news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/a...
I was always secretly routing for the croc though.
he who lives by the swordfish, dies by the swordfish
I bet he never thought that he would end up being a baddy in a Gerry Anderson series. :(
Noone ever thinks that. It just goes to show, eh?
Posted by
Brock, around September 2006:
Boo. I thought he was great. A little irritating at times (too much enthusiasm for me occasionally) but very passionate and knowledgable. And nuts.
Which is always entertaining.
he was passionate about people thinking he was a legend, didn't have a clue about wildlife, and didn't give a fuck about the animals that he used as stooges in his manic dance for attention.
he was australia's version of princess diana.
it had been drinking like a fish just before the incident
Posted by
Brock, around September 2006:
Sal: How does your assessment of the bloke tally with him creating and running one of the premier conservation projects your country has, then? Or his work reloacting Crocodiles and running that project way before anyone had ever heard of him?
He became famous because of the way he did conservation. Not because he was a famous person that decided to pick on conservation as his vehicle. So (and I don't deny he was a bit much of a 'showman' at times) to say he 'didn't have a clue about wildlife" is clearly crap as he was extremely knowledgable and noted as such within the profession, and in exactly the same way, your 'didn't give a fuck about animals' comment says more about how much you don't like him, than anything factual about someone who did so much work for conservation.
Say "I don't like him, he's an attention loving twat" if you want, but at least give him (begrudgingly if need be) his good points.
"attention-seeking" does not change from being the primary motivation merely because he finally gets to do it in front of a camera instead of a live crowd.
let's throw a few facts in:
he did no "conservation" work. he DID put some animals in a zoo and then put on shows for people. none of the captive animals were endangered (except the koalas), and there was no usefully productive breeding programme, and the offspring that WERE born were not raised in environments that allowed them ANY chance of being released to the wild.
and relocating crocs -- for fuxache. do you have any idea HOW MANY croc farms in queensland take in man-eaters? as a matter of course, rather than bleating about how heroic they are?
David Fleay is the premier australian conservation effort. phenomenal man. his wildlife preserve was unlike any other i've seen anywhere else -- essentially wild animals in a human-friendly environment. the first person in the world to breed platypi in captivity. the man who crippled himself financially to buy up permanently unproductive chunks of land just so that he could set them aside as reserves for the flocks of lorikeets that came through to those particular points each year, and left it to the State in perpetuity as a bird reserve. and a truly lovely bloke. i can remember him lifting me into the wombat pen so i could play with them, when i was a pup (after he'd worked out if i was a yob or actually gave a fuck about animals). and warning me that the tree kangaroos could bite. and showing me how to dodge the adders. and creeping round the cassowary nests with him and his kids. and trying to get close enough to the lyre birds' nests to see them sing without disturbing them. platypus coming up to the surface and sniffing my hand (mention that to ANY current "conservationist" and they'll tell you i'm lying). roos & emus everywhere, the roos sufficiently happy that they'd let people play with the joeys.
etc. etc. etc.
THAT's the mark of a genuine conservationist. he released more captive-bred platypi than the rest of the world put together, AND instead of them all dying, they nearly all survived.
irwin has good points, and a family. he may even have been a decent bloke, in person. i'm not going to denigrate him as a human being. but it puts a nasty taste in my mouth to see people bleat on and on about "him", parrotting the lines from the PR machine that picked him up when they realised they'd found a real-life cartoon. if people express sympathy for his widow/family -- fine. me too. no death is good. but to pretend he was more than a desperate showoff who finally happened to be in the wrong place when one of the animals he kept deliberately irritating in order to gain attention from humans, finally lashed out at him... well, that just gives me the irrits.
mourn the man, but don't perpetuate a fantasy.
"attention-seeking" does not change from being the primary motivation merely because he finally gets to do it in front of a camera instead of a live crowd.
It is important to get publicity, though. It doesn't help doing good work in a dark corner somewhere where no-one knows about it.
That's how you get financial support from the public.
Posted by
syl_DUPE1, around 11th September 2006:
It seems some of his fans are killing sting-rays for revenge. Idiots.
This will make ya laugh with no disrespect to The Croc Man.. R.I.P...
"Embarrassing Moments of The Crocodile Hunter...
The Wildest Home Videos of Steve Irwin".. (his own original footage)..
www.shamozzle.com/Embarrass...
[posted in the correct thread after whacks on the knuckles by school-marm-sal]
hugely relevant link there
I thought the things they said about South Africa on there were funny
Posted by
ellipse, around September 2006:
sure i'm late on this
but i care not
steve iriwin was a fully crazy loon at times
but he loved animals and shared that passion with the entire world.
In the USA he was pretty much a hero, and if you can get that culture to think more than 10 seconds about the enviroment you deserve a sainthood.
so it's very sad he's gone
a friend of mine from work went to oz and to their zoo and she got to pet tiger cubs, I was very jelous
yeah. traditional australian tiger cubs. god wee wub irwin. he's so PASSIONATE. so COMMITTED. so HONEST.
so DINKYDI TRUE BLUE MATESHIP TRADITION WALTZING COBBER COBBER COBBER OI OI OI PATRIOTISM AUSTRALIA BUSH CROC WOW ROUGH COBBER MATE TRUE BLUE DINKYDI COBBER.
but point taken, soo, re waking up bits of america.
for future reference, miki, tell your mate to head down the coast an hour or two to burleigh heads (just south of the currumbin bird sanctuary), and go to a genuine conservationist's site.
the park:
www.epa.qld.gov.au/nature_c...
why he's regarded still with awe globally:
www.epa.qld.gov.au/nature_c...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David...
he was one of the most phenomenally genuine people i've ever met. and his animals were so comfortable that they bred normally as though they were wild. because they essentially were. just comfortable with the people walking through and around them.
"so DINKYDI TRUE BLUE MATESHIP TRADITION WALTZING COBBER COBBER COBBER OI OI OI PATRIOTISM AUSTRALIA BUSH CROC WOW ROUGH COBBER MATE TRUE BLUE DINKYDI COBBER."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
*takes a breath*
Bwhahahahahahahahahahahahaha.haaaaaaaaaa!
Posted by
ellipse, around September 2006:
sal, people raise tiger s in different parts of the world, becuase they are extinct in the freaking wild.
allowing people to pat and touch cubs creates a bond with that animal people never forget. By not forgeting, they might actualy dontate their money or time to the cuase.
sorry soo, not trying to have a go at you, but...
on that basis, siegfried and roy did as much for conservation as did steve irwin.
but at least they were honest about why and how they were using the animals they played with. and at least their animals were treated well.
why tiger cubs? why not, say, baby bilbies?
bilbies are far more endangered than tigers. and they're australian so any successful breeding in his zoo would actually be useful. AND they're cuter, so would be better for ordinary publicity reasons.
but, you know, they're not DANGEROUS when they're grown.
so they don't create that frisson for casual observers.
fundamental difference in perception/opinion here:
•
you think he was primarily interested in conservation, and that he only made himself famous by various stunts/displays with animals in order that he could raise awareness about their conservation needs.
•
i think he used animals to (and ONLY those animals which could) gain awe, respect, and hence status from humans.
sorry soo, i know you like the guy. but we're going to have to agree to disagree on his underlying motivations.
Posted by
Brock, around September 2006:
Actually, she didn't particularly like the guy. We have discussed him before.
But frankly, to say he did 'no conservation' is utter shit. Just one example: to equate relocating crocodiles (to continue their lives in the wild further up river) to being taken in by a croc farm (where they kill them for food and their skin) is the most patently fuciking ridiculous thing I have ever seen you type. Why the fuck would the croc farms crow about being heroes? They are just getting extra fucking profit, for christ sake. They get a fully grown croc for meat/skin that they didn't have to pay for to raise or house.
Quids in. Hardly the same as relocating to avoid them being killed is it?
Yes, this guy you continually refer to may be a great conservationist. So what? No-one is saying that Irwin is the best or only Oz conservationist. No-one even compared them until you did. Irwin's worth does not in any way detract from the bloke you laud. You may not like how Irvin worked - you also may not like the fact that he was so successful at using his personality to raise awareness of his causes, but to claim his only intent was self promotion is astonishingly ignorant, to be honest.
I have watched a hell of a lot of Croc Hunter diaries and related programmes, and I know a fair bit about the natural world. Have you watched any? And saw nothing at all related to conservation, just showmanship? How about all the home videos from the 20 years before being famous for this sort of thing was heard of? Was that for attention? Was it all one big long audition for Hollywood? Of course not. His methods were unusual, but he was knowledgable and genuinely believed he was acting in the best interests of the animals and species as a whole. Some believed he was a bit too hands on - they may be right - but those very methods created a massive awareness that can only be a good thing. Half the battle with conservation is making people aware of and care about the animals being harmed, and a lot more people and organisations who know a fuck sight more than you do about wild life clearly think a huge amount of his achievements (people such as David Bellamy, for instance - or does he know fuck all as well?), so how come you know better?
So unless a massive amount of people are wrong, and you know the 'true light', perhaps you are badly informed, or just plain wrong.
YOU think he used the animals to make himself famous.
MOST OF THE REST OF US think that he
became famous because of what he was already doing (and had been for many years). Animal Planet are not exactly renowned for employing or filming pure showmen with no care for the environment, are they?
sorry brock, refusal to step outside preferred memes does not an argument make.
announcing that you felt emotionally affected by parts of what he did, is NOT the same as establishing how what he did had anything to do with his stated (shouted) objectives. and it in no way explains the vast discrepancies between his stated (trumpeted) objectives and his actions.
yes, i saw many of his shows. there was a big gap between the first couple and then me watching a large chunk after hearing people rant and rave about him, to be absolutely certain i wasn't missing something.
if you don't understand what he was doing, that's fine. but please don't jump up and down and say that because you don't, i don't.
here's a hint. the average croc farm takes better care of its crocs and has them in a more natural environment than does irwin's zoo. that's kinda weird, isn't it? they also breed faster. that's kinda weird, isn't it? because that's kinda a global indicator of how well you actually look after animals. the fact that they then start behaving naturally.
by the way: have a look at what "relocating crocs" means, in real life. you may be a little taken aback.
remember, this is the man who was SO dedicated to The Image that he would with tears in his eyes and a tremblingly clenched jaw tell interviewers that he never had time to think about his own safety, because he was too concerned with that of his crew. they would report this wide-eyed. do you have ANY idea how hard it is to be attacked by a crocodile if you're standing next to it, let alone a snake? anyone 10 feet away might as well be in a hotel in sydney. do you have ANY idea how hard it is to be poisoned by most of the snakes he made a big song & dance about? (hint: their teeth are at the REAR of their jaw and their poison is not injected but merely trickles down the side of their teeth). complete fiction. but only in real life, not in the minds of the people listening, who lapped up his unselfless hero schtick because it fit one of their favourite memes.
sorry, brock, but if this is what you genuinely think, then i'm afraid you've been a sucker for his self-publicity campaign: you're his target market.
steve irwin: conservationist
princess di: charity worker
Posted by
Brock, around September 2006:
Clearly the same. Yuhu.
What unsung work for charities for Di do for 20 years or more before marrying into the spotlight through being attached to someone famous, then? Mind you, Princess Di clearly didn't do any good for anyone either. No promotion for charities at all. Until she self destructed, of course, but I never said they were the same.
I think you have finally lost it, Sal. If you had said " I don't like him. He smacks of total egotism and loves the fame more than the animals", I may have accepted your point (although I would have disagreed with the last bit. But your standpoint that he ONLY did what he did for the fame, does no conservation work at all and is basically a media puppet is fucking laughable. You don't like him, we get it. But at least be honest about it, rather than fabricating shit.
posturing for the media is not the same as being a media puppet.
you seem to equate finally succeeding in gaining attention, with a fundamental change in behaviour. on that basis, your behaviour's not criminal until you're convicted and you're not corrupt until you're caught.
someone screaming "look at me look at me look at me LOOK AT ME-EEEE!!!!" is attention-seeking, regardless of how many are looking at them.
as i said elsewhere, i feel sorry for his wife and family. they have lost a loved one.
but i find it deeply irritating to see fantasies created and wrapped round him and his behaviour in the public sphere, conforming to pre-existing memes rather than anything he did or was. if people are going to do that, do it about the people who GENUINELY strove for the goals he paid lip service to.
I was struck by similar reactions when Di died : masses of flowers and an outpouring of grief. A few months later (I think?) Mother Theresa died : diddly squat. Such is the nature of our world. At least Sal is crying out in the wilderness about it.
Posted by
ellipse, around September 2006:
yeah becuase mother teresa was such a lovely person.
oh wait....
I totally agree with Brocks comments although:
"people such as David Bellamy, for instance - or does he know fuck all as well?"
I think Bellamy went on record as saying there was no proof of global warming. I sawa debate on it and he was in the "doesn't exist" camp. Although to be fair, after he was pointed in the right direction he did do a public U-turn.
Posted by
Grim..., around September 2006:
I was struck by similar reactions when Di died : masses of flowers and an outpouring of grief. A few months later (I think?) Mother Theresa died : diddly squat. Such is the nature of our world. At least Sal is crying out in the wilderness about it.
They died at about the same time, I think, hence (in the UK at least) Theresa was completely overshadowed.
some people look at the facts, others prefer the social bandwagon.
massed opinion always beats verifiable observation. ask galileo. and conformance to social memes always beats contribution. ask sister theresa. and nothing better engages social attention than playing up to the crowds. ask di. and other social-game players will play along, because they know which side their own bread is buttered.
The Wisdom of the Ancient Greeks
Phocion ruled Athens as Macedonia's agent with great
moderation and personal honesty. In the power struggle after
the death of the regent in 319BC, however, he was deposed,
convicted of treason, and executed by Athenians hoping to
restore democracy. Shortly afterward the Athenians decreed
a public burial and a statue in his honour.
-- Encyclopaedia Britannica
ANYway
you'll note steve spent his whole life avoiding the fiendishly dangerous holder of
Real Ultimate Power
Facts:
1.
wombats are mammals.
2.
wombats fight ALL the time.
3.
The purpose of the wombat is to flip out and kill people.
They died at about the same time, I think, hence (in the UK at least) Theresa was completely overshadowed.
Yeah, I guess so. All the tears had dried up by the time T went.
But one can't help drawing a comparison between the two women, and consequently, forming a picture of our values as the human race.
grrr geeeees sal I wasn't asking for another tirade about how all our opinions are wrong, I was just sharing a tiny little story about someone I know.
For all you and I know, they also went to the place you mentioned, and obviously the tiger cubs were not the only animals they saw or were allowed to handle.
and why the hell am I defending my post (how the hell do you make an angry or annoyed smilie)
sorry miki.
because you just threw it in without any extra explanation, your post read as being in context rather than a separate story.
(how the hell do you make an angry or annoyed smilie)
>:O
>:|
]:/
§:[
I like that last one:it looks like his hair is all mussed up too :)
Nice weekend everyone...ciao
Posted by
Brock, around September 2006:
Alfie: Actually, Bellamy went on record to say that there was no serious evidence that we are <icausing global warming. He never said there was no warming at all ( I read the article that triggered that debate off - I have it somewhere). Because we have no control data it is really hard to make any sort of accurate assessments as to the amount we have affected it.
Clearly the Earth is warming - it has to be because there was an ice age a few hundred thousand years ago, and there sure as shit isn't now (unless you count Newcastle upon Tyne), so it has been slowly warming for thousands of years, mostly without any input from us at all. There seems to be something like a 60/10/30 split (rough as hell guess) between people (knowledgable, that is) that believe 'we affect it' (whether tangibly or not), those that say 'we don't', and those that say that with the evidence we have, it is 'practically impossible to say conclusively' respectively. Bellamy was/is in the last camp (I haven't sen any retraction - do you have linkys?)
How can we prove that without the carbon dioxide and pollutants we produce, that the Earth wouldn't have got this hot anyway? We have only been polluting for about 200 years in any significant volume, and that is approximately a blink in the scheme of things since the last Ice Age. Most of the 'evidence' is based on conjecture (most of it hugely knowledgable and modelled for sufficiently long to have reasonable faith in, mind you) but at the end of the day, you cannot categorically say how much, if at all, we are accellerating the natural warming of the globe.
I have some links somewhere from a previous discussion with my extremely knowledgable environmentalist mate about this. His assessment is roughly that 'most environmentalists (with no agenda) are fairly convinced that we are having 'an effect', but that it is impossible to say how much. But being as any effect is bad, combined with our almost total blindness to the consequences of our producing power and polluting, we should do something about it as our impact is only ever going to increase'.
The media, shockingly enough, totally blow this out of proportion and use scare tactics, which are easily disproved by the lack of real evidence, so you get a see-saw of public opinion that is wholely unhelpful. The Earth is getting warmer. We are fucking up the Earth. It doesn't
really matter if one affects the other, we still shouldn't be doing it. Focussing on the details just allows people to argue that the effect is minimal/non-existant.
Sal:
if people are going to do that, do it about the people who GENUINELY strove for the goals he paid lip service to.
I think I get it now. You think the attention over his death is unjustified. You worded that as "he didn't do fuck all". It may well be unjustified in terms of the level of fuss, but some of the fuss over his death is for being a conservationist, MOST is for being a celebrity. Perhaps if you seperated the two fusses, you may stop spouting about how he never did anything to help animals, and was a cynical manipulator for his own ends - that is the bit that is horseshit. The international reaction is over the top, yes. But that doesn't mean the bloke never did anything good. Also, don't forget, most of the reaction is generated by the Land Of The Media Puppet And General Hysterical Behaviour (ie here) so will always be out of proportion to anything representative.
He did genuinely strive for those goals. That is painfully obvious from his very early programmes (before he was ever a 'star') and by the various charities he set up and funded, along with the subsequent international coverage of his further work. Other people may have done it with less fuss (your platypus man) but that doesn't mean that Irwin was better or worse, just a different person. You may prefer the quiet approach, but, again, that doesn't mean Irwin did nothing. No-one can quantify whether captive breeding of Platypus has more
value than making most of america aware of the plight of animals (to pick two examples), but one being good doesn't preclude the other being so also.
I love discussions, but Sal with you I feel like there is no discussion, you just often seem to launch "your opinion is wrong" tirades and use about 100 times more words then anybosy else on the site.
This is obviously your prerogative, but it makes me not want to read your posts and not want to post myself.
Where I usually just keep my mouth shut, this afternoon I was annoyed by the fuckwit-friday driving before I even got in the door, hence my post.
It's all fine and thanks for the smileys, momentary brain freeze there.
Posted by
ellipse, around September 2006:
let's face it miki tiger cubs are cute and anywhere that lets you cuddle them is tres awesome.
brock: "You think the attention over his death is unjustified." that's the essence of it, more or less. more less than more. and in the interests of winding this down i won't try to realign the lesses.
but i do very strongly disagree with your subsequent assertions re him genuinely striving for those goals. i didn't equate di's & irwin's motivation for no reason.
miki: sorry that you feel that way. but bear in mind you're thinking only of the times where i see a material error in people's knowledge/analysis and seek to correct it. i really object to current memes (and people's consequential behaviours) --no matter how widely held or popular-- which are flatly contradicted by objectively independently observable facts, being presented as reality.
where there's an actual discussion to be had, or some ambiguity, i take very much more restrained a position.
the purpose is the purpose, not the status.
oh, and re words, i average 90-140wpm -- i can type dictation. so it's a real and deliberate effort of will to type less rather than as i speak.
sorry about that. i do TRY to cut it down.
but i'll try harder
Posted by
ellipse, around September 2006:
but salti - i personally see a material error in your analysis of the whole Steve Irwin thing - you won't let it go, or accept that any postion other than yours might have merit.
Posted by
Brock, around September 2006:
Particularly in reference to repeated comments such as these:
which are flatly contradicted by objectively independently observable facts, being presented as reality.
I have seen NO independantly observed facts suggesting that Irwin has done nothing for conservation, or that he purely used animals for his fame. Especially as he was doing this sort of thing from the age of 9 or earlier.
I
have, however, seen independant comments that they don't approve of his methods and wish he would be less showy in his presentation of a worthy message, but that is by no means the same thing. No denial of worth in there.
Did any of these independantly observed facts come from watching any of his programmes? How many have you seen?
Posted by
Brock, around September 2006:
Oh, and:
oh, and re words, i average 90-140wpm -- i can type dictation
How much can you average if you use capital letters? You know, like a grown up...
;)
salti, I agree with you that it's grating when you hear people express opinions without basis BUT
- like sue and brock I dont see how your opinion is somehow FACT and the arguments you bring to the discussion do not persuade me
- your posts usually imply, or simply state, that the other person is stupid to hold the opinion they do, I'm a smart, well read adult and I take great offence at that.
- even if you are right, even if you somehow posses THE TRUTH on a particular subject, no-one appointed you 'high lord of stamping out incorrect opinions'. Like sue said, can you not let another person have a different opinion ?
Just fyi my opinion on this particular subject, which I hadn't actualy stated before:
I have no real knowledge about how much or little conservarion he did, but I do believe he did a lot more positive things then negative things so conclusion: good guy.
I did find him tiresome/annoying on tv.
I rarely understand any of this mass hysteria, not the flowers for Di or the hoopla over Irwin. I don't usually go in for hero worship, I didn't have posters of people on my wall, I don't 'love' moviestars I've never met.
But if millions of people feel some positive feeling for this man and they want to share it then I think that is a nice and positive thing and I don't feel the need to tell them they are wrong.
I feel bad for his wife, kids, family and friends who will miss him and like I said I think he was a good guy who tried to accomplish positive things so it's sad he is gone.
dammit Brock, I don't like capital letters either and your remark made me go back over my post and put some in. I can't wait untill the outlow them alltogether!
we are going to my mums for the weekend now, no internet access, so please don't interpret my silence as pouting, happy weekend all
Posted by
Brock, around September 2006:
Wow. I think that is the first time I've seen miki get 'stern'...
:)
It's given you the horn, eh? ;)
/crass saturday
/been on b3ta too long
go me ;)
I think you'd like me in real life Brock :D
Posted by
ellipse, around 1st October 2006:
yeah go you miki!!!!!
Posted by
Sul_DUPE1, around 1st October 2006:
Oh god I've clicked into a Jeremy Kyle show!
Posted by
ellipse, around 1st October 2006:
Sul i brought you some promite yesterday!
expect a package in 2-8 weeks
Posted by
WarHead, around 1st October 2006:
Is that some kind of penis enlargement treatment?
Posted by
ellipse, around 1st October 2006:
the vegetarian version, in fact
*raises glass to miki*
Good work. Not sure what the vegetarian penis enlargement malarkey is about. Sung a song on Wednesday; "When the barb hits your heart / like nature's poison dart / that's a stingray / (a stingray) / when your world has been threat / by some cruel marionette / that's a stingray / (a stingray)" and so on. Nice to hear about some of Australia's unsung heroes of nature. I'm sure there's a kid who stops people stepping on snails who's greater than Stevie E, and everything he's done is just part of his marrying-Prince-Charles drive for publicity. He does that sort of thing. Easiest way to get famous, playing with crocodiles. Media whore! Cocksmoker!
Hello all, by the way. I'm home. I'm back. I've still not got an internet and I'm at my mother and father's house for the weekend so I've been catching up on what you kids have been up to lately. I've finished university for ever. Yes. I'm now a Master of Arts in English Literature. I got a C+. The analysis of my dissertation went; "You have some very good ideas. It is very funny. You are good at creative writing and should pursue this. But you still don't have a darn clue about literary theory and there are massive holes in this."
This is more or less what I expected. I passed, anyway. Heck, yeah! I moved house. This was traumatic. I have a new house now however. I have two jobs (pub, journalism) and am looking for third.
Hopefully, we shall have internet at home soon and I shall be up for posting more soon. But it's good to know you're all well.
It was the sonnet wot won it
Princess Diana, no longer shall you front Kula Shaker.
A girl with writing on her jeans, in a photo
Of a photograph. That summer, we paddled canoes,
Stole glimpses of Sophie's legs, and toasted
The new government. When a rose fell, once again
Into a bowl of thorns. We watched the funeral,
On video, again and again. Once backwards.
I stayed up for Portillo, all night . . .
Rapid pulsing breaths from exaggerated lips
But summer ended, and Diana passed away
In flying metal, accusations, and headlines
Only to rise again, phoenix-like
Reincarnated as a hardback coffee table book
£25.
Posted by
WarHead, around 1st October 2006:
Ha ha ha hahaaaaaaaaaaa....... excellent.
Congrats on the pass.
What's the journalism job, Doc?
Maybe you could combine the two existing jobs, so it'd be pub journalism. You know it makes sense. 'Doctor Lucid's Good Pub Guide.' Like the
other one, but from the barman's perspective.
Went to St. Albans beer festival yesterday. Don't want to look at a pint of ale for a while.
I'm working for the Brighton Fringe.. it's like the Edinburgh fringe, but in Brighton. Might actually be doing some faux-pub-journalism at some point, but just for fun...
Posted by
ellipse, around 1st October 2006:
does the brighton fringe pay as much as all other fringe festivals around the world?
normal going rate
400 hours a week = free tickets and $0
Posted by
syl_DUPE1, around 1st October 2006:
Nice to have you back Doc. I missed you. Congratulations on passing your Masters! Good work!
Posted by
ellipse, around 1st October 2006:
are you going to learn up to be a doc, doc?
ooh congratulations docter doc!
>This is more or less what I expected. I passed, anyway
if you delete the comma and "ny" from that last word, you will immediately be hailed by all as a literary genius unrecognised in your own time, and your thesis will sell for mucho moola
you could then achieve international superstardom and wealth publishing as Doctor Doctor Lucid RIP
Ha. Fringe: Slightly more than that. Slightly.
Doctor Doctor Lucid; I don't think they'd let me back in. Also not sure about 3 more years of school. But it's tempting.
