talkmagic.co.uk

My remark about pros is not to sneer at the attendees at Blackpool. It is to highlight the point that the comedian was not facing an audience of fellow professionals. If he was, he would still have died a death. But he might have been treated with more humanity. The audience in Blackpool don't understand what it is like to face a hostile crowd, because most of them don't perform.

Let's also bear in mind that we're talking about the way soemone earns a living so perhaps we ought to offer clear and clinical observations rather than anything else.

I'm interested to observe that, if he'd listened to the audience, he could have had a rethink in the interval and done different material in the second half.

However, googling him only turns up reports of people on cruises saying how hilarious his Sex/Gardenining routine is, a few videos of the same material we saw him doing, and nothing much else. Some of these articles are dated many years ago, so maybe he doesn't have other material to use.

Ah, my post has disappeared! I see challenging people on biggotry isn't appreciated here!

nameless wrote:Ah, my post has disappeared! I see challenging people on biggotry isn't appreciated here!

On the contrary, as the orginal post needed to be edited for the same reasons as expressed in your post, it would have been pointless to leave it on view.

so lets see if I've got this right
Nameless is postless as it was pointless, yes?

No, Nameless was postless until he posted and discovered it to be pointless not to be postless during the time period in which Nameless was not only Nameless but postless also.

Actually, nameless had a point but became postless when the post was perceived to be pointless and I pointed that out in my preceding post .

Oh dear, this could run and run. At the risk of derailing a good thread and killing a joke let me get this staight: Nameless had a point but no name until his point was taken from him as it was deemed pointless leaving him pointless, nameless and postless until he posted to inquire why he was so postless when he was informed of also being pointless and nameless and so confusion ensued. Therefore surely the act of making nameless postless due to the post being pointless was pointless as now nameless is postless nobody can see the point that was pointless that led to nameless becoming postless. sorry

And your point is what ?

Never mind. It was a pointless point outlined in my post anyway.

i fear someone might be upset should he relise we're taking the micky, so best he remain nameless

Nameless, postless and pointless.

spooneythegoon wrote:Nameless, postless and pointless.

And a nonny mouse.

Bakc on topic, the irony of the situation just ocurred to me that those on the show were the winners of the one and a half days of performance, assessing and rating by a panel of European judges. In the other thread it's been mentioned that many of those who performed in the competiton were eliminated with the very harsh experience of the curtain suddenly being brought down to stop their act because the judges thought they weren't good enough. George compered that show and.. well, you can see what I'm thinking, can't you

If you are going to go on a stage and insult people then that is on the performer and the performer should get what is coming.

I go to a show to be entertained not abused and I won't stand for it. In the USA audiences put up with a lot. In certain places in Canada we will boo somebody off a stage. In Quebec I saw Sadowitz get punched in the nose during the just for laughs comedy festival. He was in a french province insulting french people. The audience payed a lot of money to attend the show and did not appreciate being be-littled.