Page 1 of 1

I ain't saying she a gold-digger...

Posted: 22:16 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by KillerB
...but £24,000,000 and whingeing he had more assets takes the chocolate hob-nob (vegetarian by the way).

Posted: 22:20 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by DRT
She asked for £125,000,000 - but didn't have a leg to stand on :roll:

Posted: 22:44 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by KillerB
Derek T. wrote:She asked for £125,000,000 - but didn't have a leg to stand on :roll:
Conky, stop using Derek's userid it is bad form.

Three hundred grand

Posted: 22:47 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by jdaw1
KillerB wrote:£24,000,000
Three hundred grand might be small change to Alex K., but I can’t be the only person for whom it is a lot of money.

Re: Three hundred grand

Posted: 22:49 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by KillerB
jdaw1 wrote:
KillerB wrote:£24,000,000
The BBC, in a story entitled [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7300931.stm]Mills awarded £24.3m settlement[/url], wrote:Heather Mills has been awarded £24.3m in her divorce settlement with estranged husband Sir Paul McCartney.
Three hundred grand might be small change to Alex K., but I can’t be the only person for whom it is a lot of money.
I only saw a headline. Once she started talking about him having £800,000,000 I was shouting at the telly. I will take the spare £300K if she doesn't want it.

Re: Three hundred grand

Posted: 22:53 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by jdaw1
KillerB wrote:I only saw a headline. Once she started talking about him having £800,000,000 I was shouting at the telly. I will take the spare £300K if she doesn't want it.
Come on Mr Units! How many hours does it take for my cellar to age a year? You wrote “£24,000,000†, not “£24m† — to which I would have had no objection.

Re: Three hundred grand

Posted: 22:55 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by KillerB
jdaw1 wrote:
KillerB wrote:I only saw a headline. Once she started talking about him having £800,000,000 I was shouting at the telly. I will take the spare £300K if she doesn't want it.
Come on Mr Units! How many hours does it take for my cellar to age a year? You wrote “£24,000,000†, not “£24m† — to which I would have had no objection.
It was rounding. I am always willing to round to the nearest mill. and put the zeroes in. I have to do this for work so I have no compunction about it on a Port website.

Re: Three hundred grand

Posted: 22:58 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by jdaw1
KillerB wrote:It was rounding. I am always willing to round to the nearest mill. and put the zeroes in. I have to do this for work so I have no compunction about it on a Port website.
No. “£24,000,000† is right to within a pound or so; “£24m† is right to within quite a lot of pounds. You know that.

Why is he arguing with me? Does Alex K. really think he can out-pedant me? Presumably!

Re: Three hundred grand

Posted: 23:01 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by KillerB
jdaw1 wrote:
KillerB wrote:It was rounding. I am always willing to round to the nearest mill. and put the zeroes in. I have to do this for work so I have no compunction about it on a Port website.
No. “£24,000,000† is right to within a pound or so; “£24m† is right to within quite a lot of pounds. You know that.

Why is he arguing with me? Does Alex K. really think he can out-pedant me? Presumably!
Wrong. When rounding you round to a number of decimal places or significant digits. I rounded to 2 significant digits.

Re: Three hundred grand

Posted: 23:04 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by jdaw1
KillerB wrote:Wrong. When rounding you round to a number of decimal places or significant digits. I rounded to 6 significant digits.
So how come your third “significant digit† is wrong?

Re: Three hundred grand

Posted: 23:05 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by KillerB
jdaw1 wrote:
KillerB wrote:Wrong. When rounding you round to a number of decimal places or significant digits. I rounded to 2 significant digits.
So how come your third “significant digit† is wrong?
Damn - beat me to change it.

Why is that familiar?

Posted: 23:08 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by jdaw1
Ooooh, rewriting my posts without making clear the change of authorship! Why is that familiar?

[Suggestion: humble apology.]

Re: Three hundred grand

Posted: 23:09 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by KillerB
KillerB wrote:
jdaw1 wrote:
KillerB wrote:Wrong. When rounding you round to a number of decimal places or significant digits. I rounded to 2 significant digits.
So how come your third “significant digit† is wrong?
Damn - beat me to change it.
I messed up with rounding to significant digits with rounding to millions on danged computers. Bloody Paddy's night and Murphy's.

Re: Three hundred grand

Posted: 23:11 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by jdaw1
KillerB wrote:I messed up with rounding …
This is a true statement, and will suffice.

Posted: 23:11 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by DRT
I think this thread proves only one thing. Jdaw should not go snowboarding in places where he has limited access to t'internet :lol:

Derek

PS: I am pleased that my bad humour was thought to be of Conky proportions

Re: Why is that familiar?

Posted: 23:11 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by KillerB
jdaw1 wrote:Ooooh, rewriting my posts without making clear the change of authorship! Why is that familiar?

[Suggestion: humble apology.]
I didn't re-write your post, I re-wrote mine within yours. It was a joke.

This is getting way off-topic. I suggest moving it to Meaningless Drivel.

I'm still right about rounding, even if I got the number of digits wrong.

This whole thread started in MD, and fell deeper into it.

Posted: 23:13 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by jdaw1
This whole thread started in MD, and then fell deeper into it.

Posted: 23:15 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by KillerB
and now you've made me miss post 11111. Do you realise how long we have to wait for all the 1s again?

But 12,345 will be along soon.

Posted: 23:18 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by jdaw1
All my fault, for which I humbly apologise. But 12,345 will be along soon.

Re: But 12,345 will be along soon.

Posted: 23:23 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by KillerB
jdaw1 wrote:All my fault, for which I humbly apologise. But 12,345 will be along soon.
Make me miss that and there will be trouble. I need to be there for five little ducks as well.

Posted: 23:34 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by Conky
Back on topic,

She is a horrible peace of work, and I am pleased that she got a lot less than she wanted. Aw shucks, ONLY £24million!
Having said that, how some drug taking, arrogant, ponce of a minstrel, can accumulate £800 million, is beyond me. Mind you, he needs decent money for that realistic hair colour and his Cliff Richard dance lessons! :roll:

The Worlds gone mad! Jeeves, pass me my gun...

Posted: 23:39 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by DRT
Alan,

I'm glad it's not just me who doesn't get all this Macca thing. As far as I'm concerned he's just an embarassing uncle at a wedding each time he shows his smug face on TV. Personally, I wish the judge had taken all their money off them and gave it to charity on the basis that they are not fit to have wealth. Is John Lenon's assasin still alive?

Derek

Makes me weep.

Posted: 23:41 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by jdaw1
Makes me weep.

Quite what makes me weep I’m not saying, especially after Conky’s recent—albeit gentle—reprimand.

Posted: 23:45 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by Conky
Agreed. At least I think its a common consensus, but Jules may surprise me again, and be weeping because he really appreciates old Mull of Kintyre???

No, the man drinks good Port, he's better than that?

Weep!

Posted: 23:49 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by jdaw1
Conky wrote:peace
Conky wrote:drug taking
Conky wrote:The Worlds gone mad!
Weep!

And Mark David Chapman is still inside, and will probably stay there.

Posted: 23:50 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by DRT
Jdaw may have been weeping for one or more of the following reasons:
  1. The Worlds gone mad
  2. the judge should probably have given the money to charity
  3. John Lenon's assasin is a couple of letters short of a picnic :?
Derek

Posted: 23:51 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by KillerB
Derek T. wrote:Alan,

I'm glad it's not just me who doesn't get all this Macca thing. As far as I'm concerned he's just an embarassing uncle at a wedding each time he shows his smug face on TV. Personally, I wish the judge had taken all their money off them and gave it to charity on the basis that they are not fit to have wealth. Is John Lenon's assasin still alive?

Derek
Nope - I'm ABM - not Anti-Ballistic Missile nor Activity Based Management but Anyone But Macca. He was my least favourite Beatle and has annoyed me consistently ever since. I hate that twee twiddly song on the ukelele with a passion I normally save for burning effigies of Westlife.

However, last week I was in the US and saw Celebrity Apprentice, featuring professional slime-ball, Piers Morgan, a man so dispicable even Alan Sugar smiled when he sacked him on the UK version. He was up against a woman who actually made me want him to win against her. This reminds me of Hevva.

Posted: 23:52 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by Conky
Thats ok. I've come to terms with your need for spelling perfection.

Defending that overated halfwit would have opened a whole new area of contention. :lol:

Posted: 23:55 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by Conky
KillerB wrote:
Derek T. wrote:Alan,

I'm glad it's not just me who doesn't get all this Macca thing. As far as I'm concerned he's just an embarassing uncle at a wedding each time he shows his smug face on TV. Personally, I wish the judge had taken all their money off them and gave it to charity on the basis that they are not fit to have wealth. Is John Lenon's assasin still alive?

Derek
Nope - I'm ABM - not Anti-Ballistic Missile nor Activity Based Management but Anyone But Macca. He was my least favourite Beatle and has annoyed me consistently ever since. I hate that twee twiddly song on the ukelele with a passion I normally save for burning effigies of Westlife.

However, last week I was in the US and saw Celebrity Apprentice, featuring professional slime-ball, Piers Morgan, a man so dispicable even Alan Sugar smiled when he sacked him on the UK version. He was up against a woman who actually made me want him to win against her. This reminds me of Hevva.
Who needs a Gym membership when you can develop such Ab's!

ABM (Anybody but Macca) and,
ABU (Anybody but United)

Have you got any decent Pec's to go with them?

Posted: 23:55 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by DRT
Conky wrote:Thats ok. I've come to terms with your need for spelling perfection.

Defending that overated halfwit would have opened a whole new area of contention. :lol:
Presumably the OHW to whom you refer is Macca?

Re: Weep!

Posted: 23:59 Mon 17 Mar 2008
by DRT
jdaw1 wrote:
Conky wrote:peace
Conky wrote:drug taking
Conky wrote:The Worlds gone mad!
Weep!

And Mark David Chapman is still inside, and will probably stay there.
So I got one out of three - but added 2 more for luck.

Could they let MDC out for a day or two to reduce the Beattle-count down to accpetable levels?

Derek

PS: We need the drummer to stay alive for the sake of children's animation

Posted: 00:00 Tue 18 Mar 2008
by Conky
Derek T. wrote:Jdaw may have been weeping for one or more of the following reasons:
  1. The Worlds gone mad
  2. the judge should probably have given the money to charity
  3. John Lenon's assassin is a couple of letters short of a picnic :?
Derek
As we now know, it was his OCD spelling issues. But you raise a good point. What would make you weep?

I'd start of with,

1. The lack of affordable 63 Fonseca,
2. If Liverpool ever won the Premiership.
3. Hillary or Gordon were ever elected.

Bank of England reforming the implementation of monetary pol

Posted: 00:05 Tue 18 Mar 2008
by jdaw1
Conky wrote:What would make you weep?
The Bank of England reforming, again, the implementation of monetary policy, and getting it wrong, again. Please no: the answer isn’t difficult.

Posted: 00:05 Tue 18 Mar 2008
by KillerB
Conky wrote:Who needs a Gym membership when you can develop such Ab's!

ABM (Anybody but Macca) and,
ABU (Anybody but United)

Have you got any decent Pec's to go with them?
You leave my Pecadilloes alone.


Tracy Turnblat wrote:PS: We need the drummer to stay alive for the sake of children's animation
I see no need now that we have South Park. See 'im orff.

Posted: 00:11 Tue 18 Mar 2008
by DRT
KillerB wrote:
Tracy Turnblat wrote:PS: We need the drummer to stay alive for the sake of children's animation
I see no need now that we have South Park. See 'im orff.
OK. Agreed. Let's be done with them all. And, while we're at it, get rid of the last of those Stones.

Derek

Posted: 00:13 Tue 18 Mar 2008
by Conky
Gall, or Bladder?

Posted: 00:16 Tue 18 Mar 2008
by KillerB
Tracy Turnblat wrote:
KillerB wrote:
Tracy Turnblat wrote:PS: We need the drummer to stay alive for the sake of children's animation
I see no need now that we have South Park. See 'im orff.
OK. Agreed. Let's be done with them all. And, while we're at it, get rid of the last of those Stones.

Derek
Too many to go for, there are four originals and another with forty years of experience. They know how to avoid the bullets. Let's face it, Keef should have been dead before the Seventies yet somehow through technology and preservatives he is still around. These guys are indestructible, leave them.

Posted: 00:25 Tue 18 Mar 2008
by Conky
Tracy Turnblat??? I Googled.

Image

I can see it now. It's the Tartan...

Posted: 00:35 Tue 18 Mar 2008
by DRT
You had to be at the Roots Farewell Offline. Thank Tiscali that you missed it!

Derek

Posted: 15:22 Tue 18 Mar 2008
by KillerB
Back on topic. Some highlights:

"We got £24.5 [million] - I don't remember the figures because the most important thing for me was just to get this over and done with"

"But Beatrice only gets £35,000 a year. And so she obviously is meant to travel B class while her father travels A class - but obviously I will pay for that"

"everybody knows he has been worth 800 (million) for the last 15 years."

Yes Hev, and when did you meet him?

Posted: 23:53 Tue 18 Mar 2008
by Overtired and emotional
Gentlemen (he said in his best Frankie Howerd impersonator's voice),

I am disappointed with you all. You overlook a signifiacnt issue. The BBC has, quite disinterestedly I am sure, published the transacript of the judgment.

Ms Mills claimed that she needed £39,000 per annum for wines notwithstanding that she does not drink alcohol. The Judge awarded £30,000 for wines AND food AND flowers. Tight or what?

I do not know what to make of this. If someone who claims £100,000,000 (don't the numbers look exotic) is prepared to spend a measly £39k per annum on wines, what sort of woman is she whether she drinks or not? A flibberttigibbet! A slut! A sodding (sorry) teetotal vegetarian.

On the other hand, who would not want to see Macca that smug, self satisfied, multimillionaire truly taken to the cleaners. Who does not want to wield his late granny's flat iron and push into Macca's Dorian Grey like mush?

My considered judgment is that their marriage, like that of Thomas and Jane Carlyle was very good. It made just two people miserable rather than four.

Posted: 23:58 Tue 18 Mar 2008
by KillerB
Overtired and emotional wrote:A sodding (sorry) teetotal vegetarian.
How dare you use that word on this site? It's all very well putting (sorry) before it but that is an outrageous word to mention. I may well have to add it as a banned word.

Posted: 00:09 Wed 19 Mar 2008
by DRT
Well, let me tell you. I live with a Vegetarian {who happnes to own two legs} and at no point has she asked her lawyers to secure £125 Squillion from my personal fortune.

Posted: 00:18 Wed 19 Mar 2008
by KillerB
Derek T. wrote:Well, let me tell you. I live with a Vegetarian {who happnes to own two legs} and at no point has she asked her lawyers to secure £125 Squillion from my personal fortune.
Nothing wrong with vegetarians, I restrict my diet to eating vegetarians. It was the other word meaning somebody that does not drink port, which is now unacceptable.

Posted: 22:32 Thu 20 Mar 2008
by Overtired and emotional
"While Bacchanalians madly sing
and magnify impiety
We'll load the passing zephyr's wing
with praises of sobriety"

T**t*t*l propagandists compelled children to chant the foregoing drivel at a public meeting in Bolton in 1851.

When I was a lad a woman came round to my primary school with terrible tales of the slaughter inflicted on one's brain cells by the demon drink. I signed the pledge. Didn't last very long really.

Re: But 12,345 will be along soon.

Posted: 16:11 Sat 05 Apr 2008
by KillerB
KillerB wrote:
jdaw1 wrote:All my fault, for which I humbly apologise. But 12,345 will be along soon.
Make me miss that and there will be trouble. I need to be there for five little ducks as well.
Didn't miss it. See here