Paying off debt (R&R version) Please ignore the other post

It's official! I'm the biggest idiot around. The previous post was a trial and wasn't meant to be posted. That's why it's all messy and double spaced. But since it's already posted, I figured I will post this one too. :)

                                     -x-

Paul (Johnson walker) should have written this essay but he hasn't been posting on ATF for a while now. So, I offered to take his place and write the essay in the hopes that it will provide for some entertainment in ATF during the summer. :)

I'll start with my stand on the situation before I write the pro R&R essay. This isn't as articulate as Claire's essay but here goes:

I used to be an ardent R&R fan when I began watching the show. Their constant bickering made me lose interest in the pair. It started with TOW No Ones Ready. I thought Rachel's behavior towards Ross was unforgivable. Like Claire, I too think that Ross is too good for Rachel who behaves like a bitch most of the time. Strangely, I find that she is this way only with Ross.

I turned into a J&R supporter in season seven where the best stories and jokes came from Joey and Rachel. Those characters were the only ones who were constantly funny throughout that season and they shared great chemistry. With the advent of episode 812 TOW Joey Dates Rachel, it became very evidant that these would make a fun couple. Joey is different from Ross in many ways. Sure, he doesn't have the benefits of a college degree but he knows how to put Rachel in her place. Ross never knew and still doesn't know how to do this. That is one of the many reasons that they shouldn't be together.

Ross and Rachel lack respect for each other, which is something a child shouldn't be exposed to while growing up. If they get together immediately after this cliffhanger, it just wouldn't work because they would mess it up again and this time there's a child involved.

                                   -x-

Having said all of that, I will now proceed to say exactly the opposite. :P

I'm a J&R fan but I am open to a R&R relationship provided it happens gradually. So, I'd like to write how they become a couple again before stating the advantages of their relationship.

Here goes:

Come September and the misunderstanding over the ring is quickly cleared up. Joey realises that these two still have way too much baggage for him to add to their problems and backs off. Chandler will be the good friend that he used to be and talks to Joey to help him get over Rachel.

Meanwhile, Ross and Rachel take Emma home and decide that they will leave things the way they are for the time being. Ross gives the ring back to Judy and tells her to stay the hell away from his personal matters.

Rachel gets to spend a lot of time at home with the baby thanks to the extended maternity leave that Joey had "helped" her get. Months pass as little Emma grows and Rachel learns what it is to be a mom. Ross keeps the promise he made to her and stays by her side to help her out with all the baby matters. Motherhood teaches Rachel to be less selfish and patient or is that wishful thinking on my part? As they share countless joyous moments with their child, it slowly dawns on them that they are more of a married couple than Chandler and Monica.

Rachel wants to give the relationship a go but Ross is somewhat hesitant. He reminds her of all the times that she has been unbelievably demanding and turns her down. He does have feelings for her but doesn't want to jeopardise his daughter's future by entering into a hasty relationship that might turn sour again. This leaves a complete shocked Rachel, who is left to ponder on her past mistakes. She actively makes attempts to be a better person for the sake of her child. She doesn't make fun of his career even though she still doesn't understand anything he says. For his part, Ross doesn't make "Jurassic Parka" jokes either. She lets him go on dates and doesn't ask him to be at her beck and call all the time. Rachel dates too, not with Joey though. No, that would complicate things again. :)

Months later, Ross notices the change in Rachel and proposes to give their relationship a go. She accepts and they start dating again. Suprisingly, everything goes well. This is a mature relationship that doesn't involve mind games and ego trips. Finally Ross proposes and they marry. They have to elope because they can't have a proper wedding after their fake wedding fiasco.

Despite their best attempts, old dragons rear their head when juggling careers and their child and mistakes are made. Ross won't take the blame anymore and she can't run away from her problems. After undergoing some marriage counceling, they stock of the situation and make amends. Slowly they plough through their troubles and finally, finally learn what it takes to be in a trusting relationship while maintaining respect.

Advantages of the Ross and Rachel relationship that come from the above mentioned scenario:

- With both parents under one roof and married, they provide an ideal and stable environment for little Emma.

- To borrow a few lines from the show, little Emma would be popular in school with an aptitude for science. :)

- Rachel is no longer Princess Bitch. She is a mature, smart career woman who is also a great mom.

- Thanks to the intake of various calcium supplements, Ross has a stronger backbone. :P

- Ross and Rachel respect each other. Jokes about each others careers are only made in good fun and never to ridicule.

• We don't have to see any bickering or mind games or guilt trips.

• There is no use for 'fat' in their fridge.

• Diehard R&R fans would be thrilled.

- MLB would be relieved that he doesn't have to play the Joey who's in love with Rachel again.

Oh, and Joey moves on and falls in love with Phoebe, not. At some point, Joey moves to California for various movie deals and hooks up with Kate Millar there.

                                     -x-

I had to throw in the marriage counceling thing because things wouldn't possibly be that easy and I figured that Rachel's take-Ross-for-granted attitude would make a short visit after she's in the security of a marriage.

The earliest reunion for a R&R relationship, if there has to be one, would be during November sweeps. Even then, I only want to see them date, not rush into a marriage.

-Priya

"p r i y a" wrote in message news:[email]...

Naw, if that were true we wouldn't be doing this!

Good. Back to the basics.

You did great.

Well, I will say this; she does not treat Joey this way. Yet.

With the advent of episode 812 TOW Joey Dates Rachel,

Well, I'm with you on this one. My own essay reflected it.

No problem at all. Don't worry, there's little chance they are hooking up immediately. That makes great sense.

Hey, you volunteered. :-)

ROFL! Yes. While I think Phoebe's advice was worthwhile, Judy *was* obtrusive.

Oh, no, I think this could surely happen.

Thank you!

ROFL. There's some real comic potential in this.

Uh, yeah, I think that's mandatory.

And badly overdue!

Well, that's nice. I certainly would be sad if Joey didn't get a happy ending.

Absolutely right on the nose. No question about it.

Sure.

Thanks, Priya. That was great, especially since this was never your deal in any way at all. And this is done.

"abrahammy" wrote in message news:...

Thanks, Claire.

Thanks again.

Their

We'll see. :)

Yes, if they go for a R&R relationship on the show, they should address this issue.

Yep, Rachel "okay" makes it impossible for anything major to happening immediately.

Yep.

Yeah, so after being told off by Ross, she learns to be more supportive of her daughter.

Yes, we have to see a lot of emotional growth from Rachel.

LOL. I think this would be her comeuppance.

They run off to vegas and get married. The others are shocked and think that this is a drunken marriage no. two while these two have a difficult time convincing everyone that were sober this time.

And he lends some to Chandler from time to time.

Nobody wants Joey to be sad.

Thanks

Yep, this was fun. Thanks.

Priya

In article , [email] (p r i y a) usenetted:

Er, how long do you think next season is going to be? I know they compress time on Friends, but the scenario you've outlined is like a Three-Year Plan. And given that the writers have other plotlines and stories to focus on besides R&R, maybe even a Five-Year Plan. Plus, it *is* a comedy.

I've always assumed that the series would end with R&R's wedding with everyone in attendance. So unless the cast signs up for a tenth year, they'll need to get a move on.

wg

[email] wrote in message news:...

I was supposed to write the pros of a R&R relationship and how they'd be good together. I'm not a R&R fan and I can't imagine that it can happen in 24 episodes. What I've written goes well with my argument that these two cannot be shown as having a happily-ever-after life in the span of the show.

Do you think that three divorces, a mother's suicide, being fat, living on the street and going mental are funny? It depends on the writing, anything can be funny if written with a light hearted tone to it.

I never said that my proposed plan for a happy R&R relationship wraps up in the next season. I even said that I see them begin to date during the november sweeps. Maybe they could marry by the serious finale but that would just be the end of the show not the end of their troubles.

Priya

"p r i y a" wrote in message news:[email]...

I read your post and then came back up here to say that you essays is superb and definitely is articlulate.

Great job! It was also really nice of you to honor a bet that wasn't yours to begin with.

"Dennis" wrote in message news:[email]...

superb

Hopefully, someday I will learn to proof read first, before sending out my posts...GRRRR What I wanted to say (this time with no typos) was:

I read your post and then came back up here to say that your essay is superb and definitely articulate

Dennis

"Dennis" wrote in message news:...

LOL. I know what that's like. I first posted this essay by mistake. Since I post through Goolge, I wanted to preview it first but I hit the Post_Message_No_Preview button out of habit. :(

Thanks for your kind words.

Priya

"p r i y a" wrote in message news:[email]...

news:...

my

superb

No need to thank me. You and Claire were the ones that did all the work. We should be thanking you.

"Dennis" wrote in message >

We

Well, for the most part folks felt I did my work badly and absolutely nobody even acknowledged when I tried to fix it.

I was contemplating what might have been both interesting and valuable about this particular exercise, however. Both Priya and I grappled with a particular core problem:

We were trying to find realistic solutions to what is essentially a cartoonish dilemma. The J&R advocates have as one of their best arguments the concept that Ross and Rachel have been playing a series of toxic mind games from which they will not be able to recover without a drastic and rather sudden change of behavior. Some think this impossible.

The R&R fans, on the other hand, may counter that the possible engagment in which Joey and Rachel now find themselves has a suspect origin and motive; I personally do not think they can allow it to move forward without a betrayal of such magnitude it will shatter the circle of friends permanently, and leave Joey aware he has violated the core of his personal code of ethics.

Both bring us to a possible situation which could be very bad for Emma, and recovery from either scenario realistically would require quite a bit of healing time and professional counseling.

However, this is a sitcom, and I think all of us realize that eventually everybody is going to be quite content with the outcome and feel that every member of the Six has a love life which is satisfactory and exactly as it should be. In the real world, there might not be time for this to come about, but in sitcom land it will. I think some people are going to find the happy ending forced no matter which direction it goes.

The culprit in this - Sweeps. This entire story from beginning to end has been entirely driven around the perceived need, not primarily to tell a believable story, but to write a funny show which has shocking or controversial "events" every November, February and May. Since the events are designed to be shocking, they are often more contrived and less believable than what we see at other times. I mean really, what ARE the chances that Phoebe and Janice will be advising R&R to cross purposes on the very same day that Judy butts in with a ring while suffering and hormones wear Rachel down to her last good nerve and Joey just HAPPENS to pick the ring up on his knees? That's actually kind of dumb. Rachel turning to Joey with a kiss because of Ross' rejection would actually have been both more believable and much harder to solve; the number of things that had to go a certain way to get this extreme result are really beyond what would generally happen.

We can analyze that a certain outcome can't realistically come to pass, but somebody else will always shout out this truism: It still could, anyway. Rachel could have a secure and happy engagement with either man from 901 on and the other man, and all three of their mutual friends, could be entirely OK with it. It won't make any sense, but it could happen. And indeed, while I sought to separate R&J from their friends and Priya gave R&R counseling and a slow recovery, the answers from BK&C are likely to come much more quickly - because they aren't interested in being realistic nearly as much as they are in being funny. Look for this romantic triangle to be settled one way or another by November and the other man to have his happiness signaled by February for a May happy ending - which may involve somebody getting married and a birth scene for Monica - hey, why should Courteney be left out?

"abrahammy" wrote in message news:...

I did. :)

I think that was because we were both arguing the other party's case. :)

BKC will fix it if they want but if it should be a quick fix, I for one won't buy it. By quick fix, I mean getting them together in one or two episodes.

Besides, will-they-or-won't-they couples are only fun until they get together. It's okay if they get together at the end of the show.

Certainly Joey isn't going to go along with the supposed engagement. Any story that comes out of such a situation would be a gross violation of ethics and Joey would be the last to do that.

Your concern is that Ross has to have more access to Emma and not be the loser again. If Joey and Rachel should have a relationship, they can easily work out something wherein Ross gets to be with Emma as much as he wants.

Yep, I agree.

I read the older threads where you and Johnson talked about this Joey/Rachel kiss. Was it originally filmed and later dropped?

I too think that some sort of resolution will come during the November sweeps. It would be interesting to see if CCA can beat er..(who am I kidding) match JA's perfomance. :)

Priya

"p r i y a" wrote in message news:[email]...

news:...

work.

nobody

Thanks, friend.

about

Well, then, it comes down to something on which we may not agree. I think it's been messed up too much now. The finale kind of wrecked the idea of J&R getting together without hurting Ross; they've made him back in love with her, and they've left the strong implication that Rachel has tried to hook up with Joey on the rebound. And as Marita and you both noticed with irritation, the other three friends have absolutely no sympathy for him at all.

mind

That is a reasonable concern.

in

motive; I

betrayal

ethics.

I think you are right. Certainly Rachel and Joey are not really engaged and they have not thought this through. I am going to have faith that Joey will be written consistently.

That was true before the finale. Now they have revealed that he's still in love with her to the point of tears. It just got much more emotionally messy on the Ross front. Blame Phoebe if you like.

No. This was my conception of a believable cliffhanger that could make Joey a serious contender, lose the bet for me and give us suspense. He didn't like it because Joey became the second string and he thought Joey deserved better. I actually think Joey would have had more of a chance in that scenario then the contrived mess they've given us here.

Over at Angel's, I was completely honest about how I felt about Courteney's acting. I was absolutely screamed at. I do not think she could surpass what Jennifer did here.

"abrahammy" wrote in message news:...

Well in Friends JA has an advantage, she almost always gets the better writing. I doubt the writers would make anywhere near as much effort for Monica.

If you have time I suggest you try watching a film called The Runner. Courteney has a labor scene in that, and I have only heard good things be said about her performance. It may be hard to find, but worth it, as you may change your minds a little.

[email] (Chase Corrigan) wrote in message news:...

Fair enough. It's just that on Angels, Claire mentioned that she doesn't like CCA and everybody got upset and asked her to apologise and the thread just went on and on. Noone bothered to present evidance that CCA is a capable actress or that a person is entitle to their opinion.

Priya (who had to search and dig this thread up. For some reason, google doesn't show this thread. )

"p r i y a" wrote in message

At one point, I attempted to cite particular scenes Courteney had been in that I DID like just to calm one particular little hysteric down. Another man then blasted me because he remembered I had given that particular episode a bad review here several years ago and asked me why I was inconsistent. (This was TOW the Routine. ) The real answer was that I thought the dance was extremely funny and the rest of the show was just awful, but what I told them there is that I will not be permitted to stop slamming Courteney (which was never really my intention) unless they drop it. Why on earth a bunch of people who are furious that I expressed dislike of her farcical skills would demand that I criticize her over and over in my self-defense, I don't know.

And I still don't think she does farce well. She's a better straight man. She was just fine, even playful, in the finale. Either Courteney has finally gotten the decibels right, or the writers have decided it is better when Monica doesn't screech.

[email] (p r i y a) wrote in message news:...

That pretty much sums up why I don't post at Angels :) There seems to be a lot of hysteria there.

Thanks for digging :)

While I disagree strongly that CCA is a bad actress, I certainly don't have any problem with people who wish to express their opinion, be it negative or positive. People have a right to criticize a performance if they see fit.

I just feel that CCA has been given a lot of very bad writing on Friends. Some of the "comedic" situations she has been given, well even LK couldn't pull them off.

JA has probably been given the best writing out of anybody on the show, particularly in recent years. She should come off looking okay. However I personally don't feel she is very good at dramatic acting. As a comedy actress she is a natural, but I believe she herself has admitted that she struggles with more emotional material, and I think it shows. I am one of those who finds JA rather fake in most dramatic scenes, and there are quite a few things during the pregnancy she could have made more convincing. For example, she often walked around with much more ease than a pregnant woman really would. She should have done a better job conveying discomfort.

IMO CCA does a good job in Friends, she had a lot of Emmy buzz a few years back, and the critical response has been very positive. However she is certainly not at her best. While she is very capable at comedy, I feel sitcom is not what she is best suited to.

She can do OTT and flashy very well, she can do bitchy very well. Her performance in Scream was very well received by the critics, but Monica's version of OTT, is almost unworkable. I feel that sometimes CCA is being given an almost impossible task. She is also very, very good at seeming real and natural, sincere and genuine. She shows hidden vulnerability very well. You won't be able to tell on Friends, but she can do some incredible acting with her eyes, there is so much emotion in them. She's very believable in a wide range of characters. She can do understated very well, and she is very good with emotional scenes. She just isn't given the opportunities to show how talented she is on Friends. It is a shame, because she really does have a lot of depth and range as an actress, much more than JA imo. The character Monica is sometimes unflattering to her, in her other work she shows a lot of charm and charisma, as well as real acting chops.

The show pretty much revolves around JA now, it seems very geared towards making her look as good as possible, she's clearly the producers favorite, thats very bad news for the other women. CCA is bound to suffer the most, because if JA is to be written as the "real" one it means CCA has to play a caricature. As I said earlier, she can do OTT caricature, and she can do it really well, but when this character is at its worst, it just isn't right for her, or any actress really.

Anyway, I really do believe that Cox is in fact one of the most talented on the show, quite possibly the best of all six. She has a lot of ability, she's just not in the right show. However, if they were to give her some decent writing for a change, and put as much effort into her character as they do for JA and Rachel, then she probably would shine very brightly on Friends.

If you ever do catch "The Runner" I'd be very interested to hear your thoughts :)

[email] (Chase Corrigan) wrote in message

I have seen that she does physical comedy well in some scenes in Friends. It's just that I don't care for the overly screamish "I know" type of things that they have her do. She can't do neurotic Monica well at all. DS did Mental Geller really well. Somehow I doubt CCA would have done Mental Monica well.

Yeah, she should have moved around slower. She moved like a bunny hopping about. She more than made up for that with that awesome delivery scene. Speaking of emotional scenes in Friends. Did you like CCA's screams and tears during the proposal scene at the end of season 6? :)

Outside of Friends, I haven't seen much of her work. I've seen her Scream movies. I don't remember her performance in cocoon or ventura movie. I thought scream one was okay but I hated the other two parts. They were so cartoonish.

Yeah, that's true. Like Claire says, they should only write her as the straight man on Friends.

Didn't CCA choose to play Monica instead of Rachel when she auditioned? Of course, Monica isn't the Monica from season 1 anymore.

I love the Fat Monica scenes. She did them really well. When she gets screechy, she's intolerable. She can't pull that off at all.

They have sidelined some of the characters this season. Phoebe might as well be invisible. I hope that next season, we'll get to see a fair share of all the Friends.

I'll be sure to mail you if I watch it. Thanks for a detailed response. :)

Priya

[email] (p r i y a) wrote in message news:...

I think she can do neurotic Monica, the character has always been neurotic, I don't think she has ever had a problem with that. It's when she has to screech that she becomes hard to watch, but wouldn't all three of the actresses be hard to watch if they screeched their lines? She can play neurotic very well imo.

I think people are perhaps assuming that CCA chooses to play Monica in that screechy way, but from what I have seen she is encouraged by directors/producers etc to act like that.

DS did Mental Geller very well sometimes, he is also very good at physical comedy, but there were other moments when he was awful. He did over act sometimes.

I don't recall the screams, but no, I wasn't impressed. It wasn't just the acting though, the script was awful. R&R have always had better dramatic writing than C&M. Days of Our Lives would have rejected that script.

Still, I don't think it was anywhere near as bad as some seem to think, but it wasn't in any way good either. I'm not sure whether or not Perry would be capable of doing better, but I was disappointed with Cox because I know for a fact she can do much, much better. That was just one scene though. With the possible exception of Kudrow, all of them have at least one scene on Friends that wasn't acted very well at all.

Scream 3 was poor, but I thought Scream 2 was quite good up until the ending, and I think she gave a very good performance as Gale Weathers, as I said the critics were very impressed, she stole the trilogy. She also showed versatility by playing a character completely different to Monica, and playing it well. As Gale she changes her voice, tone, mannerisms, and does seem like a totally different person. Her co-stars mostly struggle to do this.

I don't think she needs to be the straight man. She can be funny, she can do comedy, all they need to do is say

"Look Courteney, we have realized that writing Monica as a one dimensional cartoon is a bad idea. We're going to stop giving you awful, unworkable scripts. Now you can speak in you real voice, and stop putting on that screech, because we've realized it isn't funny either."

She has been highly praised for her comedic skills, they just need to tone her down, and bring some realism back to her character.

Yes, Marta & David approached her to play Rachel, she said she thought Friends was great, but was only interested if she could play Monica. I'm not sure what made her decide this. I wouldn't say she seems like Monica at all in real life, despite what the media puts out, and despite the image she herself tries to put out, her background appears to be more similar to Rachel's, so I don't think that is the reason. She clearly thought the Monica character seemed more interesting. Like you said though, she didn't choose to play this Monica...

I agree she can't pull off screechy, but in all honesty, who can? Nobody likes to hear women screeching. She does play Fat Monica very well, she can be very sympathetic and sweet, and she can be very fuuny.

Me too. There are some very talented people who are just being wasted.

Thanks for a detailed reply :)

[email] (Chase Corrigan) wrote in message news:...

I don't know. I guess I've never been a fan of that. I never found her obsessing over packing funny.

Well, Tennant squarely blames DS for the disaster in 802. :)

Agree, he was awful at times.

"There's a reason why girls don't do this". Yes, because they hurt the guys ears. :p

Well, I've always thought that the breakup in TOO Morning after was good because they didn't try to force laughs in there by adding stupid jokes like they did with the proposal. 816 did a good job with that too. The scenes with Ross and Joey were very good.

LK looks dead bored in most of Season 8.

Hmm.. I found Scream 2&3 rather spoof like.

Oh God, I hope they do that.

Take the finale for instance. Initially when she tries to pull a joke on Chandler and talks all paranoid. That wasn't funny but later on when she says that she wants to make babies in the hospital. "Maybe here", That was funny. They just have to tone her down.

Oh, you're a major CC fan. She hasn't exactly screeched in a long time but when she gets too excited, that's not fun to watch. She just doesn't hit the right note. I did find her scenes in TOW Cooking Classes funny but usually, they aren't flattering.

Well, maybe Janice can. Maggie Wheeler has played Janice nasally and now she has brayed in the finale and she's pretty good at it. :)

I was hoping we'd see a fat Monica with a fat brad pitt in 809. :(

My pleasure. :)

Priya

[email] (p r i y a) wrote in message news:...

I don't find her obsessing over packing funny either, but there are plenty of episodes where her neuroses are funny, they just need to stop relying too heavily on them.

I'm thinking of people higher up than DS, let's just say at one taping I attended, I saw evidence of her being very heavily encouraged to shout her lines.

Was that a scream?

Yes, but that's about attitude rather than acting.

Well the whole point of Scream was to parody the horror genre.

Yes, but they won't unfortunately. They think screechy Monica is hilarious.

No, not really. :) My niece is a huge fan of the show, and took great pleasure in filling me in on every last little detail of every actor. Perhaps I should direct her to Angels :)

I believe Cox is a very good actress, but I don't particularly like her as a person. I am not a fan of any celebrity.

I think she can play an excitable Monica, she has done it in an enjoyable way. It depends how they write her. When they write her as a one dimensional freak, with the mental age of six, she's annoying and unfunny.

There's a big difference there. Janice was invented to annoy people. We are supposed to look down on her and take pity on whichever character she is inflicting herself upon. We're supposed to like Monica. Janice would be unbearabe 22 episodes each season.

On 30 May 2002 15:34:06 -0700, [email] (Chase Corrigan) wrote:

There is an interesting interview with Courteney Cox in the "100% Unofficial Friends" video. Judging by her appearance, it takes place during season 2 (or 3). Anyway, Cox says that she would like to "play Monica on prozac -- just a little more calm." I think this proves that Cox doesn't necessarily want to play Monica like the screechy cartoon character we saw in some parts of season 6. Besides, I also saw proof of Courteney struggling with bad writing when I was at a taping for the show. I think she has been exasperated over her material many times, so we can't put all the blame on her.

"abrahammy" wrote in message news:...

Oh, you're most welcome. :)

Okay, a little flashback to season four finale: Phoebe had a little talk with Rachel which lead Rachel to realise that she still loves Ross.

Fastforward four seasons: Phoebe helps Ross realise his feelings for Rachel.

Quick rewind to Season 4: Ross wrecks his wedding by blurting out Rachel's name at the altar indicating that he may still be in love with Rachel.

Skipping ahead to Season 8: Rachel accepts Joey's "proposal" because she thinks that Ross doesn't want a relationship with her. (This is not how I see it but still.)

We were left hanging all summer four years ago with almost the same situation and what happened, Claire? :)

Ross's feelings that have been induced to the surface by Phoebe might disappear just as fast his tears dried up. It happened with Rachel in the fifth season, it could happen again.

Yes. The Friends don't support Joey but they won't particularly voice their opinions against Joey either. They'll keep quiet. Joey is a perceptive guy and a whole lot smarter than Rachel to know what his Friends are thinking. She doesn't know that they all think that she was being unreasonable with the whole break thing. Please!

Yeah, I'm worried that we'd get this one quick moment of happiness and they are set for life.

I just hope they don't give Rachel post-partum depression! Think about it. It could happen. It goes well with my season four parallels. In season five, Ross went Mental, Season nine, we may get a depressed Rachel. :)

Oh, I see. Yes, I like your idea better than what we saw.

Well, this ain't Angels. I don't post there just for that reason. Too much star worshipping and most of them are far too young to reason with. I lurk there occasionally only because all the news comes there first.

Priya

p r i y a wrote:

*jumps in* That Angel's board is one of a kind. Signature Madness I'd say... they're moving, blinking, huge pictures, hell some of them seem to have a whole transcripted ep as a signature. I registered, but I wonder why :)

Andr�

In article , "Andr� Knoche" wrote:

They often have some good news items breaking there Andr�, and people posting with links to interesting articles, transcripts they've written, stuff like that. And it is moderated, with people trying to keep down the worst spoilers, and other excesses.

But having said that, you're quite right, Signature Madness is an apt description. And the spoiler protection only works if you're up-to-date with America. Meanwhile, Priya is quite right about some of them being very young - I shocked some of them last year by revealing that Ross & Rachel were married before, and a few flatly wouldn't believe me - and also I had great fun explaining all the dirty jokes they didn't get.

Does anyone know what the very bad word was, that had to be censored out of every AF post, that had something to do with feminists? You can tell me in rot13 if it's also too shocking for ATF.

Tennant

Tennant Stuart wrote in message news:...

I haven't read the thread that this was discussed on AF, so I've no idea. Maybe you should ask one of the moderators of AF. Marita, mind telling us? She's a mod there, did ya know? :)

While I'm talking to the mods on AF, why don't they put a limit on the size of sigs. Four lines of text and pics!!

Tennant, what did you do with the "Paying off debt (R&RVersion) Season Finale spoilers" thread?? Huh? I can't find it anymore. <throws a suspicious glare>

Priya

[email] (p r i y a) wrote in message news:...

True. Most of them are very young.

Yes, I can tell you guys what happened. A particularly annoying newbie started harassing fans of a certain couple as well as women in general by posting hateful posts on the board. As for feminists, he called them "femi-nazis." He annoyed the hell out of me and many of the other moderators, so we asked the admin to ban him.

As long as they're not too flashy, they're allowed.

"Marita Bakken" wrote in message > > > > p r i

OIC. Moderators can ban too, can't they? I thought they had full control.

I'm only suggesting but it would be better not to have huge images in sigs. It will save a lot of time scrolling down. Some posts just have a smiley and a huge signature with a picture that fills half the size of the screen and text filling up the rest of the space. Maybe you should toss this idea with the other mods and see what they think? :)

Priya

On Thu, 30 May 2002 11:25:08 +0400, "p r i y a" wrote:

No, we can't ban anybody.

I can mention it to them, but I doubt anyone is going to change their signatures. It's somewhat of a tradition over there. :)

In article , [email] (p r i y a) wrote:

Oh, lots of us have mod status, but rarely exercise it.

There are limits, but they're not enforced, and I've had little support from the others when I've complained.

Grin <bathes in suspicious glare>. :)

Tennant

Tennant Stuart wrote in message news:...

Oh, okay.

Well, when you consider that the mods themselves like to have "elaborate" sigs...

:) BTW, did you not get my posts in your 822, 823 & 824 threads? Should I post them again?

Priya

In article , [email] (p r i y a) wrote:

Exactly. :(

I'm a bit behind sweetie, but I've answered every post in 822 & 823, and hope to do 824 tomorrow. So if nothing appears for you by then, please post them again. Ta fish.

Tennant

Tennant Stuart wrote:

Hmm... maybe so, but one doesn't need to be registered in order to *read*

What's wrong with being young? I'm about two months away from the legal drinking age in the US, so I'm at least ten years younger than most of the regs in here seem to be....

Andr�

"Andr?Knoche" wrote in message news:...

Yes but you were the one who wondered why you registered in the first place. :)

Oh, nothing wrong with being young. It's just that some of them argue their point with a 'You suck, I win' answer... ;)

Priya

p r i y a wrote:

Exactly. When I'm bored, I sometimes browse around on that board and read a few messages here and there, but one day I signed up although I didn't want to post. In a way, I just gave my email address away to spammers for nothing.

Good thing my sig says "I win. You suck" then, eh? :p But, yeh, I was getting too much hate mail because of the Noel Gallagher sig, so I figured I'd better change it...

Andr�

"Andr?Knoche" wrote in message news:...

I didn't register there for a long time just because the registration form was a mile long.

Darn! You got off on a technicality... :D

Oh, I don't have anything against your sig, just making a joke. :)

Priya

p r i y a wrote:

I just *love* to give fake information, like street, country and stuff... I am living in so many places under so many weird names... :-)

hehe...

I wouldn't have thought so, it's a quote from Chandler anyway. Really surprised me to see people get heavily upset about the Noel Gallagher sig. Somehow I've always figured they're not to be taken seriously...

Andr�

In article , "Andr� Knoche" wrote:

I didn't say there was anything wrong.

And about seven years older than those on AF who don't understand some of the jokes on "Friends" - not just those who had to ask, but those who gave charmingly innocent (and quite incorrect) explanations for them.

Tennant

Thanks Dennis!

Priya