Meeting Royalty in Europe
Nov 1st 2003, 8:27 am
#91
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Meeting Royalty in Europe
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 18:52:22 -0800, in rec.travel.europe, "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)"
<"evgmsop-no spam"@earthlink.net> arranged some electrons, so they looked like this :
...
... Magda wrote:
... >
... >
... > No problems with coffee and keyboards/monitors here, but I'm decidedly scaring my
... > neighbours since 6 am... ROTFL
...
... Another newsgroup to which I post identifies such posts with "BW" (for
... "beverage warning") meaning that if one wishes to avoid spraying liquid
... everywhere, one should swallow before reading!
We should do it here too.
<"evgmsop-no spam"@earthlink.net> arranged some electrons, so they looked like this :
...
... Magda wrote:
... >
... >
... > No problems with coffee and keyboards/monitors here, but I'm decidedly scaring my
... > neighbours since 6 am... ROTFL
...
... Another newsgroup to which I post identifies such posts with "BW" (for
... "beverage warning") meaning that if one wishes to avoid spraying liquid
... everywhere, one should swallow before reading!
We should do it here too.
Nov 1st 2003, 8:40 am
#92
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Meeting Royalty in Europe
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 18:40:20 -0800, in rec.travel.europe, "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)"
<"evgmsop-no spam"@earthlink.net> arranged some electrons, so they looked like this :
...
... Robert wrote:
... >
... > It's strange how my posting on safety in Europe turned into a debate
... > of whether or not I have a royal friend. Some of you may not have seen
... > my last post so I'll say it again below.
...
... I KNEW his avowed decision to stop posting here was much too good to be
... true!
Obviously. But if we stop giving him the attention he craves and leave him babbling alone,
maybe he will take his fantasies and delirious dreams elsewhere. He is not even amusing in
his role of "penniless Lord Sinclair" !... :-((
<"evgmsop-no spam"@earthlink.net> arranged some electrons, so they looked like this :
...
... Robert wrote:
... >
... > It's strange how my posting on safety in Europe turned into a debate
... > of whether or not I have a royal friend. Some of you may not have seen
... > my last post so I'll say it again below.
...
... I KNEW his avowed decision to stop posting here was much too good to be
... true!
Obviously. But if we stop giving him the attention he craves and leave him babbling alone,
maybe he will take his fantasies and delirious dreams elsewhere. He is not even amusing in
his role of "penniless Lord Sinclair" !... :-((
Nov 1st 2003, 9:30 am
#93
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Meeting Royalty in Europe
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 22:58:43 +0100, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Arwel Parry writes:
>> I have to say the royals serve very nice cakes and ice cream.
>Are you expected to dress up to go to their parties?
It would be normal to, normal business smart.
>If so, what happens if you don't?
You're considered odd for not following the social conventions of the
occasion, same as if you turn up in a suit to a skater convention.
They don't set the hounds on you or anything.
Jim.
wrote:
>Arwel Parry writes:
>> I have to say the royals serve very nice cakes and ice cream.
>Are you expected to dress up to go to their parties?
It would be normal to, normal business smart.
>If so, what happens if you don't?
You're considered odd for not following the social conventions of the
occasion, same as if you turn up in a suit to a skater convention.
They don't set the hounds on you or anything.
Jim.
Nov 1st 2003, 9:49 am
#94
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Meeting Royalty in Europe
Robert writes:
> What I meant is I have her email address and can email her right now
> because we're good friends. I can call her too. I can also call her
> father, the prince and his wife, the queen and get right through.
So? That's normal for good friends, no matter who they are. Do you
think that well-known people refuse calls even from friends and
relatives, just because they are well known?
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> What I meant is I have her email address and can email her right now
> because we're good friends. I can call her too. I can also call her
> father, the prince and his wife, the queen and get right through.
So? That's normal for good friends, no matter who they are. Do you
think that well-known people refuse calls even from friends and
relatives, just because they are well known?
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Nov 1st 2003, 9:51 am
#95
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Meeting Royalty in Europe
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) writes:
> If the troll's claims WERE true, one wonders how his "royal" friends
> would react to being made the butt of a travel newsgroup?
At least he has had the discretion not to name names, but I probably
wouldn't be happy if others talked about my friendship as if it were a
Rolex, names or not.
> And of course, ANYONE can claim ANYTHING on the internet -
> how many of us actually CARE enough to do any checking up?
It's not hard to make friends with famous people, if your objective in
life is making friends with famous people (including royals). And
remember the six degrees of separation.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> If the troll's claims WERE true, one wonders how his "royal" friends
> would react to being made the butt of a travel newsgroup?
At least he has had the discretion not to name names, but I probably
wouldn't be happy if others talked about my friendship as if it were a
Rolex, names or not.
> And of course, ANYONE can claim ANYTHING on the internet -
> how many of us actually CARE enough to do any checking up?
It's not hard to make friends with famous people, if your objective in
life is making friends with famous people (including royals). And
remember the six degrees of separation.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Nov 1st 2003, 9:52 am
#96
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Meeting Royalty in Europe
Robert writes:
> My princess friend knows that people are interested in royalty. What
> would she say about these posts? I don't know for sure but I think she
> would think it's funny that no one believed me. She's smart enough to
> understand all of this. She might be mad that I'm spending too much
> time here.
Why don't you pick up the phone and ask her, instead of speculating, and
then report back to us?
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> My princess friend knows that people are interested in royalty. What
> would she say about these posts? I don't know for sure but I think she
> would think it's funny that no one believed me. She's smart enough to
> understand all of this. She might be mad that I'm spending too much
> time here.
Why don't you pick up the phone and ask her, instead of speculating, and
then report back to us?
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Nov 1st 2003, 9:54 am
#97
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Meeting Royalty in Europe
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) writes:
> Possibly because of them?
Those eyebrows were part of what prevented me from ever finding her
attractive. They looked bad enough naturally, but make-up often
deliberately exaggerated them.
Actually, she looked a lot like my mom.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> Possibly because of them?
Those eyebrows were part of what prevented me from ever finding her
attractive. They looked bad enough naturally, but make-up often
deliberately exaggerated them.
Actually, she looked a lot like my mom.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Nov 1st 2003, 9:56 am
#98
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Meeting Royalty in Europe
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) writes:
> Interesting observation! Does a "princess" cease to be such, when she
> marries?
If she marries an heir to the throne, she becomes queen when he becomes
king, as I recall. In fact, I think she also becomes queen if she
marries a king, but I'm not sure. I know that the rule does not apply
in reverse, which is why the queen of England is still married to a
prince (a "prince consort").
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> Interesting observation! Does a "princess" cease to be such, when she
> marries?
If she marries an heir to the throne, she becomes queen when he becomes
king, as I recall. In fact, I think she also becomes queen if she
marries a king, but I'm not sure. I know that the rule does not apply
in reverse, which is why the queen of England is still married to a
prince (a "prince consort").
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Nov 1st 2003, 9:56 am
#99
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Meeting Royalty in Europe
Arwel Parry writes:
> A business suit will do, though lots turn up in morning suits and hats.
What is a morning suit?
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> A business suit will do, though lots turn up in morning suits and hats.
What is a morning suit?
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Nov 1st 2003, 9:57 am
#100
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Meeting Royalty in Europe
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) writes:
> Oops! That lets you out, Mix (I imagine the DO enforce a "dress code"
> there).
I wouldn't want to attend a party that would exclude me (or anyone else)
on the basis of dress.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> Oops! That lets you out, Mix (I imagine the DO enforce a "dress code"
> there).
I wouldn't want to attend a party that would exclude me (or anyone else)
on the basis of dress.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Nov 1st 2003, 9:59 am
#101
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Meeting Royalty in Europe
Robert writes:
> I was then invited to his house and met his beautiful wife
> and was asked if I wanted to meet Senator Kennedy whose
> office was close by. I couldn't believe it. We didn't go
> but went to an Indian resturant where I showed more of my
> youthful ignorance. I've learned. What can I tell you.
That you haven't yet shed your youthful indiscretion.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> I was then invited to his house and met his beautiful wife
> and was asked if I wanted to meet Senator Kennedy whose
> office was close by. I couldn't believe it. We didn't go
> but went to an Indian resturant where I showed more of my
> youthful ignorance. I've learned. What can I tell you.
That you haven't yet shed your youthful indiscretion.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Nov 1st 2003, 9:59 am
#102
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Meeting Royalty in Europe
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> nightjar@<insert my surname here>.uk.com> (nightjar) wrote:
> >
> > "Robert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > ...
> > > Oh, yea? Then why is royal watching so popular with the masses.
> >
> > It is popular enough to sell newspapers at the low end of the market in
> > the
> > UK, but then so are football, scandal, government sleaze and women with
> > naked breasts.
> Indeed. I haven't counted column inches, but ISTM the British royals who
> get the most coverage in the UK press are Prince William (young,
> good-looking, glamorous, rich) and Princess Diana (all the above plus dead
> in what people call "tragic circumstances").
> They're both much more discussed than the Queen (head of state but
> quiet, sensible and uncontroversial). So in a sense the royals who are
> attentively watched are so because of the characteristics they share with
> celebrities in general, not because of their royal-ness per se.
I think there is a great deal of truth in that observation.
Colin Bignell
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> nightjar@<insert my surname here>.uk.com> (nightjar) wrote:
> >
> > "Robert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > ...
> > > Oh, yea? Then why is royal watching so popular with the masses.
> >
> > It is popular enough to sell newspapers at the low end of the market in
> > the
> > UK, but then so are football, scandal, government sleaze and women with
> > naked breasts.
> Indeed. I haven't counted column inches, but ISTM the British royals who
> get the most coverage in the UK press are Prince William (young,
> good-looking, glamorous, rich) and Princess Diana (all the above plus dead
> in what people call "tragic circumstances").
> They're both much more discussed than the Queen (head of state but
> quiet, sensible and uncontroversial). So in a sense the royals who are
> attentively watched are so because of the characteristics they share with
> celebrities in general, not because of their royal-ness per se.
I think there is a great deal of truth in that observation.
Colin Bignell
Nov 1st 2003, 10:03 am
#103
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Meeting Royalty in Europe
Robert writes:
> But I do have these contacts and I realize that
> that it's sounds unbelievable.
It doesn't sound unbelievable at all. A great many people are very
close to billionaires, royalty, and so on, but usually do not pursue the
contacts that would have the former drinking tea in the parlors of the
latter. It is really true that most of us are separated from so-called
celebrities by only a few degrees of separation, and so those of us who
worship them can come to know them if that be our goal.
What concerns me more is your lack of discretion. Each tale is a bit
more fabulous than its predecessor, and, as I expected, you eventually
named names when the stories alone failed to impress. If you are making
things up, it doesn't matter, but if you are not, it's very indiscreet.
> I am curious that my sincerity has not come shinning
> through my posts, because what I say is true.
Sincerity is impossible to assess on USENET.
> I see now I made my own luck.
Probably. See above.
> It's not my targe but I'm just going to push forward until I get
> it. Success treads on the heals of every right effort.
Yes. See above. I'm not sure I see the attraction of tea with royals
or handshakes with Senator Kennedy, but it's clear that these are very
important to you.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> But I do have these contacts and I realize that
> that it's sounds unbelievable.
It doesn't sound unbelievable at all. A great many people are very
close to billionaires, royalty, and so on, but usually do not pursue the
contacts that would have the former drinking tea in the parlors of the
latter. It is really true that most of us are separated from so-called
celebrities by only a few degrees of separation, and so those of us who
worship them can come to know them if that be our goal.
What concerns me more is your lack of discretion. Each tale is a bit
more fabulous than its predecessor, and, as I expected, you eventually
named names when the stories alone failed to impress. If you are making
things up, it doesn't matter, but if you are not, it's very indiscreet.
> I am curious that my sincerity has not come shinning
> through my posts, because what I say is true.
Sincerity is impossible to assess on USENET.
> I see now I made my own luck.
Probably. See above.
> It's not my targe but I'm just going to push forward until I get
> it. Success treads on the heals of every right effort.
Yes. See above. I'm not sure I see the attraction of tea with royals
or handshakes with Senator Kennedy, but it's clear that these are very
important to you.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Nov 1st 2003, 10:04 am
#104
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Meeting Royalty in Europe
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) writes:
> Judging from your frequent mistakes in spelling, one can only conclude
> that your billionaire "friend" is a "self-made man" and his business
> such that a proper education is not a requirement.
In the United States, most wealthy people are self-made, although that
is becoming less and less true with the continuing polarization of
wealth.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> Judging from your frequent mistakes in spelling, one can only conclude
> that your billionaire "friend" is a "self-made man" and his business
> such that a proper education is not a requirement.
In the United States, most wealthy people are self-made, although that
is becoming less and less true with the continuing polarization of
wealth.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Nov 1st 2003, 10:06 am
#105
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Meeting Royalty in Europe
Robert writes:
> No, the name "Mxmanic" is so close to indentifying my princess friend.
> It's staring you in the face but unless you know the who's who's of
> world royalty you probably won't know who it is. What was princess
> Diana's nickname? Di? That's why I thought you were messing with me. I
> don't know who your Mxmanic is but I know who mine is!
You seem to be seeing a royal under every Louis XIV chair.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> No, the name "Mxmanic" is so close to indentifying my princess friend.
> It's staring you in the face but unless you know the who's who's of
> world royalty you probably won't know who it is. What was princess
> Diana's nickname? Di? That's why I thought you were messing with me. I
> don't know who your Mxmanic is but I know who mine is!
You seem to be seeing a royal under every Louis XIV chair.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.