Searching \ for '[OT] April Fools' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=april+fools
Search entire site for: 'April Fools'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT] April Fools'
2005\04\01@233951 by Mike Hord

picon face
> Well, guys, it's been fun but all good things must come to an end.

Now James, it's hardly fair to do that to those on the list not familiar
with first of April trickery.

Speaking of which, how ubiquitous is the April Fool tradition?  How
many non-USA members are familiar with it?

And just for fun, what's the best April Fool *you* ever pulled (to the
list at large)?

Mike H.

2005\04\02@030703 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Mike,

On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 22:39:31 -0600, Mike Hord wrote:

> Speaking of which, how ubiquitous is the April Fool
tradition?  How many non-USA members are familiar with
it?

It's alive and well in Britain - the most famous (about
40 years ago I think) was then BBC television did a
programme about spaghetti trees in Italy, complete with
scenes of groves of trees with spaghetti hsnging from
the branches...

Cheers,



Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2005\04\02@035551 by ThePicMan

flavicon
face
At 09.07 2005.04.02 +0100, you wrote:
>Mike,
>
>On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 22:39:31 -0600, Mike Hord wrote:
>
>> Speaking of which, how ubiquitous is the April Fool
>tradition?  How many non-USA members are familiar with
>it?
>
>It's alive and well in Britain - the most famous (about
>40 years ago I think) was then BBC television did a
>programme about spaghetti trees in Italy, complete with
>scenes of groves of trees with spaghetti hsnging from
>the branches...

It's an alive-and-kicking tradition also in Italy. Best
I remember was when RAI television made a programme about
tea cups trees in England. Just a bit before 5 o'clock
the trees spontaneously dropped the fruits. :D

Oh no, the 1st of April is already over..

2005\04\02@040716 by Jinx

face picon face
> It's alive and well in Britain - the most famous (about
> 40 years ago I think) was then BBC television did a
> programme about spaghetti trees in Italy, complete with
> scenes of groves of trees with spaghetti hsnging from
> the branches...

The NZ program Country Calendar ran a similar piece and
showed pictures of "spaghetti weevils" that threatened to ruin
the world spaghetti trade

CC has done stunts at other times - turkeys with gumboots, a
radio-controlled sheepdog, musical fence wires, how to relax
sheep for better wool.......

A friend of mine about 5 years ago got out to Rangitoto Island
in Auckland's harbour, which is a volcanic cone one everyone
worries about going bang. He took over some smoke machines
and managed to get on the radio. The date is always the problem
though - too obvious. Burning tyres down Mt Eden crater isn't
funny anymore

2005\04\02@045254 by Howard Winter
face
flavicon
picon face
Jinx,

On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 21:07:11 +1200, Jinx wrote:

> A friend of mine about 5 years ago got out to Rangitoto Island
> in Auckland's harbour, which is a volcanic cone one everyone
> worries about going bang. He took over some smoke machines
> and managed to get on the radio.

Love it!  :-)))

> The date is always the problem though - too obvious. Burning tyres down Mt Eden crater isn't
> funny anymore

It is from here...

Cheers,



Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2005\04\02@051000 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> CC has done stunts at other times - turkeys with gumboots, a
> radio-controlled sheepdog, musical fence wires, how to relax
> sheep for better wool.......

AFAIR the turkey stunt, contrary to embedded NZ urban myth, was not CC
but "Town and Around".

The radio controlled sheepdog brought numerous complaints about
cruelty to animals. Very convincing dog - twisting around its owners
legs and giving a fine demo of being totally under control. A good
sheep dog IS under control, or as much as its handler wants it to be.
Dog and man (appear to) form an extended symbiotic system with a
shared brain.

       RM

2005\04\02@090228 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> It's alive and well in Britain - the most famous (about
> 40 years ago I think) was then BBC television did a
> programme about spaghetti trees in Italy, complete with
> scenes of groves of trees with spaghetti hsnging from
> the branches...

How could people ever believe that? Everyone knows spagetti is made by
the giant spagetti catepillar!

April 1 is of course well known in the Netherlands - folk wisdom is that
it originated from the fact at some April 1 a bunch of sea-faring
partizans took the city of Den Briel from the then-reigning Spanish
gouvernor Alva.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu


2005\04\02@124456 by Philip Pemberton

face picon face
In message <000101c5378c$531d37a0$0b00a8c0@PAARD>
         "Wouter van Ooijen" <spam_OUTwouterTakeThisOuTspamvoti.nl> wrote:

> How could people ever believe that? Everyone knows spagetti is made by
> the giant spagetti catepillar!

Can't be any worse than how the fictitious soft drink "Slurm" was shown to be
made in Futurama... I'm not going to give out spoilers, but the episode is
entitled "Fry and the Slurm Factory" (IIRC).

"What if it's made out of PEOPLE?"
"No, there's already a drink like that. It's called Soylent Cola."
"Really? What's it like?"
"It varies from person to person."

Later.
--
Phil.                              | Acorn Risc PC600 Mk3, SA202, 64MB, 6GB,
.....philpemKILLspamspam@spam@philpem.me.uk              | ViewFinder, 10BaseT Ethernet, 2-slice,
http://www.philpem.me.uk/          | 48xCD, ARCINv6c IDE, SCSI
... How much sin can I get away with and still go to heaven?

2005\04\03@102642 by Rolf

face picon face
Hmm April 1st is good in South Africa, and Canada too

The best stunt I have witnessed was (sometime n the 80's I think) when
South African Airlines issued a price change for their flights.
Air-fares would be in proportion to the amount of weight you took on the
plane. The passenger would stand on a scale with all their luggage, and
would have to apay an appropriate fare. Fair?

Caused a substantial furore....

Rolf

Mike Hord wrote:

{Quote hidden}

2005\04\03@113651 by Matthew Miller

flavicon
face
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 10:26:41AM -0400, Rolf wrote:
> Hmm April 1st is good in South Africa, and Canada too
>
> The best stunt I have witnessed was (sometime n the 80's I think) when
> South African Airlines issued a price change for their flights.
> Air-fares would be in proportion to the amount of weight you took on the
> plane. The passenger would stand on a scale with all their luggage, and
> would have to apay an appropriate fare. Fair?
>
> Caused a substantial furore....

Shouldn't fares be calculated that way? It takes more fuel to transport a
300lb man than it does a 150lb man. Basing fares on weight only acknowledges
the realities of the economics involved with air travel. I guess only the
fat people where up in arms... ha ha!

Take care, Matthew.

--
He was a cowboy, mister, and he loved the land.  He loved it so much he
made a woman out of dirt and married her.  But when he kissed her, she
disintegrated.  Later, at the funeral, when the preacher said, "Dust to
dust," some people laughed, and the cowboy shot them.  At his hanging, he
told the others, "I'll be waiting for you in heaven -- with a gun."
       -- Jack Handey

2005\04\03@165917 by Richard.Prosser

flavicon
face

I traveled on an airline in about 1985 that had a "weighbridge" in front of
the check in counter - you were weighed as you checked in. Didn't change
the fare, but possibly allowed them to carry more cargo. (Or less fuel ?)

RP




On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 10:26:41AM -0400, Rolf wrote:
> Hmm April 1st is good in South Africa, and Canada too
>
> The best stunt I have witnessed was (sometime n the 80's I think) when
> South African Airlines issued a price change for their flights.
> Air-fares would be in proportion to the amount of weight you took on the
> plane. The passenger would stand on a scale with all their luggage, and
> would have to apay an appropriate fare. Fair?
>
> Caused a substantial furore....

Shouldn't fares be calculated that way? It takes more fuel to transport a
300lb man than it does a 150lb man. Basing fares on weight only
acknowledges
the realities of the economics involved with air travel. I guess only the
fat people where up in arms... ha ha!

Take care, Matthew.






2005\04\03@174404 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
On Apr 3, 2005, at 8:36 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:

> Shouldn't fares be calculated that way? It takes more fuel to
> transport a
> 300lb man than it does a 150lb man. Basing fares on weight only
> acknowledges
> the realities of the economics involved with air travel.

Since  "payload capacity" of a typical airliner is only about 20% of
takeoff weight, weight differences between passengers are pretty much
lost in the noise.  Your hypothetical 300lb man is less than 1% of the
payload capacity of a modern airliner...

BillW

2005\04\03@234403 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> I traveled on an airline in about 1985 that had a "weighbridge" in
> front of
> the check in counter - you were weighed as you checked in. Didn't
> change
> the fare, but possibly allowed them to carry more cargo. (Or less
> fuel ?)

On smaller aircraft the actual distribution of load can be
significantly affected by passengers and it can help to know exactly
who weighs what and where they are located. AFAIR moment calculation
sheets are used to assist in loading.

On all aircraft load distribution is significant but I assume that
with large passenger aircraft they control the cargo distribution and
make assumptions about where people are located. "Everyone to the back
of the plane" probably makes for interesting changes for the pilot.


       RM

2005\04\04@003125 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> Since  "payload capacity" of a typical airliner is only about 20% of
> takeoff weight, weight differences between passengers are pretty
> much
> lost in the noise.  Your hypothetical 300lb man is less than 1% of
> the
> payload capacity of a modern airliner...

You'd have to consider part of fuel as payload weight as well as it is
necessary to carry the load. Not a directly linear relationship. The
test is, how much to fly the same route under same conditions with no
load and with full load.  You could then do an Mx + C calculation,
assuming the additional fuel consumption is linear with increasing
load (which it wouldn't be). eg for a passenger only load in a single
class.

   Fare = (All costs empty)/N + (Difference in costs)/(all passengers
mass)

Good first start anyway.


           RM




2005\04\04@040307 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Russell,

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 15:28:20 +1200, Russell McMahon wrote:

> On smaller aircraft the actual distribution of load can be
> significantly affected by passengers and it can help to know exactly
> who weighs what and where they are located. AFAIR moment calculation
> sheets are used to assist in loading.

All aircraft have to have a "weight & balance" sheet calculated prior to takeoff, although the differences
between a light aircraft and an airliner are huge - it's normally done by computer for the latter, and for the
former most pilots know what sort of load they can carry without having to calculate it every time.  Some
aircraft (the Lockheed L1011 Tristar comes to mind) "weigh" themselves when parked, by measuring the
deflection of the undercarriage, and can inform the crew of the weight & CofG position, but the calculation
still has to be done first, with the measurement used as a confirmation.  For calculations on an airliner
there is an assumed weight of each passenger (I have a feeling it's 65kg), so although they don't weigh you,
they do insist that you sit where they tell you for takeoff because if the CofG moves too far from the Centre
of Lift it can affect the controllability of the aircraft.

> On all aircraft load distribution is significant but I assume that
> with large passenger aircraft they control the cargo distribution and
> make assumptions about where people are located. "Everyone to the back
> of the plane" probably makes for interesting changes for the pilot.

No, they make assumptions about what you weigh, but they know where you are sitting for takeoff, the most
critical time.  In flight the aircraft adjusts the trip of the elevators itself in response to people and
trolleys moving up and down the cabin.

Cheers,

Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2005\04\04@041340 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Russell,

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 16:31:20 +1200, Russell McMahon wrote:

> You'd have to consider part of fuel as payload weight as well as it is necessary to carry the load.

Sorry but you're misusing the term here - "payload" is the load you are being paid to carry.  To use the
correct term, fuel it is considered part of the "disposable load" in that you can decide how much you want to
carry, although other factors than its weight determine how much you need.

More often than not, if the passenger load is lower then maximum, cargo will be loaded to take advantage of
this, and fuel loaded as appropriate to enable it to be carried (with the appropriate safety margins, of
course).  Obviously the weight of the extra fuel feeds back into the calculation because it has to be carried
into the air, but by reiterating the calculations the optimum passenger/cargo/fuel load can be found.  The
fuel isn't expensive compared to the fees for cargo, so saving fuel by leaving cargo behind would be daft -
maximising the payload means maximising the profit!

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2005\04\04@044343 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>The NZ program Country Calendar ran a similar piece and
>showed pictures of "spaghetti weevils" that threatened
>to ruin the world spaghetti trade

There was another program "Town and Around" many years ago, which ran a
number of well known (in NZ anyway) spoofs, most famous of which were
"Turkeys in Gumboots" and "Radio Controlled Sheep Dogs". I do not recall
that they were done as April Fools jokes though.

2005\04\04@084358 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
William ChopsWestfield wrote:

> On Apr 3, 2005, at 8:36 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
>
>> Shouldn't fares be calculated that way? It takes more fuel to transport
>> a 300lb man than it does a 150lb man. Basing fares on weight only
>> acknowledges the realities of the economics involved with air travel.
>
> Since  "payload capacity" of a typical airliner is only about 20% of
> takeoff weight, weight differences between passengers are pretty much
> lost in the noise.  Your hypothetical 300lb man is less than 1% of the
> payload capacity of a modern airliner...

The problem is not the question whether they /should/ charge by the weight
or not, the problem is that they /do/ charge by the weight -- but only by
the luggage weight.

When I have a few kg more than allowed in my luggage, they charge me
"excess baggage fees", which can be substantial on international flights.
Considering that I, together with my "excess" luggage, still weigh less
than most others (with their respective non-excess luggage) on the flight,
I don't really see a good reason for that. I think that if they need to
consider weight, they should consider the /complete/ weight somebody
carries on board. If weight is no issue, they should drop it completely as
a criterion. But just considering the weight of the checked luggage to
calculate the fare sounds phony to me. I can't see it being more expensive
to transport my 140kg (for which I pay excess baggage fees) than it is to
carry somebody else's 180kg (who does not pay any excess fees).

This also leads to the cabin being overloaded with several "carry-on"
pieces per passenger, with 30kg or more -- the cabin storage facilities are
not really made for that. If they would consider the total weight instead
of only the checked luggage weight for fare calculation, many passengers
would rather check in the (now not anymore "excess") luggage than take it
on board with them. (I'm not talking about short trips where you take
everything with you in a small carry-on bag.) Besides more convenient for
everybody it's also safer.

Gerhard

2005\04\04@090603 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 09:43 -0300, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
> When I have a few kg more than allowed in my luggage, they charge me
> "excess baggage fees", which can be substantial on international flights.

Consider yourself lucky that you were allowed to take your overweight
luggage on board. On a recent flight with British Airways someone I know
had one bag that was at 33kg (the limit being 30kg). They were forced to
remove items from the bag until it was at 30kg. No choice. No excess
baggage fee. The reason? They are worried that the baggage handlers will
injure themselves on the heavier baggage and therefore won't allow
ANYTHING above 30kg!??! TTYL


-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\04\04@121748 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> The problem is not the question whether they /should/ charge by the
> weight
> or not, the problem is that they /do/ charge by the weight -- but
> only by
> the luggage weight.

FWIW - "excess" baggage is often but not always charged at 1% of first
class fare per kg. So 100 kg excess pays for a first class seat.

...

> This also leads to the cabin being overloaded with several
> "carry-on"
> pieces per passenger, with 30kg or more

You may have found an unusually lax airline. The normal cabin baggage
limit is AFAIR typically 7 kg and many airlines often enforce it
rigorously. There is also a dimension limit and some airlines have bag
"gauges" which you have to be able to fit your carryon bags within.

The trick for long distance travel is to try and make your first leg
via or from the USA :-). The US baggage allowance is so large as to be
embarrassing and, quite literally, dangerous to your health if you try
and carry all your baggage at once. This allowance applies to the
whole of an around the world trip if you have the US as your first leg
and to NONE of the trip if you don't. Ask me how I know :-). For those
who wish to bring home a large amount of paper (brochures/books/...)
and gifts it can be worth planning ones trip appropriately - even if
it makes your journey longer.



       RM





2005\04\04@121756 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> Consider yourself lucky that you were allowed to take your
> overweight
> luggage on board. On a recent flight with British Airways someone I
> know
> had one bag that was at 33kg (the limit being 30kg). They were
> forced to
> remove items from the bag until it was at 30kg. No choice. No excess
> baggage fee. The reason? They are worried that the baggage handlers
> will
> injure themselves on the heavier baggage and therefore won't allow
> ANYTHING above 30kg!??! TTYL

Completely standard - and reasonable IMHO. The limit is 28kg for some
airlines. That's a heavy load when you have to push many of them
around literally all life long. I was embarrassed severely by two BA
staff members who decided to use me for sport and had me repack
several large bags and redistribute material to get all bags under 28
kg. While the requirement was fair the way it was done was not. Had it
been videoed I'm sure their performance would have resulted in one of
them being fired.

I'd say I'd try to never to fly BA ever again were it not that their
inflight entertainment systems were far superior to any others we met
:-)


       RM

2005\04\04@124846 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>> This also leads to the cabin being overloaded with several
>> "carry-on"
>> pieces per passenger, with 30kg or more
>
>You may have found an unusually lax airline. The normal cabin baggage
>limit is AFAIR typically 7 kg and many airlines often enforce it
>rigorously. There is also a dimension limit and some airlines have bag
>"gauges" which you have to be able to fit your carryon bags within.

It was normal practice in southern China in 1997, when we travelled there.
The front row of seats was kept for everyone's carry-on luggage, stacked to
the ceiling with no safety net to hold it.

That flight was a story in itself.

2005\04\04@155333 by Richard.Prosser

flavicon
face

Yeah, I got caught by Qantas at Brisbane airport with a fibre optic splicer
that weighed 31kg. "Sorry - you can't take it with you." I had to trundle
it down the road and airfreight it. The guys at the (Quantas)  airfreight
depot couldn't believe it and put it on the plane as checked baggage
anyway. Just as well I was there early.

RP




On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 09:43 -0300, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
> When I have a few kg more than allowed in my luggage, they charge me
> "excess baggage fees", which can be substantial on international flights.

Consider yourself lucky that you were allowed to take your overweight
luggage on board. On a recent flight with British Airways someone I know
had one bag that was at 33kg (the limit being 30kg). They were forced to
remove items from the bag until it was at 30kg. No choice. No excess
baggage fee. The reason? They are worried that the baggage handlers will
injure themselves on the heavier baggage and therefore won't allow
ANYTHING above 30kg!??! TTYL




2005\04\05@064638 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Russell McMahon wrote:

>> The problem is not the question whether they /should/ charge by the
>> weight or not, the problem is that they /do/ charge by the weight --
>> but only by the luggage weight.
>
> FWIW - "excess" baggage is often but not always charged at 1% of first
> class fare per kg. So 100 kg excess pays for a first class seat.

Unless you carry it around your waist -- then it's free :)

>> This also leads to the cabin being overloaded with several "carry-on"
>> pieces per passenger, with 30kg or more
>
> You may have found an unusually lax airline.

I've seen that regularly, with US and Brazilian airlines on flights from
the US to Brazil. Since Brazil has import tax on many items and a rather
high one if you import in small quantities as a private person and a number
of things are just not sold here, it is quite common to take advantage of
the tax-free allowance on international flights and bring stuff to here.
Which fills the flights to here often with an impressive number of all
kinds of packages :)

Gerhard

2005\04\06@050224 by dr. Imre Bartfai

flavicon
face
Hi,

the tradition is also well-known in Hungary. Especially newspapers offer
articles which seems to be beliveable but on the next day it comes out it
is a joke. Sometimes it is very interesting to find out which article is
the bogus one...

Imre


On Sat, 2 Apr 2005, Howard Winter wrote:

{Quote hidden}

> --

2005\04\07@120139 by Martin McCormick

flavicon
face
       As for successful April Fools jokes, I once placed a sonalert
module connected to a small Solar pannel atop our refrigerator.  When
my wife came in to the kitchen that morning and switched on the light,
she could hear it as well as see it.  The light is a fluorescent tube
fixture so the sonalert had a nice 120-HZ rasp to it, kind of a RRRRR
sound.

       She turned the light off immediately and then back on again and,
of course, the sound resumed.  She said some mild expletive about how
the light is buzzing.  I reached up and hauled down the Solar pannel
and sonalert module while saying, "April fools."  She wasn't terribly amused.

Martin McCormick

2005\04\07@141715 by James Newtons Massmind

face picon face
>        As for successful April Fools jokes, I once placed a
> sonalert module connected to a small Solar pannel atop our
> refrigerator.  When my wife came in to the kitchen that
> morning and switched on the light, she could hear it as well


I once used a rubber band to hold closed the trigger of the... Thing... On
the sink that you can put out with the flexible hose and use to spray things
down with? So that it was pointed right at the place where you would stand
if you were about to use the sink. So my wife turned the faucet and got
sprayed nicely... On her new dress... After which I said "April Fools" all
bright and cheerful...

I still have the scars. <GRIN> If you marry Latin woman, you learn not to do
these things... As RAH says, "you live and you learn, or you don't live
long"

---
James



2005\04\07@145903 by John Ferrell

face picon face
Great one!
Mine is Sicilian but I may take the risk any way....
John Ferrell
http://DixieNC.US

----- Original Message -----
From: "James Newtons Massmind" <jamesnewtonspamKILLspammassmind.org>
To: "'Microcontroller discussion list - Public.'" <.....piclistKILLspamspam.....mit.edu>
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 2:17 PM
Subject: RE: [OT] April Fools


{Quote hidden}

> --

2005\04\07@152102 by Mike Hord

picon face
> >       As for successful April Fools jokes, I once placed a
> > sonalert module connected to a small Solar pannel atop our
> > refrigerator.  When my wife came in to the kitchen that
> > morning and switched on the light, she could hear it as well
>
> I once used a rubber band to hold closed the trigger of the... Thing... On
> the sink that you can put out with the flexible hose and use to spray things
> down with? So that it was pointed right at the place where you would stand
> if you were about to use the sink. So my wife turned the faucet and got
> sprayed nicely... On her new dress... After which I said "April Fools" all
> bright and cheerful...

When I was young and resented my parents' decision to purchase yet
another new home, I used to do that on the sprayers in the houses we would
tour.  So if you lived in central Virginia, were selling a house ~15 years ago,
and got sprayed by your vegetable sprayer, I hope you didn't punish YOUR
kids...

Mike H.

2005\04\07@153216 by James Newtons Massmind

face picon face

> Great one!
> Mine is Sicilian but I may take the risk any way....
> John Ferrell
> http://DixieNC.US
>

Do you swim well?


2005\04\07@161434 by John Ferrell

face picon face
It depends on how much chain I have to carry....

John Ferrell    
http://DixieNC.US

----- Original Message -----
From: "James Newtons Massmind" <EraseMEjamesnewtonspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTmassmind.org>
To: "'Microcontroller discussion list - Public.'" <piclistspamspam_OUTmit.edu>
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 3:32 PM
Subject: RE: [OT] April Fools


>
>> Great one!
>> Mine is Sicilian but I may take the risk any way....
>> John Ferrell
>> http://DixieNC.US
>>
>
> Do you swim well?
>
>
> --

2005\04\07@165345 by Aaron

picon face
My best trick was when my folks were still driving an old Buick -- I ran
a jumper wire from one of the the high beam headlight bulbs to the horn.

Dad got the last laugh, though.  He went to the local mechanic and had a
fake bill written up.  A crushing blow to a nearly broke teenager..

Aaron

2005\04\08@105309 by Martin McCormick

flavicon
face
"James Newtons Massmind" writes:
>I once used a rubber band to hold closed the trigger of the... Thing... On
>the sink that you can put out with the flexible hose and use to spray things
>down with? So that it was pointed right at the place where you would stand
>if you were about to use the sink. So my wife turned the faucet and got
>sprayed nicely... On her new dress... After which I said "April Fools" all
>bright and cheerful...

       Excellent!

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2005 , 2006 only
- Today
- New search...