Or was it "Impersonation"?
http://www.blogger.com/profile/00140899973856854127
Pappillon Featured Writings
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
10 comments:
Pappillon welcomes your comments and encourages your participation. However, in commenting, you agree that you will not:1) Post material that infringes on the rights of any third party, including intellectual property, privacy or publicity rights. 2) Post material that is unlawful, obscene, defamatory, threatening, harassing, abusive, slanderous, hateful, or embarrassing to any other person or entity as determined by Pappillon in its sole discretion. 3) Impersonate another person.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)





And yes, I do moderate my comments, so all of the idiotic ones are binned. Sorry.
ReplyDeleteWhat can I say I love Joe Papp. (or myself)
ReplyDeleteAs Joe Papp I do not do push ups I push the ground down
ReplyDeleteI (Joe Papp)am currently suing NBC, claiming Law and Order are trademarked names for my left and right legs.
ReplyDelete"joepapp" isn't me, but I'll keep publishing his comments as long as he isn't a jerk and stays funny and/or even mildly sarcastic.
ReplyDeleteMost people have 23 pairs of chromosomes. I have 72... and they're all poisonous, and I CAN touch MC Hammer
ReplyDeleteDude, just grab a "Chuck Norris" Fact List from the 'net, copy it into MS Word, and do an auto-replace of "Chuck Norris" with "Joe Papp" in all instances. You'll have material for a month. Then in month two, you could modify each fact to change it into it's negative...
ReplyDeleteExample:
In Month 1, "Chuck Norris does not sleep. He waits." becomes "Joe Papp does not sleep. He waits." And then in Month 2, that same fact changes to: "Joe Papp sleeps because he cannot wait." (or some variation therein) Granted, more custom work will be required to create the negative statements, but I'm sure you're up to the task.
Will the real Joe Papp please stand up? Please stand up? Please stand up?
ReplyDeleteOh well I busted myself. I am to smart for myself.
ReplyDeleteBut not a good speller. "to smart" = "too smart" in your case...
ReplyDelete