This just got my "Post Of TheYear Award" nomination.
Dave
Red Midget wrote:
> How many listmembers does it take to change a lightbulb?
>
>One to change the light bulb and to post that the light bulb has been
>changed.
>
>Fourteen to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how
>the light bulb could have been changed differently.
>
>Seven to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs.
>
>Seven more to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing
>light bulbs.
>
>Five to flame the spell checkers.
>
>Three to correct spelling/grammar flames.
>
>Six to argue over whether it's "lightbulb" or "light bulb" ...
>
>Another six to condemn those six as stupid.
>
>Fifteen to claim experience in the lighting industry and give the
>correct spelling.
>
>Nineteen to post that this group is not about light bulbs and to please
>take this discussion to a lightbulb (or light bulb) forum.
>
>Eleven to defend the posting to the group saying that we all use light
>bulbs and therefore the posts are relevant to this group.
>
>Thirty six to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior,
>where to buy the best light bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best
>for this technique and what brands are faulty.
>
>Seven to post URLs where one can see examples of different light bulbs.
>
>Four to post that the URLs were posted incorrectly and then post the
>corrected URL.
>
>Three to post about links they found from the URLs that are relevant to
>this group which makes light bulbs relevant to this group.
>
>Thirteen to link all posts to date, quote them in their entirety
>including all headers and signatures, and add "Me too"
>
>Five to post to the group that they will no longer post because they
>cannot handle the light bulb controversy.
>
>Four to say "didn't we go through this already a short time ago?"
>
>Thirteen to say "do a Google search on light bulbs before posting
>questions about light bulbs."
>
>Three to tell a funny story about their cat and a light bulb.
>
>AND
>
>One group lurker to respond to the original post 6 months from now with
>something unrelated they found at snopes.com and start it all over again!
|