Net Rage

Denise · Post by **Denise** » Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:49 pm

I would like some Honesty seeds Shirley. I have at last managed to get Cuckoo flower to grow, in a tub away from the blasted slugs!

Susie, I'm not going to rise to the bait. I won't sleep if I get all wound up, but I will say that I think that blood sports are cruel.

Denise

Denise · Post by **Denise** » Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:51 pm

Garlic Mustard is doing fine thanks Susie. I'm looking forward to having some Orange-tip larvae in the spring

Denise

Susie · Post by **Susie** » Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:52 pm

Just cos it is cruel doesn't mean it couldn't be fun.

But I won't wind you up, we can agree to disagree on this one.

Glad to hear that your Cuckoo Flower (Lady's Smock) is doing well.

Honesty seeds are so pretty, I have left mine on the plant so far as I love the round papery discs.

eccles · Post by **eccles** » Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:50 pm

I heard about this berry thing. I have always picked blackberries. Around here the brambles are so deep that there's no way that anyone could get the berries in the middle, even the most arduous and thick skinned picker. There's always plenty enough left for the bird life to leave purple droppings everywhere. In fact I've seen them rotting on the bramble this year and last (the berries, that is, not the birds

).
This year, the season is already nearly over around Brizzle with the maggots filling out on the remaining fruit. This means that birds get a welcome hit of protein as well as fructose and other carbohydrates.
If people want to protect the environment, stop Labour's wholesale plundering of green belt land for housing.

NickB · Post by **NickB** » Fri Aug 29, 2008 11:36 pm

Oh dear!
Perhaps I should regurgitate that blackberry and apple crumble I had and put it back where I found them!

And what should I do with the Blackberry Jelly my son made? March him to the nearest Police Station I suppose!

NickB · Post by **NickB** » Sat Aug 30, 2008 10:08 pm

eccles wrote: If people want to protect the environment, stop Labour's wholesale plundering of green belt land for housing.

I think that if we take action to maintain corridors and manage our urban areas more sympathetically, it is possible to combine building more houses with improving the areas that we leave for wildlife overall. There are places in the centres of our towns like parks and public gardens where (and I guess I am thinking more about butterflies

than anything else - but most other things benefit too!) meadows and different habitats could be maintained at a similar cost to lawns and flower beds, I would guess.

N

Susie · Post by **Susie** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 6:53 pm

You lot are far too reasonable.

NickB · Post by **NickB** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 8:03 pm

Rosy Rustic wrote:You lot are far too reasonable.

Oh no we F*****g aren't!
We can argue black is white and pigs can fly, if we really want to get going......
N
PS Must keep taking those old-git tablets, I seem to have been coming over all sentimental recently!

NickB · Post by **NickB** » Mon Sep 22, 2008 8:15 pm

Come on then!
Let's form a line....DSLR on one side; non-DSLR the other..
(Rosy/Susie (I just can't keep up!) - Hope you can keep the book and sell tickets for the follow-on? Gruditch looks a big lad, so I'm glad he's on the right team!)

Let us start with....

DSLRs -

How much? £#**#!
And then you pay (how much? £#**#) for each lens?
And you don't have IS-in body? (Yeah, yeah Eccles)
And it weighs, how much? #**#!
And you still have to set all the buttons yourself?

whereas

Compacts -

Cheap with IS in-body and
It's got 16 lovely scene modes
It's light and easy to use...
But aren't they noisy little buggers? Can't go above ISO100....if you don't want snow!
And only f/what? f/11 if you are lucky?
And call that a lens? A 28-300 "all-things-to-all-men" and a digital zoom too!

Shirley Roulston · Post by **Shirley Roulston** » Mon Sep 22, 2008 8:30 pm

Nick. GO TO BED.

Susie · Post by **Susie** » Mon Sep 22, 2008 8:36 pm

NickB wrote: (Rosy/Susie (I just can't keep up!)

You can get pills for that, y'know.

NickB · Post by **NickB** » Mon Sep 22, 2008 9:19 pm

Nurse! Susie says it's time for my pills!

Gruditch · Post by **Gruditch** » Tue Sep 23, 2008 6:35 am

NickB wrote:Come on then!
Let's form a line....DSLR on one side; non-DSLR the other..
(Rosy/Susie (I just can't keep up!) - Hope you can keep the book and sell tickets for the follow-on? Gruditch looks a big lad, so I'm glad he's on the right team!)

Photographs like television, add on the pounds, and height in this case, I'm actually a short arse, who weighs less then seven stone, oh and a pacifist. Well not really a pacifist and quite a bit more than seven stone, but still a short arse.

But if we are to fight, I think divide and conquer would be a good plan, so three sides.

The Mighty DSLR's, that's us,

The Poxy Bridger's, the guys who went out to get a DSLR but ended up in Jessops, where the spotty assistant, who usually works in Burger King, talked them into a Bridge.

And The Tight Ass Compactors, the guys who found their camera after pulling a Christmas cracker.

Gruditch

Jack Harrison · Post by **Jack Harrison** » Tue Sep 23, 2008 6:50 am

Gruditch wrote that he is a:

a short arse

Ladies. You might be able to answer this. Are men of reduced stature (vertically challenged) proportionally challenged in other parts of their anatomy?

Jack

Denise · Post by **Denise** » Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:00 am

I can't speak from experience, but Gruditch looks pretty well toned to me! (very fit and muscular) and tanned.
Gwennie, over to you.

Denise

NickB · Post by **NickB** » Tue Sep 23, 2008 8:32 am

jackharr wrote:Gruditch wrote that he is a:
a short arse
Ladies. You might be able to answer this. Are men of reduced stature (vertically challenged) proportionally challenged in other parts of their anatomy?

Jack

Surely the saying is - "A short arse and a long .......!"

Tony Moore · Post by **Tony Moore** » Tue Sep 23, 2008 11:34 am

I am reliably informed that it is nothing to do with the size of your wand - just how much magic!

Annie · Post by **Annie** » Tue Sep 23, 2008 12:51 pm

jackharr wrote:Gruditch wrote that he is a:
a short arse
Ladies. You might be able to answer this. Are men of reduced stature (vertically challenged) proportionally challenged in other parts of their anatomy?

Jack

Jack - a long time ago I dated a chap who was 6'10" - he had very, very large feet but there seemed to be some sort of inverse correlation between these and his, erm, um, ears

Charles Nicol · Post by **Charles Nicol** » Tue Sep 23, 2008 12:58 pm

There was a young man from Nantucket
Whose **** was so long he could **** it;
He said with a grin,
Whilst wiping his chin ~
"If my ear was a **** i could **** it !!"

Charles

Susie · Post by **Susie** » Tue Sep 23, 2008 2:22 pm

Annie wrote:
jackharr wrote:Gruditch wrote that he is a:
a short arse
Ladies. You might be able to answer this. Are men of reduced stature (vertically challenged) proportionally challenged in other parts of their anatomy?

Jack
Jack - a long time ago I dated a chap who was 6'10" - he had very, very large feet but there seemed to be some sort of inverse correlation between these and his, erm, um, ears

Likewise. My first proper boyfriend was 6'5" tall, size 14 feet. The man I chose to marry and have been happily married to for the last 15 years is only 5'8" tall but so much more man.

Utimately, like most things in life though and particularly camera equipment, it is not what you have but how you use it which counts.

Net Rage

Re: Net Rage

Re: Net Rage

Re: Net Rage

Re: Net Rage

Re: Net Rage

Re: Net Rage

Re: Net Rage

Re: Net Rage

Re: Net Rage - the Sequel: Net Rage II

Re: Net Rage

Re: Net Rage - the Sequel: Net Rage II

Re: Net Rage

Re: Net Rage

Re: Net Rage

Re: Net Rage

Re: Net Rage

Re: Net Rage

Re: Net Rage

Re: Net Rage

Re: Net Rage