Aye!
Printable View
Aye!
Driver, apparently women like a bloke who is man enough to wear pink. Therefore pink must be a blokely colour.:cool:
Mate, if you're referring to that Bundy ad, I'll point out to you something that the sheila has also missed: when she delivers that line about preferring a man who's man enough to wear pink, she's talking to a person (possibly a chap, I find it hard to believe he's a bloke) in a dyed pink polar bear suit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wongo
This tends to dilute the potency of her argument.
Further, the pink in question has been derived from what is clearly a red footy sock judiciously dipped into the bear's bathwater by his blokely mates. (See Para 9 Blokely Attire, sub-para 9.3.3 Colour, sub-sub-para 9.3.3.4 Pink)
I think on either count the Code deals with your query satisfactorily. Thank you for raising it and providing us with an opportunity to test the Code's effectiveness. ;)
Yup. (Any more "ayes" and we'll be up to our necks in eye patches, wooden legs and Seaman Stains!)
Ah Ha! She said, as she waved 'er wooden leg!
Also known as "Aye!" :D
Have run said code past various blokes at work.
Whilst meeting with general apporval one bloke suggests footwear section should include specific reference to;
"manky uggboot with gaffa tape reinforcement"
Carry on.
Seconded.Quote:
"manky uggboot with gaffa tape reinforcement"
OK, gents (see para 10- Inter-Bloke Communications, sub para 10.3 - Blokely Terms).
I have attached two files. They both contain the Code of Practice, brought up to date. One is in A4 format and the other in A5.
In the A4 file, amendments to the Code have been highlighted. They include:-
- Some minor modifications to the text throughout the Code, employing more precise terminology.
- An extra sub-paragraph on Sharpening in para 6 - Tools - suggested in part by SkewChiDAmN!!
- A useful addition to para 9 - Blokely Attire, submitted by BobL and his external sub-committee and dealing with the important issue of the gaffer-tape reinforced manky uggboot.
- A new section in para 10 - Inter-Bloke Communications, dealing with the previously omitted and very important area of Blokely Terms.
Please ensure that you read the updated Code of Practice and bring your personal copy up to date without delay to ensure compliance.
Thank you for your attention.
Toodle Pip!
Col
Or a bloke who has done himself an injury in the shed.Quote:
1.1.1.1. Note: The latter two terms can be used inter-changeably when addressing any group of blokes but are probably most effectively deployed when addressing members of a rival institution: another sporting team or woodworking club, for example.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
Dan
BTW: Toodle pip is a bit Chappish isn't it?
Nah, it means 'the other end of the dog' :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by DanP
(Think about it.) :D
I was wondering when someone would notice. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by DanP
Not bad, Ginge, but verging on chappish, too, I reckon. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Cliff Rogers
big's pum. :D
Today while out trying to get a new frog for a stanley 220 I bought some A5 paper and tonight I printed out this wonderful document.
Tomorrow I shall drill a hole in the top Right hand corner , cable tie together and shall enforce the rule that all who enter My Shed shall read and abide by the said document rules
Thanks to Driver ( Col) for the work and effort much appreciated
I dunno if this has already been mentioned but its a must to have a place in the shed which is reserved to "incubate" new tools until the missus realises that you already owned it a long time ago....;p
Col
Somehow I only noticed this thread tonight and have sent myself to stand in the corner for being so unblokely.
Whilst there I read a thread about intercoms between house and shed. This is something swmbo has tried to get me to install. I am proud of my efforts of passive resistance. Such a device would remove the very soul of the shed. It would reduce the shed to another place from where I could be found out hounded, harrangued and summoned.:eek:
This must be made part of the code. Imagine not being able to use the old "if a machine is running don't come tapping me on the shoulder" line.
This is a threat that no one else has foreseen. As insidious as telemarketers are in the house.
I know this is a really late amendment but without it all previous efforts may well be thwarted.
Right on Caliban,
An intercom is just like a mobile phone - a peace and tranquility wrecker!!!!!
Jim
Remove yourself from the corner without delay!
You have spotted a major omission from the Code and blokes everywhere will be grateful to you for your sterling work in helping to plug what had the awful potential to develop into a major breach in the defences of the Domain of the Bloke. Your name has been added to the Drafting Committee listed in Appendix D.
I attach the latest amendment to the Code, including a vitally important new Note under sub-para 5.7 - Warning signs.
The new additions have been highlighted in yellow, as usual. The Code's draughtsmen have taken the opportunity to make some other minor changes, highlighted in green. These have the effect of aligning parts of the Code in a more logical sequence.
Blokes everywhere are urged to update their copies of the Code to bring it into line with these updates.
Col
Another important addition that is essential to the code is that Blokes should avoid knowing the rules about everything anmd anything (especially swmbo's) so that they can genuinelly plead innocence to all allegations:)
Quote:
Originally Posted by echnidna
Bob
I think I understand this but it would help if you could suggest some wording to be included in the Code.
Col
Blokles are always entitled to be presumed innocent coz they don't know the rules.!!!!!!!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by echnidna
Right. Got it!
I'll work on this and issue an update.
Not sure if this has been covered but if not I'd like to humbly suggest for inclusion:
"Under no circumstances should a Bloke ever completely read the instructions to anything.
Ideally they shouldn't be read at all, but if absolutely necessary a casual flick though should be more than enough for any bloke to operate/assemble anything".
Yep. Even if you've got no idea at all, a bloke should at least unpack everything and make an attempt. Extra points if you can work out how to make it stronger, faster or better looking. High achievers will be able to get a completely different use/function from the original item.Quote:
Originally Posted by craigb
Good one Craig.
So I use old beer cans as shim metal - does that mean I'm a high achiever:D
btw steel beer cans are about 4 thou thick and ally is about 8 thou thick,
dunno what a baked beans tin is though:rolleyes:
Why not?:DQuote:
Originally Posted by echnidna
This is sterling work, gents.
Craig's suggested inclusion, with Dan's amendment, will be included in the next update.
Watch this space!
(Incidentally, I trust you blokes have noticed that the Code received meritorious inclusion in a recent episode of the Rip saga. It was, in fact, cited as sufficient justification for Groans and Shorty to facilitate Moichael's latest flight over the taffrail and into the 'oggin!).
Col
Thanks for the "get out of the corner" card. Also clear your pm inbox. Popular buggar. Also today I was hiding (read researching) in my shed when I noticed a partially complete restoration. It is a broken bar stool. It is inverted waiting for me to find the glue. Is this acceptable? Or is it, although broken, an open invitation for four "chap" types to make themselves at home and take a seat?
Could I have inadvertently breached the code whilst trying to have at least three(3) unfinished jobs on the go.(no pun intended) To me and every other true bloke out there the article in question does not represent a seat as such,so really I only have one stool in its normal (legs down) attitude.:confused: :confused: :confused:
While you're editing Col, I've got a couple of suggestions and one minor correction.
10.3 Blokley terms
How about including Fellas (Fellers sp?)?
10.3.1
Just about anything derogatory would also qualify eg knobhead, Boofhead, big nose, tosser, wanker etc.
9.3.2.1. It is recommended, notwithstanding the strictures of para 9.3.4 – Colour,
Should read 9.3.5 Colour
Geez Louise. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan
You don't work in the public service do you? :p :D
I had a recent landmark case in my jurisdiction - I know there is plenty of case law pertaining to it elsewhere but I couldn't show initially that they applied in my local jurisdiction.
In me vs Chief (2004), there was a lengthy drawn out proceedings where I had to apply for a decision on articles and possessions belonging to Chief which she wanted to store in the shed and I wasn't prepared to accomodate. Ipso facto, I got the decision in my favour.
I realise the spirit of the law is important here. The shed is my dominion so it is my decision. But is there a need to allow for this explicitly in the code?
eg. "No partner may commence proceedings for application to store articles or possessions without first lodging the plan with the owner, who may consider them on merit but is obliged to indicate that the application will almost certainly be rejected out of hand. The burden of proof follows the stricter criminal law code; the appliant must prove beyond reasonable doubt there is no impediment to storage, unlike in the civil law where he must look at the 'balance of probabilities".
Articles or possessions include but are not limited to:
single beds, currently not in use,
pictures,
old oil heaters, (although prima facie, they do provide warmth for the shed and this may be considered).
Some owners may feel they can accomodate and hold, with agreed access, a limited of gardening accoutrements and articles if no other shed is available. However on the law that 'fill expands to fill all avaliable space' it is to be discouraged."
Incidentally fellows, in an appendix, can we include such cases that have come inter alia, part of commonlaw, if not yet enshrined and codified under statute.
I invite you blokes to submit examples of past cases in your jurisdiction. As all such cases won by SWMBO are not deemed to be correct in higher court, [this forum] despite ratified by the commonwealth, they need not be included.
Don't know about the rest of youse blokes and not having been in this situation myself, but I would expect that ownership of said articles or possessions would transfer to the owner of the shed after say, a week?Quote:
"No partner may commence proceedings for application to store articles or possessions without first lodging the plan with the owner, who may consider them on merit but is obliged to indicate that the application will almost certainly be rejected out of hand.
OK ladies
Some heavy correspondence on Code-related matters this fine winter's morn!
Dealing with your input in no particular order:-
1. havenoideaatall. Mate - you are to be congratulated for your enthusiasm. It is clear that you have a fine grasp of the principles of the Code and your blokely status is unquestioned. Indeed, you are demonstrably a Good Bloke. However, in your (as I said, unquestioned) blokely enthusiasm, you have missed the most obvious point. I refer you to the Code: para 3 - Definitions and I quote:-
"3.1. Bloke – a bloke is the owner, occupier and user of his shed."
and:-
"3.2. Shed – a shed is the domain, demesne and realm of a bloke."
also:-
"4.2. The purpose of a shed.
The purpose of a shed is to provide an environment and territory wherein a bloke has total and complete dominion and control and is therefore happy."
This, I believe, deals with the important issues you raise. Thank you for providing another opportunity to demonstrate the effectiveness of the Code.
Incidentally, your point about case law and precedent is well taken. I suggest that this thread, in its entirety, can provide the necessary body of reference for this purpose.
2. Jim, me old Caliban, it's definably a Work In Progress (WIP). To quote your own post: "....a partially complete restoration. It is a broken bar stool." Until such time as it is a complete restoration, at which point it will become a mere bar stool, it remains a WIP. No violation of the Code is at issue here.
3. echnidna. Very good work, Bob. I've added an entire new paragraph (para 11) on the subject of Extra-Bloke Communications.
4. Craig. Ditto. A new section on new tools has been added under para 6 - Tools.
5. Dan. Good work on blokely terms. Duly noted and amendments incorporated. Thanks for spotting the error in numbering. (Craig: tsk,tsk, mate - it's important to get these things right - this is THE Code of Practice).
I attach the latest Code update. Please bring your copies up to date to avoid potential violations by omission.
Col
Thanks Driver, I am aware that the code provided for such a point, but thought maybe we could make it explicit.
Seems to me that any post on this forum amounts to precedent and also forms a body of case law.
Shouldn't there be a link to this forum on each page?
Sorry Col. :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Driver
Consider me chastised. :o
Newaddition to the blokey clause.
Steve ( Auld Basson ) and I are allowed to say chap.
Al :p
:D :D :D Quite so, old pal, don'tcha know!Quote:
Originally Posted by ozwinner
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozwinner
Well in that case, try to keep your voices down. We don't want people to get the wrong idea. :eek:
(I'm not even going to mention the fact that you used that sheila's word 'blokey' instead of the correct term: 'blokely').
Also, there is no "blokey clause". :confused: Are you sure you're not confusing it with Santa Claus? ;) Al, have you taken to going outdoors without your foilie again? :eek:
OK girls,
I've been using the A4 format for most of the updates but, as those of you who have been following this thread will know, I have saved a version in A5 size.
A5 is actually more usable as a printed version. I find A4 a bit unwieldy, especially in the shed.
Keeping both sizes updated is a bit of a PITA but I'm happy to do that if both formats are wanted. Otherwise, I'll revert to A5 only.
Tell me what you think.
Col the Formatter
Col, I don't think it matters at this stage 'cos I'm not going to print it while it is still being updated so often. :D
Maybe, if it is even finished, a hard copy in A5 format would be good to have on hand, just in case the power fails. :cool:
You mentioned making a cover to suit the A5 version, did you ever get around to it?