Same thing I'm missing . . . P.S. Thanks!

LET'S LOOK AT SOME GREAT PICS, SHALL WE, THIS BEING A PICTURE THREAD??? Edited to add--

Your contributions today are magnifico, brspled.

lol wrong.

I should clarify, "Led Zeppelin in its original form."

I hadn't seen it before, I didn't know it was yours. Apologies. Pics get posted so many places it's almost impossible for the people who post them to know their origin, but I realize it's irritating not to be credited.

The very end of their very last performance as Led Zeppelin.

I think Babs would prefer MH didn't embed his thoughts in the middle of Babs's post, but in any case, guys--we're deep in TMI here, when it comes down to discussing whose time of the month it is. Back to the pics of yourself, huh?

You're forgiven.

I thought I said you were going to ignore him?? (Not Babs. )

I may be giving you too much credit, but to me you're a genius. Now, carry on as if I never spoke.

The atheism example was obviously just that, an example--of somebody else manipulating a readership for entertainment. I have no further interest in that topic. As for your comment about ninelives, I'm glad to know she'll think it as worthy of being ignored as I do.

I don't know how he finds all the time. Singing, playing guitar, keyboards, drums, with all those different combos, now the Dead Weather have announced a tour . . Amazing. I hope when they were making IMGL he gave Jimmy a few hints on how to get out there and actively make music.

Don't tempt us, Babs. Should just add, the notion of Spats also being a regular member is just one that occurred to me as an explanation of how it's possible to keep up the role-playing all this time, namely if he has another outlet as a regular Zep fan. But the author may just get off on creating the character. Like, for instance, the husband of a friend of mine is an atheist (not a Spats atheist! ) and we live in a very evangelical Christian area, so periodically he sends pro-atheist letters to the local newspaper for the sheer enjoyment of reading all the replies as the devout readership busts a gut in horror at his views. Tickles me, too. So, in along the same lines, note how every time Spats says something female-related, there's a reliable outpouring of I can see how that could be huge fun. Also staying up thinking up dumb replies to people's rational posts. Because there always is one, expressed in a completely deadpan tone--the writer is a genius.

*cough* That's a nice one . . .

Great job, Pilot! You can see those guys on the left are impressed!

^^ Excellent!

Exactly. That's why I'm full of admiration, and why hardly anybody else feels the same way. That picture is brilliant--posting a pic where we can't see him, because he doesn't exist--as is the line about being "a real person and not some joker" (the Joker being his avi). It's like in the Wizard of Oz--look behind the curtain and there's only some guy pretending to be the Wizard. But it's easy to maintain the role if you've got another persona on the board where you can be yourself. In response to nine: Attention. Winding everybody up. A whole thread to himself. While the author as himself is over in another thread expressing his real views on the possibility of an O2 DVD release or whatever.

That's just part of the way his character is written, ldw, from my perspective--and it's very well done (in the sense of convincing and consistent), I have to congratulate the author from that point of view.

Some good news on this thread lately.

That pic (and the "pimples" line) just confirms for me what I've always thought, lo these many years--that Spats is a character, not a person (though he may also be one of the regular members of the board under another name). He never grows up because characters never grow up--Peter Pan is the same age every time you open the book. He's damn well-written, but--and I know I'm about the only one--I'm still a Spats-atheist.

That is such a wonderful piece of architecture--well, I was talking about the Opera House, but it applies to the woman in the foreground too.

No, I think getting back to the pics is a good idea. Oops, guess I should post one!

Well, I've looked at pictures of them onstage together for forty years now, and I still think the whole notion of homoeroticism is being projected onto them by fans. Same thing happened with Jagger/Richards. I'm not saying they'd have been naive enough not to know that such things gave the girls a thrill, but they didn't play that role on stage, fans just think they did. SOME fans, I should hastily add!

:wub: