Re: OT: B5 reboot?

FP wrote on 8/10/21 9:55 am:
> On 02/10/2021 10:33, Daniel65 wrote:
>> Steveski wrote on 2/10/21 1:53 am:
>>> On 01/10/2021 10:44, Daniel65 wrote:
>>>> Steveski wrote on 30/9/21 8:33 pm:
>>>>> On 30/09/2021 09:12, Daniel65 wrote:
>>>>>> Steveski wrote on 30/9/21 10:15 am:
>>>>>>> On 29/09/2021 23:55, FP wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 27/09/2021 20:15, Kim Wall wrote:
>>>>>>>>> <https://deadline.com/2021/09/babylon-5-series-reboot-j-michael-straczynski-development-cw-1234845022/> 
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Does this mean that the cast would all have to be about 12?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Kim.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Fantastic! Something on-topic to talk about?! I may have to 
>>>>>>>> start watching television again.
>>>>>>>> Frank
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's made me think - it shouldn't OT because it's ON topic . . .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> 'OT' can mean 'On Topic' can't it?? ;-P
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes but, by long tradition, not for this froup.
>>>>>
>>>> Yeap, I knew as much, hence my Smiley!! ;-)
>>>
>>> Oops - sense of irony failure on my part.
>>>
>> Don't you worry about it, Steveski. I'm well aware that a lot of 
>> people don't 'get' my sense of humour! ;-P
> 
> IIRC Daniel is simply correct.
> 
> OT usually meant "off-topic" for most groups, but because everyone was 
> talking about everything *but* B5, it is usually used to indicate "On 
> topic" here.
> 
> Frank

Yes, it's a bit unfortunate that the one term,. 'OT', can mean either of 
two diametrically opposite things!
-- 
Daniel