This year's Missing Believed Wiped (2003)

[Michael]

Have just noticed the small print at the top of the posting that Dick Fiddy posted saying what was coming up at MBW.
Obviuosly there has been a visit from Mr.Cock-up somewhere along the line.
I have emailed Dick re this and have been instructed to call him this coming monday re what is happening for this years MBW program.
I can't see why the program for 2003 has been posted,unless it is just a slip up.
If there is any news monday I shall post it.

[Stuart Douglas]

Michael said:

Have just noticed the small print at the top of the posting that Dick Fiddy posted saying what was coming up at MBW.
Obviuosly there has been a visit from Mr.Cock-up somewhere along the line.
I have emailed Dick re this and have been instructed to call him this coming monday re what is happening for this years MBW program.
I can't see why the program for 2003 has been posted,unless it is just a slip up.
If there is any news monday I shall post it.

I think it's just Dick's post from 2003 which someone wandering through the archives has replied to, thereby bumping it up to the top of the page again.

Shame- I thought for a second that there had been several unexpected finds this year

Stuart

[ethantyler]

stuartdouglas said:

Shame- I thought for a second that there had been several unexpected finds this year

Me too! The thing that made me realise and look at the date of the post was D for Destruction, which I knew was found in 2003. I was relieved that it was an old post as I wanted to go, but live in the North West.

[robby]

it cud be that the mbw 2003 is being reopeated again this year?
i woudnt mind either as i wud like to see D for destruction again.
i hope sum body can clear it up

[Simon Winchester]

I heard that a second print of 'D For Destruction' is held in private hands. This has Pat Troughton replaced by Douglas Wilmer. Unsure why this is, but like the recent sighting of small prohet no return, it does give hope.

[Steven Sigel]

robby said:

it cud be that the mbw 2003 is being reopeated again this year?
i woudnt mind either as i wud like to see D for destruction again.
i hope sum body can clear it up

To robby, Michael and anyone else who keeps asking about this ------- this is a 2 year old post -- look at the date on Dick Fiddys posting - « Thread Started on 9/16/03 at 12:00 »

Get it? This is from 2003, so he was talking about the 2003 MBW. It has NOTHING to do with this year...

[Michael]

Like I said previously-I shall be speaking to Mr.Fiddy this monday regarding this posting and if there is any infomation as to why this vintage posting has been posted obviously by accident I shall put it on the forum.
People like Steven S. who read these things should realise that not everyone reads the small print as to when the item has been posted-they just want to see what the news item is about-I mean who buys a newspaper to look at the price,you buy it to read the headlines and the story.
And couls Steven S. please go and calm down and do some train spotting or something and not get upset about what other people write on this forum,or write things in such a manner like a 1970's patronising shcoolteacher.
Might have some more info for you lot tommorrow.

[ethantyler]

Simon said:

I heard that a second print of 'D For Destruction' is held in private hands. This has Pat Troughton replaced by Douglas Wilmer.

By "replaced", do you mean dubbed?

Unsure why this is, but like the recent sighting of small prohet no return, it does give hope.

What sighting are you referring to? I recall recent rumours regarding episodes of The Myth Makers (Doctor Who for those that don't know), but I think they were pretty much proved to be hoaxes.

[ethantyler]

Michael said:

Like I said previously-I shall be speaking to Mr.Fiddy this monday regarding this posting and if there is any infomation as to why this vintage posting has been posted obviously by accident I shall put it on the forum.
People like Steven S. who read these things should realise that not everyone reads the small print as to when the item has been posted-they just want to see what the news item is about-I mean who buys a newspaper to look at the price,you buy it to read the headlines and the story.
And couls Steven S. please go and calm down and do some train spotting or something and not get upset about what other people write on this forum,or write things in such a manner like a 1970's patronising shcoolteacher.
Might have some more info for you lot tommorrow.

Michael, Steven was trying to explain that this thread was posted in 2003 by Dick Fiddy to give information of the then forthcoming MBW 2003. However, someone added a reply to the thread, which moved it back to the first page. Basically, Dick Fiddy's post was made two years ago.

[Steven Sigel]

Michael --

Several people have posted that this was an old posting - yet people like you seem to continue to think there's something more to it.

Look - here's the deal -- this posting was from 2003. Someone saw it recently and made a new comment about it. When you make a new comment in an old thread, it brings it to the top. Simple, eh?

And BTW - please grow up and stop with the personal attacks.

Michael said:

Like I said previously-I shall be speaking to Mr.Fiddy this monday regarding this posting and if there is any infomation as to why this vintage posting has been posted obviously by accident I shall put it on the forum.
People like Steven S. who read these things should realise that not everyone reads the small print as to when the item has been posted-they just want to see what the news item is about-I mean who buys a newspaper to look at the price,you buy it to read the headlines and the story.
And couls Steven S. please go and calm down and do some train spotting or something and not get upset about what other people write on this forum,or write things in such a manner like a 1970's patronising shcoolteacher.
Might have some more info for you lot tommorrow.

[andrew martin]

Simon said:

I heard that a second print of 'D For Destruction' is held in private hands. This has Pat Troughton replaced by Douglas Wilmer. Unsure why this is, but like the recent sighting of small prohet no return, it does give hope.

I'm sure someone's leg is being pulled here, but I can't quite work out whose...

[robby]

yes i think everybode gets the message that this thread dates to the MBW 2003 event, but wat poeple want to know iis the MBW2003 the same line up for MBW 2005'

It dusnt matterif it is as lots would like to see D for dstruction again on the big screen

[Michael]

Apologies to Steven S if my comments upset him slightly.
I would have thought a far more appropriate reply to my posting would have been to politly point out the small print of the posting regarding MBW-I have spoken to Dick Fiddy re this posting and he does'nt know how it has appeared-the shedule for the 2005 event has not been finalised yet.
I would like to know how an old posting from two years ago can reappear-unless someone saved it?
As another person has said this could be a leg pull-all it boils down to is that fact that nobody bothered to read the small print until it was pointed out.

[Steven Sigel]

Michael said:

I would like to know how an old posting from two years ago can reappear-unless someone saved it?
As another person has said this could be a leg pull-all it boils down to is that fact that nobody bothered to read the small print until it was pointed out.

Let me try one more time to explain this:

1) In 2003 Dick Fiddy posted his message about the MBW show.

2) All messages posted to this forum from the time it started can still be accessed by anyone. If you look at the bottom of the screen, you will see a list box marked "page". If you click that, you can select any page of messages from the forum. You will note that there are 44 pages of messages in this forum, going back to 2003 (Which is when they moved the forum over from another system).

3) If someone posts a new response to an old thread, then that old thread moves up to the top of the list automatically by the software. In this case, on Jun 24, 2005 someone named "Tim Barker" posted a message saying "Darn, I missed it". Tim was probably looking through old messages and came across Dicks message on the board and his response brought it to the top.

4) After Tim's message, several other people started posting on it not realizing that it was an old thread.

It's really quite simple and no mystery at all.

[Richard Bignell]

This has got to be the funniest thread I've read in years! ;D ;D

Richard