[Fictionary] Pope - oh no!

[Hutch]

OMG!!! That was me asking that! I can't believe I forgot such a
transcendantly horrible joke *LOL*

However, what I meant was, what brought the comment up just now? I
hadn't seen anything recently that he might have been referring to.

                         "Hangman in reverse" *giggle*

BB,
Hutch

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCM/S d+>- s+:+ a++ C+++$ ULAC>$ P+ L+ !E W++$
N+ o K? w++++/--$ O? M- V? PS+ PE/- Y PGP- t++ 5?
X-- R !tv? b++++>$ DI++++ D G+> e++ h+ r--?* y++>
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 1:30 AM, Jim Moskowitz <jim at jimmosk.com> wrote:
> He was making a very old reference, as ancient as the very yurt itself.
> Which was in turn a reference to an earlier joke between Elliott and me from
> circa 1986.
>
> To: fictionary at plover.com
> Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 01:50:47 -0600
> Subject: "paphian" - The Finale
> From: Jeff Hutchinson <jeffhutch at juno.com>
> [...]
> Elliot mentions some kind of odd story about "pope smoke." Did I miss
> something? Or should Elliot be forced to tell "Jim Moskowitz's Pope Smoke
> Canard" to us all?
> [...]
> paphian - n - the white smoke which heralds the election of a new pope
> Nova Myhill & James Kushner - 1
> Aussie Meyer - Nah, papal defs are too easy.
> Elliot Moreton - Also, next time I tell people about Jim Moskowitz's Pope
> Smoke Canard, the one about the pope smoke will come in very handy. One
> point.
>
> From: Jim Moskowitz <jimmosk at netaxs.com>
> Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 12:49:02 -0400 (EDT)
> To: fictionary at plover.com
> Subject: Jim weighs in on the Pope
>
> As I tell the canard now (I'm not going to guess whether Elliott is
> misremembering or I've altered the setup in the intervening years), the
> white smoke that goes up when a decision has been reached come from the
> cardinals burning their ballots, and the black smoke that signifies an
> inconclusive vote is their ballots along with a piece of the old pope. This
> adds an urgency to the election, especially when they start running low on
> parts.  Encourages consensus to a wonderful degree.
>
> [maybe I just like the idea of 'playing hangman in reverse']
>
> -Jim
>
> At 1:17 AM -0500 2/14/13, Hutch wrote:
>>
>> Did I miss something? J-J, were you responding to something I don't see?
>>
>> BB,
>> Hutch
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 12:57 AM, Jim Moskowitz <jim at jimmosk.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>  At 11:49 PM -0500 2/11/13, J-J Cote wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  How will they make the white smoke this time?!
>>>
>>>  Remember, it's the *black* smoke that's canardially made by burning a
>>> piece of the previous pope.
>>>
>>>  I suppose this time they'll have to get it on the first try?