stats (long)

Quoted message said:

I didn't even show up

Katherine

This you?

30 Katherine............................. 78 46 60.9% 0.6% 0.7%

Mark Thompson said:

Quoted message said:

I didn't even show up

Katherine

This you?

30 Katherine............................. 78 46 60.9% 0.6% 0.7%

How did I miss that! Actually there are two Katherines or there were
for a while.

Katherine

Katherine <[email hidden]> wrote in news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Mark Thompson said:

Quoted message said:

I didn't even show up

Katherine

This you?

30 Katherine............................. 78 46 60.9% 0.6% 0.7%

How did I miss that! Actually there are two Katherines or there were
for a while.

Katherine

Perhaps that was the other one then?

--
Adrian

"AndyP" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:coumq3$5dr$4
@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk:

Quoted message said:

"Geoff Berrow" <[email hidden]> wrote

Here are the stats for everything I have on my machine

Quoted message said:

1 Paul Saunders......................... 1187 33 24.6% 9.7% 11.7%
2 Peewiglet............................. 1073 28 32.4% 8.8% 7.4%
3 Gordon................................ 582 22 58.9% 4.7% 3.8%

[etc, etc,]

Are there prizes involved?

If there were, Paul would be loaded by now.

--
Adrian

In message <[email hidden]>, AndyP
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

"Geoff Berrow" <[email hidden]> wrote

Here are the stats for everything I have on my machine

Quoted message said:

1 Paul Saunders......................... 1187 33 24.6% 9.7% 11.7%
2 Peewiglet............................. 1073 28 32.4% 8.8% 7.4%
3 Gordon................................ 582 22 58.9% 4.7% 3.8%

[etc, etc,]

Are there prizes involved?

No - not even many sur-prizes. -)
--
Gordon Harris

Gordon Harris said:

In message <[email hidden]>, AndyP
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

"Geoff Berrow" <[email hidden]> wrote

Here are the stats for everything I have on my machine

Quoted message said:

1 Paul Saunders......................... 1187 33 24.6% 9.7% 11.7%
2 Peewiglet............................. 1073 28 32.4% 8.8% 7.4%
3 Gordon................................ 582 22 58.9% 4.7% 3.8%

[etc, etc,]

Are there prizes involved?

No - not even many sur-prizes. -)

I think I've been the subject of some sort of computational error...

<fx: PW hangs head guiltily in the corner>

Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \

I noticed that Message-ID: <[email hidden]>
from Peewiglet contained the following:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

No - not even many sur-prizes. -)

I think I've been the subject of some sort of computational error...

I'll have a word with my computer...

--
Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/

1110 0010 1011 0011 ........ is a good one
;-)

Quoted message said:

I'll have a word with my computer...

Quoted message said:

Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/

I noticed that Message-ID: <[email hidden]> from
Bryan Hall contained the following:

Quoted message said:

1110 0010 1011 0011 ........ is a good one
;-)

â³?

I could always say

010001000110111101101110001001110111010000100000011011010110000101101011011001010010000001100101011100100111001001101111011100100111001100101110

--
Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/

In article <[email hidden]>, Darren G
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

TT Person # AML QP PGM PGB
--- ------ ---- --- ----- ----- -----
1 Paul Saunders......................... 1187 33 24.6% 9.7% 11.7%
2 Peewiglet............................. 1073 28 32.4% 8.8% 7.4%
3 Gordon................................ 582 22 58.9% 4.7% 3.8%
4 W. D. Grey............................ 482 17 39.2% 3.9% 2.4%
5 Fran.................................. 474 22 53.4% 3.9% 3.2%
6 Phil Cook............................. 323 24 48.2% 2.6% 2.4%
7 RJ Webb............................... 309 19 29.8% 2.5% 1.5%
8 Darren G.............................. 297 29 53.7% 2.4% 2.7%

The South Wales contingent are embarrassingly well placed.

For my part I apologise :-)
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk

In article <[email hidden]>, Gordon Harris
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

In message <[email hidden]>, AndyP
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

"Geoff Berrow" <[email hidden]> wrote

Here are the stats for everything I have on my machine

Quoted message said:

1 Paul Saunders......................... 1187 33 24.6% 9.7% 11.7%
2 Peewiglet............................. 1073 28 32.4% 8.8% 7.4%
3 Gordon................................ 582 22 58.9% 4.7% 3.8%

[etc, etc,]

Are there prizes involved?

No - not even many sur-prizes. -)

You see! In fourth place, I've dropped off the edge of the world :-(
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk

Rooney said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> 1 Paul Saunders......................... 1187 33 24.6% 9.7%
> 11.7%

No surprise there then!

...................... and he planned to take a break ...........

I think those dates *include* his break!

Actually they didn't. I took my break in August.

Took another break for the last fortnight but nobody really seemed to
notice...

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk

I noticed that Message-ID: <[email hidden]> from Paul
Saunders contained the following:

Quoted message said:

Took another break for the last fortnight but nobody really seemed to
notice...

/I/ noticed. Want a message ID?
--
Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/

Paul Saunders said:

Took another break for the last fortnight but nobody really seemed to
notice...

Akshally that are not true, *I* noticed you were in absentia (sic.?).

If you want to know about what its like when you're really not missed
just ask me; 8/9 days or so (computer died) and not a soul, not a
whymper! :,-(
;-)

PS thanks to those folk who added to my "washing/reproofing goretex"
thread, I wasn't able to say thanks for contributions (the above is
why). Thanks, belatedly!

SteveO
--
NE Climbers & walkers chat forum;
http://www.thenmc.org.uk/phpBB2/index.php

NMC website: http://www.thenmc.org.uk

Paul Saunders said:

Rooney said:

Quoted message said:

>> 1 Paul Saunders......................... 1187 33 24.6% 9.7%
>> 11.7%
>
> No surprise there then!

...................... and he planned to take a break ...........

I think those dates *include* his break!

Actually they didn't. I took my break in August.

Took another break for the last fortnight but nobody really seemed to
notice...

Paul

Your name seems vaguely familiar...

--

R
o
o
n
e
y

The message <[email hidden]>
from "Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

Took another break for the last fortnight but nobody really seemed to
notice...

Oh yes we did!

--
Roger Chapman so far this year 123 summits
New - 94 (Marilyns 14, Sweats 5, Outlying Fells 82)
Repeats - 29 (Marilyns 11, Sweats 21, Wainwrights 16, Outlying Fells 2)

Quoted message said:

Took another break for the last fortnight but nobody really seemed to
notice...

Was it a profitable one in photographic terms ?

--
Boo

Following up to Jhimmy

Quoted message said:

Damn, still not in the top 10. Where am I going wrong?

I'm down from 1st or 2nd to 28th or something.
--
Mike Reid
Wasdale-Thames path-London-photos "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" <-- you can email us@ this site
Eat-walk-Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" <-- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

Following up to Adrian Tupper

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I think there must be some mistake, I hardly ever post these days.
er...

Me neither. I was surprised at my number 33.

(Memories of being always in the top 5)

the question is why. I'm not doing as much walking, (Carol's bad
back). But I have two other factors, I only download threads that
might interest me, so I miss a lot of OT rambles, also having
subscribed to rec.travel, a large group which comes higher up my
alphabetical list, a lot of days I run out of time before I reach
w for walking.
--
Mike Reid
Wasdale-Thames path-London-photos "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" <-- you can email us@ this site
Eat-walk-Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" <-- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

Paul Saunders said:

Rooney said:

Quoted message said:

>> 1 Paul Saunders......................... 1187 33 24.6% 9.7%
>> 11.7%
>
> No surprise there then!

...................... and he planned to take a break ...........

I think those dates *include* his break!

Actually they didn't. I took my break in August.

Took another break for the last fortnight but nobody really seemed to
notice...

Oh we noticed alright. Somebody called you The Again Departed One. :-)

Did you get anything done about this new whizo website you promised us
ages ago? No I thought not.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"