T20 Cricket: some thoughts.

Merlin wrote:

skully wrote:

tac wrote:Probably c*ck and c*ckjuggler are the "nouns" skully is refering to, but they ain't that bad, are they?

That would be the ones tac. Use a "0" instead of a "o" perhaps. Or some of the amusing substitutes LP has used ealrier in the history of this short lived forum. I don't think our French hosts will get those nouns mixed up with a rooster.

I don't GAF but mebee the hosts will. I have images of Dello logging on and going "WTF, ya stoopid bunch of c0ckjanglers, what the hell are you playing at? That's it, I'm outta here."

So inserting substitute "letters" to form an abusive word is acceptable ?Despite the word being clearly recognized ?

Odd, I thought insertions were to disguise the word in order to avoid the C4 trapdoor that flagged the post as being unacceptable??

So what's the difference - purely as an example of course - between
cock ..... and c0ck ???

I think it's to do with programmes that automatically scan for profanities (hence the banning of words such as Essex or Middlesex by some programmes, although in those cases it is perfectly understandable.)

They get fooled by c**k or c--t I believe, even though us higher beings (with the honourable exceptions of a few here) can surmise the true meaning.

But I thought c*ckjuggling was merely juggling with male hens, a perfectly innocent and non-profane pastime (edit: as I see Gazza has so eloquently explained above.)

Merlin wrote:

Only for the next 10 minutes as he unleashes his pearls of wisdom to the equally stoopid ex Slurreyite Ward - both trying desperately to look intelligent - on Sky right now, between innings.

But like the Murphy's....

Get your Middx head off, Ramps is a damn articulate bloke.

BTW, he obviously left a wimp and Surrey made him a man. His averages and temprament are testament to that.

Some sense and reason, thanks SDCC. Dudes, no matter how rampant the testosterone is, it ain't hard to stick in the odd * to fool the profanity scanners. I assure you, I have had the urge to call certain people cnuts on a regular basis, but I don't, out of respect for JD's ace work.

skully wrote:Some sense and reason, thanks SDCC.

Uhhh, no worries

skully wrote:Some sense and reason, thanks SDCC. Dudes, no matter how rampant the testosterone is, it ain't hard to stick in the odd * to fool the profanity scanners. I assure you, I have had the urge to call certain people cnuts on a regular basis, but I don't, out of respect for JD's ace work.

Cnuts......aren't they just a version of KP nuts (salted or dry roast? I prefer salted myself). What's wrong with a few legumes packaged in small tin-foil bags that you buy in pubs as a fine accompaniment to excellent ale?

Merlin wrote:

skully wrote:

tac wrote:Probably c*ck and c*ckjuggler are the "nouns" skully is refering to, but they ain't that bad, are they?

That would be the ones tac. Use a "0" instead of a "o" perhaps. Or some of the amusing substitutes LP has used ealrier in the history of this short lived forum. I don't think our French hosts will get those nouns mixed up with a rooster.

I don't GAF but mebee the hosts will. I have images of Dello logging on and going "WTF, ya stoopid bunch of c0ckjanglers, what the hell are you playing at? That's it, I'm outta here."

So inserting substitute "letters" to form an abusive word is acceptable ?Despite the word being clearly recognized ?

Odd, I thought insertions were to disguise the word in order to avoid the C4 trapdoor that flagged the post as being unacceptable??

So what's the difference - purely as an example of course - between
cock ..... and c0ck ???

Sorry to state the obvious.

But ones got a zero in it the other has an o.

doctorspin wrote:

skully wrote:Some sense and reason, thanks SDCC. Dudes, no matter how rampant the testosterone is, it ain't hard to stick in the odd * to fool the profanity scanners. I assure you, I have had the urge to call certain people cnuts on a regular basis, but I don't, out of respect for JD's ace work.

Cnuts......aren't they just a version of KP nuts (salted or dry roast? I prefer salted myself). What's wrong with a few legumes packaged in small tin-foil bags that you buy in pubs as a fine accompaniment to excellent ale?

I though it was some Viking warlord?

But I prefer your version

holcs wrote:

doctorspin wrote:

skully wrote:Some sense and reason, thanks SDCC. Dudes, no matter how rampant the testosterone is, it ain't hard to stick in the odd * to fool the profanity scanners. I assure you, I have had the urge to call certain people cnuts on a regular basis, but I don't, out of respect for JD's ace work.

Cnuts......aren't they just a version of KP nuts (salted or dry roast? I prefer salted myself). What's wrong with a few legumes packaged in small tin-foil bags that you buy in pubs as a fine accompaniment to excellent ale?

I though it was some Viking warlord?

But I prefer your version

Canute, you cnut.

:D;)

So, judging by all this when historians recorded these details how can we be sure that he was King Cnut?

Maybe the historian thought he was a f'kin cnut?

JKLever wrote:So, judging by all this when historians recorded these details how can we be sure that he was King Cnut?

Maybe the historian thought he was a f'kin cnut?

No. They didn't censor in those days, something about not needing their @rse wiped.

PC certainly wasn't invented.

Jeeeezus, man say women talk a lot and gossip but this thread is full of the biggest load of absolute boring bollocks ever, ever, ever, ever, ever...

Invader Zim wrote:Okay, lets see at the end of this rubbish world cup what the 'close game' count is.

I think this might classify as "close"'

taipan wrote:

Invader Zim wrote:Okay, lets see at the end of this rubbish world cup what the 'close game' count is.

I think this might classify as "close"'

:D

I've just noticed that Zim beat Australia.

eowyn wrote:Jeeeezus, man say women talk a lot and gossip but this thread is full of the biggest load of absolute boring bollocks ever, ever, ever, ever, ever...

So you read all 10 pages then?
Lots and lots of b******* to keep you interested!

Rob I wrote:I've just noticed that Zim beat Australia.

Been watching the footie then?

Merlin wrote:

eowyn wrote:Jeeeezus, man say women talk a lot and gossip but this thread is full of the biggest load of absolute boring bollocks ever, ever, ever, ever, ever...

So you read all 10 pages then?
Lots and lots of bollocks to keep you interested!

I actually did, I shouldn't be so inerested in bollocks should I?

eowyn wrote:

Merlin wrote:

eowyn wrote:Jeeeezus, man say women talk a lot and gossip but this thread is full of the biggest load of absolute boring bollocks ever, ever, ever, ever, ever...

So you read all 10 pages then?
Lots and lots of bollocks to keep you interested!

I actually did, I shouldn't be so inerested in bollocks should I?

Too late, the interest has been noted ....

ps. I had to amend my post above to a series of asterisks ... skully would have had my b******s in a mincer otherwise.

Merlin wrote:

eowyn wrote:

Merlin wrote:

eowyn wrote:Jeeeezus, man say women talk a lot and gossip but this thread is full of the biggest load of absolute boring bollocks ever, ever, ever, ever, ever...

So you read all 10 pages then?
Lots and lots of bollocks to keep you interested!

I actually did, I shouldn't be so inerested in bollocks should I?

Too late, the interest has been noted ....

ps. I had to amend my post above to a series of asterisks ... skully would have had my b******s in a mincer otherwise.

My self interest of bollocks has been known for years by all, I was being self effacing. I think......

eowyn wrote:

Merlin wrote:

eowyn wrote:

Merlin wrote:

eowyn wrote:Jeeeezus, man say women talk a lot and gossip but this thread is full of the biggest load of absolute boring bollocks ever, ever, ever, ever, ever...

So you read all 10 pages then?
Lots and lots of bollocks to keep you interested!

I actually did, I shouldn't be so inerested in bollocks should I?

Too late, the interest has been noted ....

ps. I had to amend my post above to a series of asterisks ... skully would have had my b******s in a mincer otherwise.

My self interest of bollocks has been known for years by all, I was being self effacing. I think......

Facing up to ************'s?

up, down, along and sideways, is there any other way?

taipan wrote:

Rob I wrote:I've just noticed that Zim beat Australia.

Been watching the footie then?

Three-nilllllllllllllllllllllllllllll, to the Engerlund!

Yet to have a close game in this tournament...