[Mary Meriam]

Roger, why not send in more batches under pen names? Maybe you could win the whole pot of pounds.

[Roger Slater]

I wondered about that (#26), Mary, but John seems to think that this time pseudonyms aren't kosher (#27).

That's okay. If I can't get a piece of the action with my top ten, the rest are unlikely to deliver either.

[George Simmers]

Kirsten Ranted – shock jock
Mercedes Chardonnay Sawful – wine critic
Benny Colin Pints – healthy-eating enthusiast
Dave Ornight – lighting cameraman
Roger Slater - abhors sex before marriage
Bernard Isobel Heaver - fundamentalist
Wendy Wifesaway – hooker
Robert X. Payer – public servant
Eddie Torquil Isbest– runs a Luddite magazine
Pauli Feat – claimant for disability benefit

[John Whitworth]

George those are brilliant, particularly Roger Slater which is quite up to the standard of Tudor Titsoff, and no praise could be higher. We MUST getaround to posting these. There MUST be money in it, even if not much.

[Roger Slater]

Godfrey Preacher -- secular evangelist

[FOsen]

George, I second John's enthusiasm for "Roger Slater" in particular - I wish I'd thought of that when I was reviewing Sphere names.

Frank

[Roger Slater]

I wasn't acquainted with the slang term that would have told me that my own pseudonym was a goldmine, but perhaps there is a slight problem with it as an entry to the competition . . . "abhors sex before marriage" isn't a "job" and the competition seems to call for names that fit particular jobs, not just character traits and such. Perhaps it won't matter, but if you could fit the joke to a job it would probably be better.

[George Simmers]

Originally Posted by Roger Slater

but if you could fit the joke to a job it would probably be better.

Hmmm...
So maybe - Roger Slater: Poet who moonlights as a gigolo?

[Roger Slater]

That one strikes a little too close to home. But I like it.

[Jayne Osborn]

George and I were talking about these today, over a cup of tea and George's heavenly chocolate brownies (highly worthy of a poem, but I digress)...

I had to admit that I don't 'get' some of them at all (I'm not saying which ones), which means that, either:
a) they're far too obscure, b) you're all far too clever, or c) I'm thick.

Yeah, it's probably 'c'.