Talk:Joggling board

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Winner of the first-place award for Best Use of the Passive Voice: "Smooching would ensue."

Ends attach how?[edit]

How are the ends attached to the supports. Are there blocks or pegs that keep the board from sliding off? --Gbleem 20:10, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pegs keep the board from slipping out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.26.219.66 (talk) 22:06, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rocking[edit]

Which way does it rock? Back and forth or side to side? --Gbleem 20:12, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Smooching would ensue."[edit]

Although this may be somewhat comical, this is completely ridiculous. I'm removing it. BigSciZot 20:46, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The old last paragraph was nothing more than a free advertisement for a private company. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.26.219.66 (talk) 22:04, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was a "free advertisement for a private company" because it is all pretty much taken direct from their brochure.Centerone (talk) 12:41, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Origin?[edit]

Currently, this article describes the origin of the Joggling board thus: According to one popular, but totally unsupported, story about joggling boards, the device was used by courting couples or graduate students. The male and female would sit at opposite ends of the board and bounce up and down. Because the board slopes in the middle, the couple would bounce toward each other and eventually meet in the middle. Sore bums, but new chums. Apart from the somewhat comical tone, this is entirely unreferenced. Does anyone have any sources to show, if not that this is actually true, that it is at least a widely told story? If not, it should be removed. Robofish (talk) 16:40, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the absence of any sources being added, I've removed it. I also cut the 'History' section down to one line - it appeared to be copied directly from the source given, which would be a violation of copyright. Robofish (talk) 15:54, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]