Re: Views question?
Despite the subject line, this portion of the thread contains no Informix content at all — it is pure off-topic banter. It began when a joking remark about a "hummer" was misread as a double entendre, and the participants spent the rest of the thread explaining the pun, apologising for dragging comp.databases.informix toward alt.sex territory, and trading further innuendo and puns. No technical problem is raised and no resolution is recorded; there is nothing here for a reader seeking help with views.
Auto-generated by DrWatson from the posts below — may be imperfect; read the full thread.
Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > > > Enor P said: >> June C. Hunt wrote: >> >>> Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >>>> June C. Hunt said: >>>> >>>>>Andrew Hamm wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>June C. Hunt wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>So, Mark, how'd I do? Do I get a big, fat buzzer too? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Maybe not, but if you ask nicely you might get a big fat hummer... >>>>> >>>>>I thought that only worked the other way.... Hmmmmm. Maybe you really >>>>>*do* learn something new every day. :-) >>>> >>>> >>>> Words fail me, and that doesn't happen too often! >>> >>> >>> When I wrote that, it was way past my bedtime. It was only just now, >>> after catching up, that I realized this could have been taken, um, >>> WRONG! (No wonder my husband thought it was so darn funny. He could >>> have explained it to me!) >>> >>> No more posts past my bedtime - I promise! Actually, maybe no more >>> posts ever. >> >> Am not understand what is hummer plesae? > > It's either a very large 4x4, based on a military vehicle, or it's when > the singer gets too close to the microphone and starts to hum with it in > her/his/its mouth. Am still not sure I understand why this make embarrasment but thnak you. -- Enor
Enor P wrote: > Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >> >>Enor P said: >> >>>June C. Hunt wrote: >>> >>>>Obnoxio The Clown wrote: >>>> >>>>>June C. Hunt said: >>>>> >>>>>>Andrew Hamm wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>June C. Hunt wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>So, Mark, how'd I do? Do I get a big, fat buzzer too? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Maybe not, but if you ask nicely you might get a big fat hummer... >>>>>> >>>>>>I thought that only worked the other way.... Hmmmmm. Maybe you really >>>>>>*do* learn something new every day. :-) >>>>> >>>>>Words fail me, and that doesn't happen too often! >>>> >>>>When I wrote that, it was way past my bedtime. It was only just now, >>>>after catching up, that I realized this could have been taken, um, >>>>WRONG! (No wonder my husband thought it was so darn funny. He could >>>>have explained it to me!) >>>> >>>>No more posts past my bedtime - I promise! Actually, maybe no more >>>>posts ever. >>> >>>Am not understand what is hummer plesae? >> >>It's either a very large 4x4, based on a military vehicle, or it's when >>the singer gets too close to the microphone and starts to hum with it in >>her/his/its mouth. > > Am still not sure I understand why this make embarrasment but thnak you. From a personal standpoint, the embarrassment comes into it for several reasons. Part is that I meant "hmmmmm" to mean I'm-trying-to-figure-out-how-that-would-work, and it turns out that it was a very bad play on words. Another part is that the thread has turned into one that belongs in alt.sex instead of c.d.i. And I guess the rest is that, if you follow the thread back, I'm the one who provided the material for the deviation in the first place. (I must remember to take the 'Beavis and Butthead factor' into account whenever I write anything here.) From the perspective of others, there may be some embarrassment simply by the subject matter. What it has become, that is, not the original subject. -- June Hunt
"June C. Hunt" <june_c_hunt@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:40D880AB.60201@hotmail.com... > From a personal standpoint, the embarrassment comes into it for several > reasons. Part is that I meant "hmmmmm" to mean > I'm-trying-to-figure-out-how-that-would-work, and it turns out that it > was a very bad play on words. Another part is that the thread has You were just checking me out weren't you? > turned into one that belongs in alt.sex instead of c.d.i. And I guess > the rest is that, if you follow the thread back, I'm the one who > provided the material for the deviation in the first place. (I must You provide "material for the deviation"? Printed? > remember to take the 'Beavis and Butthead factor' into account whenever > I write anything here.) Yep! > > From the perspective of others, there may be some embarrassment simply > by the subject matter. What it has become, that is, not the original > subject. > > -- > June Hunt
David Williams wrote: > "June C. Hunt" <june_c_hunt@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:40D880AB.60201@hotmail.com... > >> From a personal standpoint, the embarrassment comes into it for several >>reasons. Part is that I meant "hmmmmm" to mean >>I'm-trying-to-figure-out-how-that-would-work, and it turns out that it >>was a very bad play on words. Another part is that the thread has > > > You were just checking me out weren't you? I'm afraid to go there... >>turned into one that belongs in alt.sex instead of c.d.i. And I guess >>the rest is that, if you follow the thread back, I'm the one who >>provided the material for the deviation in the first place. (I must > > > You provide "material for the deviation"? Printed? Oh good Lord - I walked right into that one, didn't I!? >>remember to take the 'Beavis and Butthead factor' into account whenever >>I write anything here.) > > > Yep! I see!! :-) -- JCH
"June C. Hunt" <june_c_hunt@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:40D8943D.4050005@hotmail.com... > David Williams wrote: > > > "June C. Hunt" <june_c_hunt@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > news:40D880AB.60201@hotmail.com... > > > >> From a personal standpoint, the embarrassment comes into it for several > >>reasons. Part is that I meant "hmmmmm" to mean > >>I'm-trying-to-figure-out-how-that-would-work, and it turns out that it > >>was a very bad play on words. Another part is that the thread has > > > > > > You were just checking me out weren't you? > > I'm afraid to go there... > Why...you know you want to! > > >>turned into one that belongs in alt.sex instead of c.d.i. And I guess > >>the rest is that, if you follow the thread back, I'm the one who > >>provided the material for the deviation in the first place. (I must > > > > > > You provide "material for the deviation"? Printed? > > > Oh good Lord - I walked right into that one, didn't I!? > Thud..Yes...did it hurt? > > >>remember to take the 'Beavis and Butthead factor' into account whenever > >>I write anything here.) > > > > > > Yep! > > I see!! :-) We are back to the printed stuff again...!! ;->>> > > -- > JCH
June C. Hunt wrote: > David Williams wrote: >> "June C. Hunt" wrote... >>> remember to take the 'Beavis and Butthead factor' into account >>> whenever I write anything here.) >> >> Yep! > > I see!! :-) hummmmm - I thought you were one of the comedians but I'm not so sure now. See, we need a replacement token chick since Impy went to the Dark MS-ide. Never need to be embarrassed here - just try to outclass the comedians with an even more risque response. People shy away from obvious naughties since this is a professional group (?!?!?!) but an excrutiating double entendre is always welcome.
"Andrew Hamm" <ahamm@mail.com> wrote in message news:2jrvhhF150uheU1@uni-berlin.de... > Never need to be embarrassed here - just try to outclass the comedians with > an even more risque response. People shy away from obvious naughties since > this is a professional group (?!?!?!) but an excrutiating double entendre is > always welcome. Yes, don't be shy in getting them out for us, even if they flop a bit.