Following on from the Eight Words Game, did anyone watch the '50 Greatest Comedy Sketches' programme a few days ago, and did it seem to anyone else that the funniest sketches were all 30 or 40 years old (Two Ronnies, Morecambe and Wise, Monty Python etc.)? I don't know who the public were that voted, but they didn't ask ME.

[Knobbly] Are you saying that the older sketches didn't deserve their place there, or not?

Not at all - I'm saying that the older sketches were the funniest ones in it and that I don't think much of Little Britain, which won.

Despite not having seen the comedy sketches show in question, I'd like to back up Knobbly with my concordance of opinion.

What about a game of rhyming or alliterative instructions for disposing of annoying celebrities and public figures?

I'd say by all means. I was also thinking of Cress but couldn't get the game started.

How about a two or three way team game? Puce v Chartreuse or Puce v Green v Chartreuse? I wouldn't advocate more than three teams - we don't really have enough players.

[pen] I was about to ask "How many of those do you think there'll be?" before scanning down see the game made and very well underway.
[SM] Sounds good - it seems like Crescent games aren't taking off at present and perhaps that would make it more interesting.

[nights] Did the Proposal Vetting Panel give you grief?

[rab] They did indeed. Damn bureaucracy. Seriously though, any reason why it didn't go through?

The Panel tends to get a bit shirty if it thinks you're starting a reheat of something old and tired. Placing old wine into new bottles sometimes helps.

I just received an email beginning "Do please diary this year's poster evening" and thought of, hmmm, almost everybody here.

(Not quite understanding...) Is it something to do with turning nouns into verbs? Or 'verbing' you might say.

who was it who said 'verbing weirds nouns'?

Are you willing to let me know who sent the email? I'd so love to reply :-)
[pen] It was Calvin (of Calvin & Hobbes)

[pen, Phil] Indeed, "verbing weirds language" - but a six-year-old or anyone else being silly should be allowed to. Serious usage of something like diary as a verb is definitely something we'll all get flighty about. We should be touched rab thought of us though.

(rab) Bin it.

[Rosie] We were waiting for you. Well said.
Meanwhile, what shall we do with that spare game slot?

[Tuj] Not all of us. :-)

I can't get to mcios this morning. Anyone else having any trouble? (More generally, the internets seem to be very slow here in France, but I can reach most sites.)

[CdM] MCiOS seems to be OK from here, as, indeed, does the net in general.

[CdM] Buy new internets.

In "verbing weirds language", it's not a noun that has been verbed (as a noun, "weird" means "fate"), but an adjective. Off the top of my head, I can't think of another example of this formation - but I'm sure I'll now be inundated with verbed adjectives that are unbelievably obvious.

I wonder if those arrested for attempting to bomb Lonodn-US flights this morning waited deliberately until Tony Blair was on holiday and John Prescott was in charge?

[pen] I doubt if one blithering idiot is more likely to be of use to the nation than another in an emergency. Thanks for bringing the news to my attention though - I didn't know anything about it till now.

[Phil] One example in standard English occurs to me: to black (a pair of boots, or a place of work).

Similarly, "to right something" and perhaps also (less clear) "to wrong someone"?

[Raak/CdM] However, "black" is also a noun. So is "wrong" and "right." Can an example be found which verbs an adjective which is not also a noun?

I was going to point out that "to up prices" involves verbing a preposition, but "up" can yet again be used as a noun.

Of course, in programming you can talk about "anding" and "oring" two numbers, but that falls more into jargon than standard English.

Loose?

Isn't that just a contraction of 'let loose', in which case 'let' is the verb?

Turpentine can be used to thin oil paint.

The map is ornated with three cartouches.

When the ossibuchi have browned on one side, turn them to brown the other.

(Ok, "brown" can be a noun, but I just like saying "ossibuchi".)

[challenge] I actually think instances of verbed nouns-not-usable-as-adjectives are even rarer than instances of verbed adjectives-not-usable-as-nouns. However, I did find an example of a verbing of a non-adjectival noun: You can tree a cat. BTW Calvin's only 12 years younger than I am. He'd be 26 sometime this year. Yeesh!

I like saying "Raak".

[Raak] I've nevr come across "ornate" used as a verb, and it hurts just to look at your sentence. I like the "thin" example, though.

[SM] I live and learn - I'd never seen "tree" as a verb before, other than in the sense that "the copse was heavily treed", but have found now found it in the dictionary. I may have to try and get this sense into normal conversation tomorrow

(Phil) I hope it doesn't replace "woooded". I agree "ornate" as a verb is monstrous when "ornament" already exists as a verb. (SM) How do you tree a cat? Stick a twig up its bum? You'll be lucky. I can see how you can de-cat a tree, though, even if it might need the Fire Brigade.

[Phil] I never saw it before, until I googled it in a spirit of misunderestimation. The OED has it as an obsolete verb, which I suppose is why an antiquarian map dealer might use it to ornate his prose. But as Caxton writes, "Somtyme ornatynge of wordes maketh the proposycion to be withdrawen fro the trouthe."

It's usually mixed up in some way to even both sides out.
Things have quieted down.
Dual the A11!

So is it in fact the case that "ornament" as a verb was monstrous because "ornate" already existed as a verb?

Is the interesting thing about these words simply that they don't appear to have been verbed in the 'normal' way - i.e. by an apparent change in the spelling? After all, it presumably doesn't count in the noun-to-verb category to include the verb "to shelve" since it isn't "to shelf", whereas "to tree" involves no spelling change (although I think some linguists would argue there is a morphological change by virtue of the change of use). In these non-spelling-change cases, it's presumably for some other reason that they appear the same when verbed... You can verb "thick" by spelling it "thicken", whereas "thin" doesn't lend itself to being spelt "thinnen".

(That said, I don't think it would break any intuitive rules of morphology to have "righten" and "wrongen").

[Non-adjective verbings] Saki has an instance of the verb "to sky", meaning the practice of putting the paintings of lesser artists higher up on the gallery wall, above better-regarded work.

Nounish verbings: beach, ship, dog, horse, house, caravan, cup, motor, earwig. "Some to think of it," he umbrella'd, "there aren't many words you can't slip in as a substitute for 'said'."

S C

horse?

[pen] Ever horsed around?

[horsing] I know I have.

(Raak) Or omit it entirely, as in "So I'm like f*** off" and all that edifying stuff.

[Raak] Horse is a strange one... I dog you, you dog her, we dogged them, but do you ever say 'I horse, you horse'? It's usually linked to 'around'. I have no idea what this does to the classification of the nounage/verbage discussion. I'm almost out of my depth!

Maybe it's like goosing, but on a larger scale. Oo-er.

'Horsing' & 'Horsed' have been in common usage in the B&D world for years. So I'm told.

[TMITGS] Meaning what, exactly?

The only other usage than "horsing around" I can find on a (SafeSearch) Google, is the expression "to horse a gentlewoman", which I assume is an historical expression meaning the general assistance of a lady in enabling her to ride out. Then again, maybe I'm being naïve and it has a more Catherine the Great connotation.

I believe it involves a carpenter's sawhorse (suitably reinforced and stabilised), a willing 'victim', a quantity of rope and a good imagination. It might be a good idea to keep a chiropracter on the speed dialer too IMHO.

Earlier today something similar to Projoy's comment on "thicken" occurred to me, although I noted that "enlarge" seems to apply the suffix as a prefix. There are words such as "enliven" which seem to follow the same pattern, except "liven" isn't an adjective (at least now). Anyone know a reason why "enlarge" behaves like that?

[Darren] No idea, but it did make me think of the verb from "bold" is "to embolden", which has both suffix and prefix (though not necessarily in that order).

(Darren) "Enlarge" is from the French enlarger and may just be a copy, so to speak. A more regular formation, reading between the lines of my 1964 COD, would be "largen", (cf thicken) the prefix en- + adjective being rare. En- + noun or verb is common though and explains "enliven" either as "to give life to" or to (intensively) liven.

[Rosie] ...which has both prefix and suffix. As does embolden. But you can't ensticken the affixes on ad lib.

You people scare me a bit sometimes. I love you all, but you scare me mildly.

(Raak) With "embolden" and "enliven" it would seem that in the past someone has done just that. I don't think the rules are particularly well-defined. (nights) Yep, we're a bunch of swivel-eyed fundamentalists. In the beginning was the Word. AND THE WORD SHALL BE SPELT PROPERLY. :-)

P - R - O - P - E - R - L - Y

Is there an opposite for "enlarge" which has the same pattern? There doesn't seem to be an "ensmall" or "enlittle" (although there is "belittle" but then where's the "belarge"?) - the closest in meaning is probably "shrink," which seems to have no connection with any words meaning "small" whatsoever.

Darren] Well, there's the Simpsons' 'debigulator' machine, which rather implies that there's a verb 'to debigulate'

More seriously, since the 'en-' prefix mostly seems to mean 'more of', or 'increase' you wouldn't really expect a word for making smaller to be made up in that way. There is 'decrease', which is a Latinate construction of 'de-' and crescere, to grow.

[penelope] which sense of "dogging" are you talking about?

[Phil] Perhaps it's best we don't ask.

[Phil] In the 'following someone annoyingly' sense. Why, what other senses are there? ;o)

[Irouléguy] Doesn't the prefix 'en-' mean something closer to 'to make'? (Enlarge - to make sth large).
Actually, the example that made me think that was ennoble - to make noble.

I have on my lap a big Chambers Dictionary:

en- prefix
1) in words derived from Latin through French (a)used to form verbs with the sense of in, into, upon; (b) used to form verbs with the sense cause to be; (c) used intensively or almost meaninglessly;
(2) in words derived from Greek used to form verbs with the sense of in.

I can't think of any for sense (c)...

(Knobbly) I think enliven could fall into your category (c). Liven would do on its own ( = to make lively).

The Simpsons also introduced "enbiggen", iirc.

[CdM] Wasn't that EMbiggen? As in, "A noble spirit embiggens the smallest man" or something to that effect?

[penelope] "To hold or fasten with a mechanical device", apparently. >-]

It's so nice to see grammaticalisation and form-function reanalysis in progress. Errr... I think.

House news - we now have a phone, the main delay caused by the engineer not knowing where a big pipe of wires came out. Broadband apparently appeared first thing this morning, but since I had to come into work to read my email I didn't know about it then. (Actually, given that we've just had a system "upgrade" here, it might have been better to have stayed at home in any case). First major disaster was the downstairs neighbour complaining of water coming through our ceiling. We had a plumber/odd-job-man come out Saturday morning and spend three hours under the bath fixing the makeshift repair that the previous owner must have done about, oh, three or four days before moving out. Nice welcome present for us, oh yes. Anyway, should be fixed now; no all we need is for someone to plumb the gap that subsequently appeared in my bank account.

+w

Knobbly] I must admit i didn't look it up - I just went off the sense of most of the 'en-' words I could think of. I still can't think of an example for making smaller, though.
Another contender for your sense c) is 'tangle' and 'entangle', though according to Webster-Merriam Online 'tangle' is an Anglo-Saxon shortening of an old French verb 'entangler'.

*waves red rag* Can I argue for 'to Google' as one useful example of verbification? I can't think of an alternative that isn't a clunky noun-phrase - to look up on Google, to research on Google, to scope (out) on Google, etc.

I think "to Google" as a verb for "to search on Google" is OK, but only informally. I use it myself. However, it has become synonymous with "to search on the Internet, regardless of search engine used" which plays into the hands of those evil corporate types.

It has, of course, an friend in "to hoover."

Right on cue, Slashdot reports that "Google Sends Legal Threats to Media Organizations" over the use of its name as a verb for internet searces. See here.

...and in case you didn't scroll all the way down, here for some wonderful derivations from the Japanese verb 'guguru'.

That story suggests that 'to Google' becoming a generic verb doesn't necessarily benefit them, though, because they lose their exclusivity.

To be more specific, potentially they could lose their trademark (at least in the US) if it becomes an ordinary word ("google" isn't an English word yet, although "googol" is), as once a word has become a generic term, it becomes impossible to enforce trademark rights on it.

Ditto for "to Dyson", which used to be used in my household.

Darren] The OED listed it as a verb in June - see here - which surely counts as a word becoming 'officially' English.

Are there other brand-name verbs? I can only think of 'to Xerox' (American for photocopying), which I don't think is current any more.

[Irouléguy] It would only become a generic if "to google" meant "to search on the internet on any search engine." As long as it's defined to mean "to use Google" it shouldn't present them with any problems. There are plenty of brand names which have become generic nouns, applied regardless of brand (escalator, tannoy, biro, etc.) but not many verbs ("to rollerblade" is another, though).

[Darren] "Escalate" (he tannoyed, then biroed it in on his list of brandname verbs).

I don't think "escalate" quite counts as it predated "escalator." The thing which makes "escalator" a generic is the way it's use for any moving staircase, with no regard for whether it's an Otis "Escalator" model. If, however, you say, "I'm just going to escalate to the third floor, darling," then yes, "escalate" qualifies as a generic verb. Personally I've never heard it used that way.

"Escalate" no longer reads as a word to me, as a result of the previous paragraph. I just see a bunch of meaningless letters. It's annoying when that happens.

Talking of meaningless letters, I've developed this annoying habit of leaving letters out of my posts: "it's use for" indeed.

(Darren) Stare at any word long enough and it begins to look mis-spelt or foreign. Either way you think you're going slightly barmy. I can assure you you're not unless I am as well.

Excuse me for a second...
Dear I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue Mailing List Member,
We are now in a position to reveal the dates of the Autumn series of I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue.
TICKETS WILL GO ON SALE FROM 10AM ON THE MORNING OF WEDNESDAY 16TH AUGUST.
Tickets to these recordings sell extremely quickly, so you are strongly advised to book early.
The first recording will take place on the evening of Sunday 22nd October 2006 at the Southport Theatre (capacity 1631). Tickets are priced at £10.50, £8.50 and £6.50, with a £2.25 transaction charge. There would normally be a £1.50 per ticket service charge as well, but we have absorbed this for you. You can either book tickets online at www.LiveNation.co.uk/southport , via the telephone by calling Ticketmaster on 0870 6077560, or in person at the theatre between the hours of 10am and 6pm, Monday to Saturday.
The second recording will take place on the evening of Sunday 12th November at the Victoria Palace Theatre (capacity 1525). This is the theatre showing the musical Billy Elliot. Tickets are priced at £11.50, £9.50 and £7.50, with a £2.50 transaction charge. We have absorbed a 6% per ticket service charge. You can book tickets online by calling 0207 834 1317 which will ring at the box office direct and if not answered (either due to being busy, ringing too many times or outside the hours of 10am to 8.30pm Monday to Saturday) it will trip through to Ticketmaster.
The third recording will take place on Sunday 26th November at the Sunderland Empire (capacity 1875). Tickets are priced at £10.50, £8.50 and £6.50, with a £2.25 transaction charge. There would normally be a £1.50 per ticket service charge as well, but we have absorbed this for you. You can either book tickets online at www.LiveNation.co.uk/Sunderland or via the telephone by calling the theatre's box office on 0870 602 1130 (phone trips to Ticketmaster either due to being busy, ringing too many times or outside of hours), or in person at the theatre box office between the hours of 10am and 7.45pm (6pm when there's not a show on), Monday - Saturday.
Doors open to each recording at 7pm, and the recordings will begin at 7.30pm. They are scheduled to finish between 10.15-10.30pm and include a twenty minute interval.
We are very concerned that tickets to these shows (which are already subsidised) are being touted for money, so in an attempt to remedy this, SALE OF TICKETS WILL BE LIMITED TO NO MORE THAN FOUR PER APPLICANT. Should you find yourself unable to use your tickets, please telephone the relevant theatre's box office. They will keep contact details for the first thirty applicants unable to get tickets, and will re-sell the tickets for you. Under no circumstances should you buy or sell tickets on eBay. If a recording has to be cancelled, anyone who has a ticket that has not be purchased legitimately will not get their money refunded, as Ticketmaster and the theatre box offices can only refund the original cardholder.

So here's a question: how do you find out a ballpark figure for how much one should be expected to pay for replacement windows? There seems to be a pact between fitters to give no indication of costs whatsoever, presumably so you can be royally ripped off when it comes to ordering them.

[rab] Try calling fitters and replacement window companies in a completly different town to escape the geographical fixed-price cartel. And I'm sure some of the national companies (Everest, Staybrite, Penicuik) have websites that might calculate it for you, once you have the approximate measurements. There's a glaziers' regulatory body I think - is it Fensa? Maybe they have a list of reputable ones.

Thanks. No-one seems to offer an on-line quote; I'm not even after anything as scientific as that, just an estimate of how many thousands of pounds it's likely to be so we can budget for it. Very frustrating.

[Darren] According to the online dictionaries I just consulted, "escalate" is a back-formation from "escalator".

[rab] How many windows do you want replacing? I have a ballpark figure of £5K for my flat, which would be 4 windows replacing, including patio doors. But then I am in the London area.

[Projoy] By that token, anyone outside London should be able to have it done for £1.50, then.

[Raal] Nice to see a new face here. You look a bit like Raak, if I may say so. Anyway, that's interesting because the ones I checked showed the reverse!

[Projoy] We have seven windows in total: three of them quite large (about 2m²), two medium sized (1.25m²) and two wee ones (less than 1m² apiece). We're not in a listed building, or a conservation area, thank goodness, so they can be made out of anything we like, as long as we respect the astragals etc. 5K was the kind of number that was floating around my mind, for some reason, but from what you say it might be a bit more than that.

I paid 3.5k a few years ago for a ground floor flat; four large windows (3+m² and one medium (1.25m²) plus a front door and a back door. It's the doors that add a lot to the expense; several hundred pounds a pop. And of course small windows are disproportionately costly for their size. I'd hope your requirements would be cheaper than Projoy's - I bet patio doors incur a double expense, once for being doors, and once for being large windows. I admit, I'd still anticipate a cost of well over 4k.

Do you have to do them all in one go? I know there are 'do the front, get the back for free' offers every now and again... but don't panic, that's the main thing.

I spose not - but all but two of them really need to be done if not by the winter then next summer at the latest, so we may as well have them all done in one go. We'll try not to panic - I'm just not keen on the whole "salesman" thing...

My regular customers include a window salesman, and a window surveyor (goes round after the salesman has done his bit and actually measure the windows etc). Unfortunately, the latter is on holiday this week, but I'll check with the former this evening if I remember. He's an ex-salesman as of last year, so should be honest about it. From conversations with him, I can advise you to beware of all the "pay for the front, get the back free" deals etc, as those sort of companies will be ripping you off anyway. The salesmen are amongst the most highly-trained, aggressive-style of any trade. You do not get a bargain from them, even though you will think you do. Some of the techniques he explained to me were quite scarily akin to military interrogation. I'll let you know what he says either tonight, or tomorrow morning.
There is another way, though. If they are standard sizes, the window units themselves do not cost much (think 10% od what you get charged) and a pair of competent builders/handymen should be able to fit them.

[rab] Everest claim to be the best, but are probably the most expensive. They did six floor-to-ceiling windows and a door for me years back for 4k. How long do you plan staying at the address? You don't want something that will need replacing again in less than 20 years.

I've spoken to my mate, who used to work for StayBrite. He says there's a huge window-making company in Edinburgh that the likes of Staybrite buy their windows from. He'll try and track down the name tonight. He also reckons that, if there are no complex openings required etc, that you "could" get it done for £2K-ish. His advice is find a reputable window-fitter, not a big national company - you get the same windows, a non sales-driven company, and half the price. More to follow when I get more info.

[Phil] I'll bet you 5p and a melon that it's Penicuik.

[pen] I don't accept bets that I might not win ...i.e. I think you're right.

Anyone seen Inkspot lately? He and I (as sigmundfreud) seem to be the only two left on Celebdaq. I'm really hanging on so he doesn't feel in solitary splendour. I suspect he's doing the same...
Alternatively, some of you deserters might re-join.

Celebdaq? Oh, puh-lease, that's so 2003. :)

[Phil] Thanks. Any ideas as to how one knows a fitter is reputable?

Isn't it marked on their bottoms?

[rab] Ask to see jobs they've done in the area, would be my best guess, other than local recommendation.

How's the weather?

>> Celebdaq? Oh, puh-lease, that's so 2003. :) Absolutely. For the last 3 years, I just buy Madonna - she's easy, cheap and she gets column inches.

...just realised there's been one sitting blank for a while. Any innovative ideas?

[gil] Still doing pottering with the daq, member of Ultimates (MSN group) for investment tips and DDT also peek at http://www.redtide.co.uk/celebdaq/index.html?s=09000901
Every now again like today Mornington_Crescent appears on the front page, sadly I run more than one account. Still not made Top Trader.

An old standby from my days as a language assistant - "What will you do this weekend?" "Remember, we construct the future tense using the auxiliary 'will' - the clue's in the question!"

I'm currently waiting for a friend to make his way out of Town to the boondocks of the tube system, from where we will embark on a voyage of historical discovery. We're going up the M40 to go and look at the paintings in a stately home. I have to choose the CDs for the trip, and he's going to choose the destination. We'll probably argue a bit.

I learned why the Knights say "Ni!". Néa must know this already. "Ni" is the Swedish for "you" in the plural, and used to also be the formal singular "you", like the French "vous". However, Swedish added a strange twist to this. If someone was eligible to be addressed as "ni" then, by definition, it was inappropriate to do so. Instead, one referred to them by their title, e.g. "would the professor like another cup of tea?" As the writer concludes, "the world really is coming to a sorry state when people are going about saying "ni" to old ladies."
       I suspected the story of being a wind-up, but I happened to have a copy of "Teach Yourself Swedish" dating from 1969, and it agrees. It also said that the awkwardness of having to address people in the third person, while also avoiding the words "he" and "she" (taboo in this situation), had led to efforts to persuade the Swedish public to use "ni" more widely, with some success. However, the success must have been limited, as I understand that the formal "ni" is now all but extinct.
       It is not know if the Knights who say "Ni!" are a deliberate reference to this quirk of Swedish grammar.

This weekend, which is mostly gone now here? Watched a Hindi film, bought some plants and crushed my right index finger in a car door.

"In Soviet Union, Saturday is START of weekend."

Ha! Despite the fact that I don't follow the trends in e.g. http://www.redtide.co.uk/celebdaq/index.html?s=09000901 I have been making a good living buying Madonna, which seems to be a profitable move.

Wow! That hurts. My father-in-law shut the car door on my finger just before Beryl and I drove off on honeymoon... No remarks, please. My style was NOT cramped.

*Delurking*
[Raak] But these knights you speak of are no longer the Knights Who Say 'Ni!' and annecdotal evidence would suggest they ceased to be so some time before 1000 AD, before the age of 'Professors'. Therefore, going by the rules of good Swedish, it would be inappropriate to refer them as 'Neow-wom-peng!' or something close to that. This story would appear to be another urban legend. :)
[gil] Your 'Celebdaq' posting had me in stitches when I read it. Then I looked up 'Celebdaq' and twigged I had the wrong end of the stick. Thanks for the laugh anyway.

[Sierra Mike] I prefer to interpret the film as a metaphorically expressed history of Swedish grammar.

[Sierra Mike]re Madonna... I have to confess the wording was chosen with irony in mind.

[gil] Ah, well, it worked then.
[Raak] You are undoubtedly right. Where do the dismemberment ad absurdum and cannibalism fit in?

[Sierra] I think it would take an expert in Scandinavian historical linguistics to fathom out the entirety of the Pythons' subtle code.

[Raak] Now you come to mention it, there was that whole Scandinavian thread running through the opening credits, wasn't there? Jeepers, you may be onto somthing potentially very rewarding in the accademic sense and not to shabby in the next-year's-beach-book arena too if you can pull a "Dan Brown". The Python Codex is certain to be a blockbuster.

It's ages since we had a Film Club or a Song Book...

[pen] And Sound Charades, as well. Something should really just get rushed thru'.

[Raak] That's it, in essentials, though not quite quite. Quoting my handbook in etiquette from 1933:

"Although the use of the address ni is more common today than ten or fifteen years ago, it is not accepted in ordinary social life. [...] it is however permitted to include a ni here and there in conversation, provided that one also includes the title. Thus, it is possible to say "Oh, so the countess was in Visby last summer, how did ni find it?" or "Is the consul going to Paris, weren't ni there last spring?" But you cannot be too young if you are to use ni to older people [etc etc for 30 more pages about use of titles I kid you not]"

It does say that using "ni" to colleagues is fine, though, as well as some other equal-status situations where it was OK. There's a whole chapter about when to stop using titles -- always a mutual process, you stopped using each other's titles and said du (sing. "you") instead of ni. A lot happened in the decades following with an increase in "ni" and decrease of titles, but the big big revolution was in the late 1960s, when the head of a government office declared that he would say "du" to all his employees and expected "du" back. (Well, that's it in a nutshell anyway -- it was more complicated of course.)
Anyway, the funny thing is that after all that, today Swedish uses virtually no titles at all. We have "Mr", Mrs", "Miss" and "Dr" and various old nobility and royal titles, but apart from royalty nobody uses any titles, ever. (Very young schoolkids tend to call their teacher "miss" or "teacher", but once they hit 10 or so it's strictly first names.) So when buying, say, plane tickets from British Airways, a Swede is struck by the necessity to put a title there -- which feels very very foreign.

[Néa] Swedish schoolchildren are presumably too well brought up to say "Ni!" to a teacher. Would that our lot were as aware of the social graces.

My butcher calls me "Sir", and I love it. I'd be delighted to go back to using titles and surnames instead of all this pseudo-familiar first name tosh. If someone repeatedly uses my name, I instinctively remind myself not to buy anything, or co-operate for that matter. Still, it's better than being called "mate" by someone I'm trying to conduct some business with.

(Phil) My Indian newsagent always greets me with a smile and "Ah, Mr Hughes" when I go in each week to pay for the papers. This is almost too formal even for someone of my age but charming nevertheless. What I really don't like is name-tags where the surname is omitted. It's either false familiarity or management's way of saying you're not very important.

I'm not keen on letters coming from people with gender-neutral names (like Chris) without a title as you then never know how to write back to them.

[rab] "Dear Chris"? Isn't the point that once they've introduced themselves by a particular name it's quite acceptable to address them by it...?

My nextdoor neighbours are Chris and Sam. Any guesses?

{Projoy] Actually, I was thinking of emails rather than letters where you have mail from "Chris Jones", and at the bottom a standard sig "Chris Jones, Gender Neutrality Officer". To me, it feels utterly wrong beginning a communication with "Dear Chris" when I've never met the person in question.

Mind you, I once had a letter from Scottish Gas, signed by hand as "Scottish Gas"...

[rab] Did you reply "Dear Scottish" or "Dear Mr Gas"?

I agree with rab about feeling uncomfortable replying to mails like that. I generally duck the issue and just start them with "Hi -" and in fact, I don't often use names at all unless there's ambiguity as I've never been comfortable with using people's names for any purpose whatsoever, even if I've known them for years. Dunno why.

[rab] "Dear Sir or Madam, as the case may be:" Although in email I never use any salutation at all.

[Raak] Why not? [All others] What about you? Do you use salutations in email?

[Néa] Just the custom I'm accustomed to (and therefore the One True Way).

I use 'Good morning [name] or sometimes just 'Good Morning' (or afternoon), or sometimes 'Dear [name] in an email; if it's a round-robin (which is often is) I just start with an attention-grabbing 'Ladies and Gentlemen' which seems to go down fairly well, apart from with one individual who has been making a fool of herself recently and is not much longer for this corporate world, I feel.
[Rosie] A gay couple. With stupid parents. :oP

[Néa, from whom all knowledge springs, from whose navel a lotus springs forth and who encompasses the oceans in three strides] I avoid salutations as unnecessary ornamentation.

[Salutations] For email, even formal email, I find that "Hello," is a perfectly good opening for almost every purpose. So much so that I now find it slightly quaint to receive an email that begins "Dear..." (particularly if the person uses my surname). And it's been many a year since I've seen a "yours faithfully". If forced into a formal signoff, I tend to stick to just "Yours," for fear of writing something I don't in the slightest bit mean, such as "sincerely".

[Dear Mr B-----,] While I am familiar with the feeling whereof you speak re: addressing someone by their first name prior to a formal introduction, which no doubt is deplored in Debrett, I can't say I've experienced a great deal of discomfort in discarding the convention.

In emails, I use "yours faithfully", "your sincerely", "regards" or "kind regards" depending on the context. I also use "cheers", which I use as a multi-purpose word in spoken coversation anyway. However, at the start of an email, I tend just to use the person's name (surname if we're not acquainted, forename if we are) or "Dear Sir or Madam" if it's to "complaints@????.com" or "service@????.com" (as many of my emails are).

[Phil] Whats the difference between regards and kind regards? I've never really appreciated this subtlety.

(pen) Sorry, but it's Christopher and Samantha. 50 yrs ago it would have been Christine and Samuel.

Now I come to look at it, Christine seems such a silly name. It's like the brand name of a sort of mini-Messiah individually wrapped for your comfort and convenience.

"Vicar, do you sell small packs of Christines for the weekend?"

[Projoy] Most names start to look pretty silly if you look at them too closely, like most words.

[Néa] I tend to use a first name and a colon. It's my style. For example:

Dear Samantha:

Isn't it about time you got off Humphrey's hand? I should think it was quite uncomfortable.

All the best,

Nights.

I think of an email as being a less formal letter - with an opening, closing and all the rest. Most of my peers think I'm bizarre for this.

hi nites i reckn your a yong fogy rosie

In email I don't use valedictions either, just my name at the end or a .sig. Written letters go "Dear Sir/Yours faithfully" or "Dear [name]/Yours".

Hmm, well showing my old-foginess I start with a "signature" saying who I am, website details etc. (Though this is automatically included) Then I use Dear (name) <comma> Dear Humphrey, Then the text - all properly written out and hopefully correctly spelt and punctuated. And I tail it with Regards, Blob (or whatever soubriquet that person knows me by) ........ What's more, I write SMS texts in much the same way !!!

(Nights) Actually most of my emails are no different from letters except in the greeting if I'm familiar with the person. This means capitals, punctuation and paragraphs. Well, why not? At my age you simply don't give a toss if people think you're bizarre. It's great.

The thing is, I tend to see emails as more closely related to memos than letters. When I receive an email written like a formal letter, it comes across, frankly, as somewhat illiterate.

[darren] How would you receive a letter through your letterbox? Would you feel impatience that they didn't email you about it?

[Projoy] It's a gut feeling thing. Although, if I sit and think about it, my regards tend to be much kinder if I'm selling than buying.

[pen] I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at there.

[pen] Dunno about Darren, but I would feel exactly that (and frequently do). We've too few trees as it is, without wasting them on pointless letters, cards etc.

(Projoy) You really can't be allowed to get away with that. The proportion of paper in actual letters compared with the total amount of paper (newspapers, junk mail etc) that comes through my letterbox is very small. In any case, we're not short of trees; there are many more than there were 40-50 years ago, everywhere. To be honest, I'm not that keen on trees, they spoil the view and at one time threatened to undermine my house. Rather overrated, I feel.

[Rosie] Who says my annoyance is confined to only legitimate letters? As to "more trees", I don't know if that's true, although I guess you're more likely to know than I am, But don't we need even more trees at the moment to do Carbon Dioxide conversion? This is the general impression I have gained.

I suspect Rosie is right that there are more trees now than in the 50's. I'm pretty sure, however, that there were many more in the 30's and more still before WW1. Also, the tree-planting boom of the 50's 60's & 70's was mostly conifer plantations. Planting more trees as mixed woodland must be a good thing both aesthetically and as carbon sinks.

IIRC, commercial forestry supplies most of the pulp for paper - and that's a planting-and-harvesting operation of fast-growing monoculture conifers; it doesn't use wood from mixed and deciduous woodland.

I'm still not sure what forest conservation and my opinion of email writing style have to do with each other.

Which would explain the demise of resin/wood particle composite board and the resurgence of quality natural wood at the woodyards. Oh, hang on......

That's a matter of furniturenfashion and the health hazards of the resin fumes, innit?

[Rosie] Well I look forward to being 23 then. And I write text messages just the same way - the joy of predictive text. And a new phone!

In other news, I handed in my dissertation today!

[nights] Congratulations! Well done! I hate you. No, really, well done.

(Projoy) It's true that trees fix carbon rather than letting it float free as CO₂ but the number needed to make any difference is impractically large particularly considering the rate the Amazon jungle and other areas are being chopped down. Trees are nice but have become sacred, which is just silly. They undermine buildings, obscure the sky and the view, drop leaves on the railway line and are even allowed to obscure signals. The biodiversity of tree-free railway cuttings was incredible. Down with trees! BTW I don't quite understand your aversion to printed paper. I get cards all the time from my nieces in addition to all the emails, which is nice, and far better than when they were young teenagers and sent me electronic Christmas cards. Sod that.

[Rosie] Well, I suppose it's a personal preference, but I just find dealing with paper irritating these days. It becomes clutter very quickly. You can't miniaturise it and file it conveniently in a sensible folder system on a HDD. Cards and the like seldom express sentiments profound enough to be worth keeping, and for the most part are ritualistic and purposeless. Almost anything that could be said in a conventional letter could be said in an email, which is far more keepable these days.

[PJ, Rosie] Being a keen calligrapher - I mostly design and write greetings cards to close friends and family. They seem to appreciate the personal, snail-mail touch because it's evidence that one has made the effort. Far more 'keepable' I'd say.

I loathe "greetings cards", and I've just deleted my justification of that statement because I don't want to feel yet again that I'm the only one singing in tune :-)

[Phil] I'm only mentioning how much I despise commercial greetings cards so you know you're not alone. Under normal circumstances I wouldn't even have botherd to mention it. Profit margins of 60%+?? The sleazy slimeballs.

Me2, as mentioned (and justified) above.

[SM & PJ] I have an equal, but differently justified, loathing for hand-made ones too.

I love cards. I love writing letters. I love recieving post of any form. I send lots of postcards when I go on holiday. I particuarly like hand made cards. I do get a bit pissed off when I get a Christmas card from someone I rarely keep in touch with just signed with their name, as I'd like a little newsbite. I try to lead by example and put a little line or two in each card, something personal to who its addressed to. I also mostly try to make my own Christmas cards, although I was defeated on that one last year (I sent over 85, and recieved a similar number). So, why do I like them. I accept that I do mostly just throw them away (or try to recycle) and it is a fair economic cost, but I like to keep in touch with as many people as I can and I think its a good way to show that you're thinking of someone. Hurrah for cards. That's what I say!

[Lib] If I want to know what someone whom I am otherwise too feckless to stay properly in contact with is up to, I'll usually google them or take a look at their blog or something. If I instead sent a card for the sheer sake of "staying in touch" what pleasure would it afford them to know that I thought of them... but didn't think enough of them to do more than send a card? You might argue that I miss the point, and I suppose I probably do. Obviously, not attacking anyone else's way of staying in touch, but that's how it's always seemed to me.

Apologies if I come across as a crabby bastard, but, well, I am one. :)

[PJ] You didn't seem any more crabby that I am (revising never brings the nice side of me out)... I like to know that someone out there is thinking of me. That's probably something to do with the kind of high-maintainence-centre-of-attention person I am. Getting a card is something concrete that I can see that they've thought of me. Looking at my blog doesn't mean anything as I don't track all the hits. But, each to his own, hey? And I'll remember not to send you any cards a ProjoyTowers.

[Phil/PJ] Hmm - surely you have aunts, uncles, grandparents [even parents] that may not be quite as netsavvy as you? [or even own a PC]. How do you all stay in touch or send birthday/christmas-type greetings to them? Telephone?

[Chalky] Why stay in touch? Why send greetings? Unless you want to know them as friends, doing either of those two things seems completely pointless - maybe even slightly hypocritical - to me.

[Chalky] I didn't say that I prefer to use the net. I just don't really "stay in touch". I have one uncle, one aunt, one cousin, no grandparents. I do speak to my brothers and parents fairly frequently on the phone. I do send birthday and christmas cards to all family members (including in-laws and 2 nieces) - I also loathe buses, but use them when necessary.
On the other hand, we all use email too for quick messages, e.g. my sister-in-law invited us to her 50th birdthay party by email, and I was able to decline within 30 minutes - job done, no waiting; no having to find a "sorry we can't come" card, write it, find her address, buy a stamp, post it (all of which would take me a day or two).

[Projoy, Phil] Blimey, I'm now wary of having either of you two as friends... if I left it too long, the friendship lapses and you'd discontinue membership! I've got friends all over the place that I don't see for a couple of years at a time, but I'm extremely pleased that I *can* count them as friends, and still send xmas cards. I really can't see it the way you do.

Am I sensing a gender divide here?

[Lib] No, I like cards.

[Phil] I see. You seem to use different methods for different folks. Me too. I just prefer to make a greetings card than to buy one [for the reasons already stated by PJ and SM.

[PJ] Why stay in touch? The ones I stay in touch with are the ones I LIKE and respect.

Well, I know it means more to me when I send a card or letter than an email (partly because of the extra effort). So it means more to me to receive one as well. Also probably more than half the people I communicate with regularly are not regular e-mail users, even if they have an address. I just think it's for different purposes. Quick notes, information-based, SMS or email; communication - letters or cards.

[Proj] You don't think staying in touch with your aged relatives who are not on the Internets is worthwile in itself? Me, I like sending post cards, but not too many or too often. I defaulted out of Postcrossing recently.
In other news, I suck at lecturing. Really and truly.

[Néa] *thinks for a moment*. Mm. Not really - for them or me. [pen] I have friends whom I sometimes don't see for a couple of years, or more. It sounds like in your case it's necessary to send a card or something in order to maintain the friendship subscription (whether used or not). In my case I'm very happy for someone I like to show up again after a couple of years of not calling or writing. I don't require them to ping me in the interval, because it would be a waste of both of our time (at least until they or I are ready to re-engage - and also a waste if one of us is no longer really interested).

[Néa] PS. I bet you don't suck at it.

[Néa] I agree, I bet you don't suck.

[penelope] I wonder, do I really have friends, per se, or perhaps I just have pals? I think that could be an interesting bit of self-analysis, perhaps anyone who counts me as a "friend" could contribute. Oh I dunno, I'm just me, and I'm not great at communicating, so I don't bother :-)

Here's something flerdle told me:

Hidden text

only kidding!

Phil:

Hidden text

:-)

That's the "I bet Néa doesn't suck" brigade.

[Tuj] Phew.

I'm terrible at sending cards, and I find it a nuisance. What's worse though, is that my mum gets cards and she has NO idea who the people are. She may have met them once, or be related to them, but if they sign the card with their first names only it's hard to guess. She gets a few like that every year.

I go through the ritual, but only because it's generally done. But awkward situations sometimes come up. Should I send a Christmas or birthday card this year to my lately ex-sister-in-law? At what point should a Christmas card to my brother also be addressed to his new partner?

I donate, instead of sending cards. That, and I usually work extra shifts at Christmas so I don't really have the time.

We did get one christmas card last year that said that they would not be sending cards this year, but would be making a donation to a charity (I think it was for MS) instead. Sounds good to me! We did that in work too - everyone gave a couple of pounds and we gave it all to a charity instead of giving out cards.

Which begs the question ... How does one let people know that one is donating to charity instead of sending them a card?

[Chalky] You send them a charity card.

Why do people have to know one is donating to charity except to inform them what a Wonderful Person one is? Why not send cards as usual and donate to charity? Or send "charity" cards? I normally send cards to people I don't see very often; it just means you've remembered them and value them. Some, but not all, of a group of pub mates have taken to sending (i.e. dishing out in the pub) Christmas cards to each other, which I think is barmy. I don't do it and it's done me no harm whatever.

Just thought I'd try and introduce a new subject, but I can't think of one. Anyone care to comment?

[Phil] I'd love to help, but I'm away to Bury to see IQ in concert.

I've been out all evening - has Blair gone/died/been arrested/resigned/emigrated yet? Can't wait.

Maybe changing the subject should be the new subject.

(Tuj) You could have had DELETES or STEELED.

[Rosie] I'd also spotted those (and the D was actually a blank!) but I picked SLEETED over STEELED (DELETES didn't fit on the board).

I was firmly in the anti-card camp, but I've found things have changed since having a kid. Suddenly photos of the littleun are a commodity for relatives - especially the older and less internet savvy kind. So, I've been sending cards using pictures of my son to people where in the past I might have a) sent a crappy off the shelf card and hated the whole process and b) not bothered through apathy.

One thing that kick started it all was finding a program called Comic Life (Mac users - I recommend it heartily) which is great for knocking up comic strip style cards using my own photos. I've also been known to send an occasional e-card as a slightly more colourful way of marking an occasion than just sending email. I think cards for me inhabit a sort of middle zone of contact with someone, and I find it pleasing to think that I can send my offline relatives something tangible with a picture of their grandson/great grandson on it.

I've made a move in every game in here today, so I may as well mention it here :-)

[Chalky] You should win something... a sort of sedimentary layer award.

[rab] Do html tags work in the titles of games? Actually I was mainly thinking of the hiding tags - a game entirely consisting of hidden moves would be fun. I was also wondering if it might be time for another Lies game.

[Tuj] No.

When bringing in the milk this morning at half six, there was a definite sense of the summer being over. A low haze of thick grey cloud, drizzle soaked grass and the street lights still on (not doing much but just quietly announcing that the mornings are getting darker). Inside the lights turned on for breakfast and side lights needed on the car driving in. At least one thing the heating is still off and will hopefully stay that way till October.

I don't want another Lies game.

Here in the deep south (Hants) it is doing the old cats and dogs routine (and to a strong degree at that). Certainly a change having been building sandcastles on Monday!
[Inkers] Well don't start one then.

I'm going to have to get my chimney swept, as it looks like I might be here till the end of October :-(

I can't wait for there to be a nip in the air - it's rainy here, but so warm and muggy. In preparation for autumn and winter, I ordered some new boots yesterday and tested the central heating. But I think the ancient boiler's pump has given up so the central heating doesn't work. I don't need it yet, but I'm hoping this'll prompt the landlords into renewing the boiler. They seem so proud of being to make it limp along for longer than is sensible, dammit. I just want a nice condensing boiler to make only as much hot water as I need, not a hot water tank - it's daft for just one person. In the meantime, I have a warm laptop for personal comfort :o)

We had British Gas round to do the annual service the boiler the other day, its a bit doom and gloom, it is old and parts are hard to replace. They have suggested a new combi boiler.

[pen] Sh. Don't wish it away. There'll be plenty of nip in good time. [Tuj] Lies games are really impossible to play, they're always the least popular games in the Morniverse and usually end up neglected.

[Inkers] Do it. It'll be quieter and more efficient.

Speaking of energy, having just discovered that I'm paying more than twice what I did for electricity a couple of years ago, I looked into other possibilities. Apparently, one can now change electricity suppliers with just a few clicks on a web page, and I stand to save 20%. Is it really that simple? Has anyone here done it? I'm looking at Powergen vs. Atlantic, and I wonder how Powergen can now stay in business except by relying on the inertia of their customers. (Yes, I know it's evil to heat a house with electricity, but I doubt if it's adaptable to gas.)

Funny thing, electricity pricing - I was involved in the new trading arrangements which came into force in 1998. One of the effects of them is that it's cheaper to buy small quantities of electricity than large most of the time, so the big players like Powergen are somewhat handicapped. The difference is nothing like 20% though. Of course, lots of suppliers have short term or 'new customer only' promotions, hoping to get people in and then rely on inertia. The cheapest thing to do is therefore change often.

Do you have people going door-to-door trying to get people to change their gas/electricity company? For a few months here I was plagued by 'em. Started fantasizing about electricifying the doorbell to give them a shock... rude words were thought, but not said.

[flerdle] I did get a few a while back, very strange. The first one opened by saying "How would you like to save money on your electricity bill?", and wanted me to sign up there and then, without even saying what company he was representing. Then a few months later, two young women doing "a survey" asked if I had switched suppliers, "like most of your neighbours have". Nul points. Probably from the same company, whoever they were, and if I did, I'd make a point of never doing business wth them, ever. Then the first chap came back again and I just said "Not interested" and closed the door.
[INJ] Odd, I'm going by the companies' own published tariffs for an Economy 7 dual meter. All the companies seem to claim to be at least "part of one of the biggest suppliers", although that's rather an elastic expression.

It has been my experience that deregulating state-owned utility services results in a welter of paperwork for the consumer who is bombarded by junk mail exhorting this or that 'cheaper' version of whatever it is. They invariably aren't cheaper in the long run, largely because of the increased costs associated with legislation, litigation and advertising. Service call-outs become a nightmare of humanless voice-mail mazes and all one really gets is a warm feeling when one thinks about the 'good old days'. My gas service was recently split from the monopolistic energy carrier from my area. Costs increased overnight by 10-15% and there are now three phone numbers to report a gas leak with no 24-hour call-out. The joke? that the billing departments, although ostensibly now separate for gas and electricity, still use the same style account numbers and go to the same building. Indeed, I can pay my electricity bill at a window in a gas-company cashier's office. I suspect the bills are made up on the same computer. It's all a game.

I've argued on the doorstep with an electricity account swapper guy before too. I told him I didn't want to discuss it there and then, and he kept asking me 'why not?'. so I shut the door on him. It was quite scary, to be honest, he was becoming vehement. Lord knows what it's like for little old ladies.

This is one of the benefits of having an entryphone system - with a bit of skill (and luck in having the topmost buzzer) you can generally fend these people off before they gain access to the stair.

Also, how do they tell whose electricity it is? It's all the same wires, and the electrons aren't labelled.

[Raak] You could spin 'em up with a particular bias though. That way you could discriminate yours from the rest by having a filter installed at the customer's service entrance that let through electrons with a penchant for drinking only gravity fed beer or that preferred a lawn mowed in alternating stripes and kept the others out for example.

Don't you realise you're all geing ripped off. It's AC electricity - that means you're getting the same electrons going in and out of your meter day in day out, yet you get charged as if they were all brand spanking new...bloody nerve these leccy suppliers have got, I reckon.

(SM) Quite so. Competition in itself costs money and furthermore there has to be rake-off for the private company or they wouldn't be interested in the first place. So naturally it costs more, or the service is poorer. Another example is Directory Enquiries, privatised for no good reason whatever except to satisfy the current political dogma. Don't get me going about the railways, about which I know a bit. Truly the country is run by idiots.

(Phil) A very good point. The less fastidious among us would settle for AC/DC but that's up to them, naturally.

I'm glad someone mentioned Directory Enquiries... I remember that once upon a time it was operated by BT for free; then they charged about 10p which could be circumvented by using a phone box; looking at last month's phone bill, I notice that fierce competition has delivered the fantastic bargain of 60p per enquiry. Victory!

Since they started charging, I've not used directory enquiries once. I find 192.com to be very good.
Slightly tangentially, at work, I have had no end of incorrect reservations, e.g. someone books at this Bull's Head, then turns up for dinner at another, because 118118 or whoever has given them the wrong number. One night we had two bookings that didn't show, so I called them the next day saying "Hello, this is the Bull's Head at Ratby; you had a reservation with us last night..." Both people failed to notice the "Ratby" bit, even when I said it so clearly, and said "yes we were there". Then when asked where exactly, one said "Well, we booked at the Bull's Head in Newtown Linford, but when we got there we couldn't find it (I was able to tell them that it changed name 8 years ago), so we went to the Bull's Head at Woodhouse Eaves." The other said "You know, on the A47", which is about 6 miles away in Leicester Forest West. Unfortunately, I think there are 11 Bull's Heads in Leicestershire, and half of them are within a 12 mile radius

[Phil] Well, with a bit of creative yet inexpensive sign alterage you could easily become the Bull Shed. That should stop the problem. Alternatively, add a sauna at the back and call your place The Bull's Head of Steam.

[rab] Unfortunately, we were not internet enabled when our water was leaking into the flat below and we didn't know the number for a plumber that had been suggested to us...

Sorry, that should have been directed at [Phil]

[penelope] We need a new game where the object is to supply a witty, brief and above all final response to "Why not [discuss my proposal now]?"

[Sierra Mike] Perhaps with each person giving an answer to the previous person's salesman's line, then supplying a new salesman's line of their own?

[Raak] That would work too, though I was just thinking about supplying alternatives for penelope to use after the Why not? was delivered. Sort of along the lines of Mad Magazine's old Snappy Answers to Stupid Questions feature. One question, many one-liner responses.

[rab] Commiserations - it's a shame that necessity forces one to be ripped off :-(

To make way for the new game I think it is time for Cancel Mansell to move along, ready for Why Not? or something new.

I dread to use the 'C' word in September but the school sent out the Christmas catalogue yesterday, and the milkman dropped off this morning a leaflet for spring and Christmas flowering bulbs.

Is it proper or just morbid bad taste omn my part for wanting to see how the hamster from Top Gear had a near fatal crash. Hopefully he will recover soon and take his revenge out on a few more caravans.

[Inkers] I have already planted bulbs in pots for next spring and bought xmas cards (from the V&A, online, before they run out, which is what happened last year).

[pen] Very impressed and also quite jealous.

Can I also just say about the two people that heckled John Reid, it was a set up. A member of the cabinet going to an invited audience of muslims, security would have been tight. But two well known radicals simply walk in unnoticed!! pah!! It's a government conspiracy I tell you.

Today I saw a pub advertising Christmas meals today. That is, you could go in today and have a Christmas meal. WIth free bottle of champagne (which I think must mean a one-glass quarter bottle of white fizz).

I'm so happy to be moving to a pub that does not do food. Christmas will not be a word that makes me shake with fear this year :-)

[Phil] As I recall, you didn't do food when I came in anyway! :-)

[phil] A pub that has no food? Not even chicken in the basket! But I presume you will still be working on Christmas Day.