Here’s a chance for Pieblog readers to win this Gelert Nimbus 35 litre rucksack currently selling for around £42.
Its very noticeable that many outdoor blogger types are receiving tonnes of free kit from various outdoor gear retailers on the pretext of doing a review. I too, must admit to having received a couple of tents recently. Unfortunately, I broke one of them.
But this is all old hat (note to retailers – most of my hats are pretty old as it happens…) but with the pieblog, I’ve decided that the readers should get the chance for some free kit too and they don’t have to write a review for it.
Oh no they don’t.
What they do have to do, though, is write a blog post, with some pictures. The subject can be anything related to walking about in the countryside – a trip report, a rant, or maybe a bit of useful info about something..er..useful.
I have some independent judges who, as ex-grammar school-types, will mark you down for duff grammar unless its deliberate and maybe a bit ironic , or a pun or something. I should OF known will get you disqualified, though. This may seem to be elitist, but,really, we just have standards innit? (see- that kind of duff grammar is OK!)
There’s no minimum length of blogpost but 1000 words should be the maximum number.
This is in conjunction with outdoor clothing pals at Outdoors Look – so Click on www.outdoorlook.co.uk for an indoors look at the good value deals outdoors gear they’ve got going.
Remember, we’re doing this for you.
Good blogposts will be published on the pieblog.
You have till 30 September to enter your entries, which should be emailed to mike.knipe@btinternet.com
Better, less fuzzy pictures and more information about the rucksack is available here:
http://www.outdoorlook.co.uk/gelert-nimbus-rucksack-35-litre-ruc732
If this competition is successful, we may well do a Christmas one.
Get writing. Get a Gelert rucksack for nowt.
.jpg)
16 comments:
LOL - yer first link (http://www.outdoorslook.co.uk/) is a duffer!
I suppose we'd lose marks for mistakes like that :-)
Seems Ok to me.
Indeed it does... now.
So, this pack, is it a brannie or have you had it on test?
Good grief, BG, I'm an Outdoor Blogger, I don't actually go walking!
Its still in the shop. My hands will never soil it's pristine packaging. It will be sent direct from Outdoorlook.
Cheers for that, Mike.
Do they do that sack in Piemiento?
Mike, I shall have a bash at this but I'd prefer the prize to be an all expenses paid trip to the Bavarian Alps. Could you wangle this upgrade ?
Regarding grammar; is it OK to deliberately split infinitives ?
Peter - is your blog post entry going to be a discussion about whether or not the split infinitive is unnecessarily proscribed by those who would brutally imprison the English language in archaic rules. How do you unknowingly split an infinitive anyway?
I like the idea of a prize upgrade, though. The entry would have to be really good.
Luckily (or possibly not!) I've delegated the judging.
Eye fink eye cud do dis, eye mite win.
U shud tri an you cud win. Its a nise ruksack wiv ots of rume innit. Innit?
Dammit I was going to submit an excerpt from my 40000 word thesis "The Misuse of the Apostrophe in Upland Britain and its Influence on Russian Iconography".
I'll have a rethink.
If you could cut it down to 400 word's and include a picture of a trig point, it would be Ok, I think, Peter. Youd have to put s'ome joke's in, though.
You can get punctuation mended nowadays y'know, but it's never as good as the original.
Oh no, thats punctures....
Mike - I applaud your intent to re-distrubute the wealth. Good man. Good dog.
Sometimes, The Pieman works in mysterious ways, Philip.
Just who are all these 'outdoor bloggers' who keep getting oodles of kit thrown at them by retailers? None has come in this direction - not even ONE tent.........must be doing something wrong (or maybe right?)....oh well....
Dunno Laura - Some people seem to get stuff..... I get mainly marketing companies offering to provide material so they can link to it, or "free" links to duff software and such. They can bugger off, obviously.
Post a Comment