Print

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[LosingNow]

Great stuff by all.

I also love this classic stuff - similar to CLR's version of Kban.


Andersen Consulting  (now known as Accenture)

Deregulation of the chicken's side of the road was threatening its dominant market position. The chicken was faced with significant challenges to create and develop the competencies required for the newly competitive market. Andersen Consulting ,in a partnering relationship with the client, helped the chicken by rethinking its physical distribution strategy and implementation processes. Using the Poultry Integration Model (PIM), Andersen helped the chicken use its skills, methodologies, knowledge, capital and experiences to align the chicken's people, processes and technology in support of its overall strategy within a Program Management framework. Andersen Consulting convened a diverse cross-spectrum of road analysts and best chickens along with Anderson consultants with deep skills in the transportation industry to engage in a two-day itinerary of meetings in order to leverage their personal knowledge capital, both tacit and explicit, and to enable them to synergize with each other in order to achieve the implicit goals of delivering and successfully architecting and implementing an enterprise-wide value framework across the continuum of poultry cross-median processes. The meeting was held in a park-like setting enabling and creating an impactful environment which was strategically based, industry-focused, and built upon a consistent, clear, and unified market message and aligned with the chicken's mission, vision, and core values. This was conducive towards the creation of a total business integration solution. Andersen Consulting helped the chicken change to become more successful.

This surely is a classic. The chicken paid a few million $s for this chicken change

You bet. I remember couple of chicken who paid a couple of hundred million dollars each just to find there was not much of a change. This is what worries me about Obama and Clinton who bank their future on age old marketing buzzwords like "change" and "experience". May be poitlics are catching up with business.

Politics is a business.

[kban1]

Who said the following?

1. The chicken did not cross the road. It was thrown like a javelin across the road.

Bedi

2. The chicken was not allowed to cross the road just because it is my son. The chicken successfully crossed the road one day in 2005 when no one else was crossing the road.

Shivlal Yadav

3. When the chicken crosses the road it reminds me of how I used to cross the road.

Bradman

4. I just saw the chicken crossing the road. It looked like it had swallowed a goat.



5. Man it don't matter when the chicken decides to cross the road. The score is still zero!

Viv Richards

6. The chicken has the nous to cross the road. Ergo, it crossed the road.

Prem Panicker

[RicePlateReddy]

6. The chicken has the nous to cross the road. Ergo, it crossed the road.

Kban?

LOL! It is PP. He throws around "nous" and "ergo" like there is no tomorrow.

[kingcool1432]

4. I just saw the chicken crossing the road. It looked like it had swallowed a goat.

Ranatunga

[LosingNow]

6. The chicken has the nous to cross the road. Ergo, it crossed the road.

Kban?

LOL! It is PP. He throws around "nous" and "ergo" like there is no tomorrow.

I am with sudzz on this.. doesn't kban use "nous" a lot

[RicePlateReddy]

5/6 in the Clucking Quiz, kban.

The goat one is Shane Warne (on seeing Ranatunga). To which Ranatunga offered the classic reply "better than what he is swallowing" since the comment was made when Warne was banned due to ingesting diuretics.

[kban1]

6. The chicken has the nous to cross the road. Ergo, it crossed the road.

Kban?

LOL! It is PP. He throws around "nous" and "ergo" like there is no tomorrow.

I am with sudzz on this.. doesn't kban use "nous" a lot

nope, I dont.

see my post above, I said its PP

[kban1]

5/6 in the Clucking Quiz, kban.

The goat one is Shane Warne (on seeing Ranatunga). To which Ranatunga offered the classic reply "better than what he is swallowing" since the comment was made when Warne was banned due to ingesting diuretics.

ok, i wouldnt have gotten that anyways --I was thinking Boycs on seeing Powar.

[LosingNow]

6. The chicken has the nous to cross the road. Ergo, it crossed the road.

Kban?

LOL! It is PP. He throws around "nous" and "ergo" like there is no tomorrow.

I am with sudzz on this.. doesn't kban use "nous" a lot

nope, I dont.

see my post above, I said its PP

my bad.. you use "nuance"

[pipsqueak]

6. The chicken has the nous to cross the road. Ergo, it crossed the road.

Kban?

LOL! It is PP. He throws around "nous" and "ergo" like there is no tomorrow.

I am with sudzz on this.. doesn't kban use "nous" a lot

nope, I dont.

see my post above, I said its PP

my bad.. you use "nuance"

Absolutely wrong -- it cannot be kban since your assumption about his using the word nous is precluded by the fact that he has alluded to never using this term -- this predicates that your instigation about his usage of the term is based on a false premise.

Yes I think in every conceivable measure possible, your guess could be a natural reaction about your assumed presumption about your stature, bereft of any rational thinking  -- it falls flat against the list of facts that has been beaten to death on this DG - it follows that is is unbefitting and far from the ground realities.

Or it is your stance that the accusation can be perpetrated under the guise of humour/joke? While one can argue that it is plain human nature, frankly, I think you are averting the issue, juxtaposing it with your own blueprint of what constitutes basic human nature -- it is flawed and is not plausible.

If that's your stance despite every argument of yours being disproved -- vide my previous posts on erroneous human behaviour, we just have to agree to disagree -- to wit, we have to reach a conclusion whereby your thoughts on the subject and my thoughts on the subject do not find a common platform -- on the other hand, if you choose not to agree to my agreeing to disagreeing, I must point out that there are two sides to a coin - head/tail.

Note - I would not have started this topic but for your presumptous assumption, lest you misunderstand.

Indeed I hope you can visualize with your cogent thinking that this is an indictment of your vehement imploding in the presence of many echelons of individuals at the top, if you will.

Anyways, moving on.

[LosingNow]

6. The chicken has the nous to cross the road. Ergo, it crossed the road.

Kban?

LOL! It is PP. He throws around "nous" and "ergo" like there is no tomorrow.

I am with sudzz on this.. doesn't kban use "nous" a lot

nope, I dont.

see my post above, I said its PP

my bad.. you use "nuance"

Absolutely wrong -- it cannot be kban since your assumption about his using the word nous is precluded by the fact that he has alluded to never using this term -- this predicates that your instigation about his usage of the term is based on a false premise.

Yes I think in every conceivable measure possible, your guess could be a natural reaction about your assumed presumption about your stature, bereft of any rational thinking  -- it falls flat against the list of facts that has been beaten to death on this DG - it follows that is is unbefitting and far from the ground realities.

Or it is your stance that the accusation can be perpetrated under the guise of humour/joke? While one can argue that it is plain human nature, frankly, I think you are averting the issue, juxtaposing it with your own blueprint of what constitutes basic human nature -- it is flawed and is not plausible.

If that's your stance despite every argument of yours being disproved -- vide my previous posts on erroneous human behaviour, we just have to agree to disagree -- to wit, we have to reach a conclusion whereby your thoughts on the subject and my thoughts on the subject do not find a common platform -- on the other hand, if you choose not to agree to my agreeing to disagreeing, I must point out that there are two sides to a coin - head/tail.

Note - I would not have started this topic but for your presumptous assumption, lest you misunderstand.

Indeed I hope you can visualize with your cogent thinking that this is an indictment of your vehement imploding in the presence of many echelons of individuals at the top, if you will.

Anyways, moving on.

 

[kban1]

Absolutely wrong -- it cannot be kban since your assumption about his using the word nous is precluded by the fact that he has alluded to never using this term -- this predicates that your instigation about his usage of the term is based on a false premise.

Yes I think in every conceivable measure possible, your guess could be a natural reaction about your assumed presumption about your stature, bereft of any rational thinking  -- it falls flat against the list of facts that has been beaten to death on this DG - it follows that is is unbefitting and far from the ground realities.

Or it is your stance that the accusation can be perpetrated under the guise of humour/joke? While one can argue that it is plain human nature, frankly, I think you are averting the issue, juxtaposing it with your own blueprint of what constitutes basic human nature -- it is flawed and is not plausible.

If that's your stance despite every argument of yours being disproved -- vide my previous posts on erroneous human behaviour, we just have to agree to disagree -- to wit, we have to reach a conclusion whereby your thoughts on the subject and my thoughts on the subject do not find a common platform -- on the other hand, if you choose not to agree to my agreeing to disagreeing, I must point out that there are two sides to a coin - head/tail.

Note - I would not have started this topic but for your presumptous assumption, lest you misunderstand.

Indeed I hope you can visualize with your cogent thinking that this is an indictment of your vehement imploding in the presence of many echelons of individuals at the top, if you will.

Anyways, moving on.

[inoc]

Absolutely wrong -- it cannot be kban since your assumption about his using the word nous is precluded by the fact that he has alluded to never using this term -- this predicates that your instigation about his usage of the term is based on a false premise.

Yes I think in every conceivable measure possible, your guess could be a natural reaction about your assumed presumption about your stature, bereft of any rational thinking  -- it falls flat against the list of facts that has been beaten to death on this DG - it follows that is is unbefitting and far from the ground realities.

Or it is your stance that the accusation can be perpetrated under the guise of humour/joke? While one can argue that it is plain human nature, frankly, I think you are averting the issue, juxtaposing it with your own blueprint of what constitutes basic human nature -- it is flawed and is not plausible.

If that's your stance despite every argument of yours being disproved -- vide my previous posts on erroneous human behaviour, we just have to agree to disagree -- to wit, we have to reach a conclusion whereby your thoughts on the subject and my thoughts on the subject do not find a common platform -- on the other hand, if you choose not to agree to my agreeing to disagreeing, I must point out that there are two sides to a coin - head/tail.

Note - I would not have started this topic but for your presumptous assumption, lest you misunderstand.

Indeed I hope you can visualize with your cogent thinking that this is an indictment of your vehement imploding in the presence of many echelons of individuals at the top, if you will.

Anyways, moving on.

f""" you are not allowed to be this good.

applause

[CLR James]

6. The chicken has the nous to cross the road. Ergo, it crossed the road.

Kban?

LOL! It is PP. He throws around "nous" and "ergo" like there is no tomorrow.

I am with sudzz on this.. doesn't kban use "nous" a lot

nope, I dont.

see my post above, I said its PP

my bad.. you use "nuance"

Absolutely wrong -- it cannot be kban since your assumption about his using the word nous is precluded by the fact that he has alluded to never using this term -- this predicates that your instigation about his usage of the term is based on a false premise.

Yes I think in every conceivable measure possible, your guess could be a natural reaction about your assumed presumption about your stature, bereft of any rational thinking  -- it falls flat against the list of facts that has been beaten to death on this DG - it follows that is is unbefitting and far from the ground realities.

Or it is your stance that the accusation can be perpetrated under the guise of humour/joke? While one can argue that it is plain human nature, frankly, I think you are averting the issue, juxtaposing it with your own blueprint of what constitutes basic human nature -- it is flawed and is not plausible.

If that's your stance despite every argument of yours being disproved -- vide my previous posts on erroneous human behaviour, we just have to agree to disagree -- to wit, we have to reach a conclusion whereby your thoughts on the subject and my thoughts on the subject do not find a common platform -- on the other hand, if you choose not to agree to my agreeing to disagreeing, I must point out that there are two sides to a coin - head/tail.

Note - I would not have started this topic but for your presumptous assumption, lest you misunderstand.

Indeed I hope you can visualize with your cogent thinking that this is an indictment of your vehement imploding in the presence of many echelons of individuals at the top, if you will.

Anyways, moving on.

 

Applause!

[Libran]

6. The chicken has the nous to cross the road. Ergo, it crossed the road.

Kban?

LOL! It is PP. He throws around "nous" and "ergo" like there is no tomorrow.

I am with sudzz on this.. doesn't kban use "nous" a lot

nope, I dont.

see my post above, I said its PP

And you have the nous to deny it ...ergo...you denied it

[Libran]

6. The chicken has the nous to cross the road. Ergo, it crossed the road.

Kban?

LOL! It is PP. He throws around "nous" and "ergo" like there is no tomorrow.

I am with sudzz on this.. doesn't kban use "nous" a lot

nope, I dont.

see my post above, I said its PP

my bad.. you use "nuance"

Absolutely wrong -- it cannot be kban since your assumption about his using the word nous is precluded by the fact that he has alluded to never using this term -- this predicates that your instigation about his usage of the term is based on a false premise.

Yes I think in every conceivable measure possible, your guess could be a natural reaction about your assumed presumption about your stature, bereft of any rational thinking  -- it falls flat against the list of facts that has been beaten to death on this DG - it follows that is is unbefitting and far from the ground realities.

Or it is your stance that the accusation can be perpetrated under the guise of humour/joke? While one can argue that it is plain human nature, frankly, I think you are averting the issue, juxtaposing it with your own blueprint of what constitutes basic human nature -- it is flawed and is not plausible.

If that's your stance despite every argument of yours being disproved -- vide my previous posts on erroneous human behaviour, we just have to agree to disagree -- to wit, we have to reach a conclusion whereby your thoughts on the subject and my thoughts on the subject do not find a common platform -- on the other hand, if you choose not to agree to my agreeing to disagreeing, I must point out that there are two sides to a coin - head/tail.

Note - I would not have started this topic but for your presumptous assumption, lest you misunderstand.

Indeed I hope you can visualize with your cogent thinking that this is an indictment of your vehement imploding in the presence of many echelons of individuals at the top, if you will.

Anyways, moving on.

Aandavaah !!!!!!  aka Hey Bhagwaan !!!!

[achutank]

6. The chicken has the nous to cross the road. Ergo, it crossed the road.

Kban?

LOL! It is PP. He throws around "nous" and "ergo" like there is no tomorrow.

I am with sudzz on this.. doesn't kban use "nous" a lot

nope, I dont.

see my post above, I said its PP

my bad.. you use "nuance"

Absolutely wrong -- it cannot be kban since your assumption about his using the word nous is precluded by the fact that he has alluded to never using this term -- this predicates that your instigation about his usage of the term is based on a false premise.

Yes I think in every conceivable measure possible, your guess could be a natural reaction about your assumed presumption about your stature, bereft of any rational thinking  -- it falls flat against the list of facts that has been beaten to death on this DG - it follows that is is unbefitting and far from the ground realities.

Or it is your stance that the accusation can be perpetrated under the guise of humour/joke? While one can argue that it is plain human nature, frankly, I think you are averting the issue, juxtaposing it with your own blueprint of what constitutes basic human nature -- it is flawed and is not plausible.

If that's your stance despite every argument of yours being disproved -- vide my previous posts on erroneous human behaviour, we just have to agree to disagree -- to wit, we have to reach a conclusion whereby your thoughts on the subject and my thoughts on the subject do not find a common platform -- on the other hand, if you choose not to agree to my agreeing to disagreeing, I must point out that there are two sides to a coin - head/tail.

Note - I would not have started this topic but for your presumptous assumption, lest you misunderstand.

Indeed I hope you can visualize with your cogent thinking that this is an indictment of your vehement imploding in the presence of many echelons of individuals at the top, if you will.

Anyways, moving on.

Aandavaah !!!!!!  aka Hey Bhagwaan !!!!

applause