saddler wrote:Fair enough, i believe you of course , it's quite funny really :D


in a Phil 'meant it all along' sort of way? :twisted:


Thanks ! None of us are perfect, and me with this Altzheimers ain't helping a lot ! :oops:

User avatar
geoffwhiting
Site Addict
 
Posts: 4448
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:02 pm
Location: on the Walsall/Chasetown border

Sun Jul 22, 2007 8:55 pm

Now who's unlocked Part 2 then ? :?

User avatar
Zippy
Glitterati
 
Posts: 1196
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 2:31 pm
Location: Reality: Good honest support.

Sun Jul 22, 2007 8:56 pm

geoffwhiting wrote:Thanks ! None of us are perfect, and me with this Altzheimers ain't helping a lot ! :oops:


I'd forgot about that.

:)

User avatar
geoffwhiting
Site Addict
 
Posts: 4448
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:02 pm
Location: on the Walsall/Chasetown border

Sun Jul 22, 2007 8:59 pm

Zippyzip wrote:
geoffwhiting wrote:Thanks ! None of us are perfect, and me with this Altzheimers ain't helping a lot ! :oops:


I'd forgot about that.

:)


About what ? :lol: :lol:

PreviousNext
Return to UTS Classics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests