This seems the wrong list for humor unless it's very "dry humor".  See us
analytical types have to take everything you say, take it a part piece by
piece and anlalyze it until were blue in the face.  Plus, it helps if the
facts match up, that gives a little more dryness to it.  In other words,
it's gotta be believable too, so we don't have to stretch our minds too far
and start looking up all these things to verify them.  Those simple tongue
and cheek jokes in the hall just aren't funny.  I sit there scratching my
head looking for the underlying meaning, but there isn't.  Anyway, cheers
everyone.

BTW, what will be the mnemonic in the subject line for "humor" in the
proposed list standard to identify contents?


>
> I could almost swear that I put 'Humor' not 'Facts' in the
> Subject header.
>

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, etc *
*     please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html       *