lilyleia78: Close up of a lily in black and white (SG1: JD elevator scene)
lilyleia78 ([personal profile] lilyleia78) wrote in [community profile] sg_five_things2009-04-16 07:24 pm
Entry tags:

Prompt 69.03

Five memos Jack never read


Participation is open to all. If this is your own prompt, you're free to write to it (please do!). Post your list as a comment to this post, adding additional comments if you exceed the character limit. It's OK to post as Anonymous, then come out later or not as you choose. Responses will be screened until April 27 to see what people come up with independently. You can still respond to the prompt after the April 27 unveiling.

General info and a place to ask questions: the comm 'welcome' post.

Technical-support questions: tech help.

Suggestions: the suggestion box.

To supply a new prompt: the open call for prompts.

Subject-line spoiler warnings for late-season SGA eps and the SG-1 movies, thanks!


April 27 is the official due date. If you're posting a response after the unveiling announcement on April 27, please copy the link to your comment, click on the 'set 69' tag, and reply to the post 'Set 69 Responses Unscreened' with the link to your new comment-response. That helps people find and read and comment on responses that weren't there when they cruised through right after the reveal. Pimp the link in your journal, too, if you want to let your flist know you've posted something new.
sid: (Jack two L's)

Five memos Jack never read

[personal profile] sid 2009-04-27 02:13 pm (UTC)(link)
The one where Daniel, quite politely, asked him if there was some sort of problem with his reports. Was Jack not receiving them in a timely manner? Some people read more quickly than others. Was the font size troublesome? Eyesight can deteriorate over time, perhaps Jack should have that looked into.

The one where Daniel asked him, none too politely, to at least skim through his reports before they went into a briefing, because he was tired of having to stop in the middle of a sentence, numberless times, to answer Jack’s inane questions that would have been unnecessary if Jack would at the very least bother to skim through his reports; and was that really too much to ask?

The one where Daniel advised him that in future he would be attaching a bullet point summary to each report that he sent to Jack; one using very small words that a child of meager understanding could understand, and if Jack needed help finding such a child to help him interpret these documents Daniel would be more than happy to oblige. Anything for his Commanding Officer. The words ‘commanding officer’ were underlined, italicized and bolded in such a way that even a Commanding Officer of meager understanding would have perceived the sarcasm. If he had bothered to read the memo.

The memo from Sam that contained the information, hidden in extremely formal and round-about terminology, that one of Colonel O’Neill’s team members was a trifle unhappy and that something perhaps needed to be done before said team member… here the language grew so vague that it was unclear exactly what action she was fearing on the part of this unnamed team member.

The memo Teal’c sent was much more to the point:

O’Neill. I believe that your life is in danger.

Jack really, really should have read that one.
ext_35076: photo of a Harry Dresden character with my user name along the bottom. (gert)

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[identity profile] crevanfox.livejournal.com 2009-04-27 06:59 pm (UTC)(link)
HA! the second to last line FTW
sid: (Teal'c Oh Hai!)

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[personal profile] sid 2009-04-28 03:24 am (UTC)(link)
Teal'c doesn't fart around. LOL
(deleted comment)
sid: (Daniel urge to kill)

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[personal profile] sid 2009-04-28 03:25 am (UTC)(link)
Nobody's more dangerous than Daniel!!

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[identity profile] natsuko1978.livejournal.com 2009-04-27 07:27 pm (UTC)(link)
Hee. I really, really want to see/read the outcome of this. :D

Jack has to be the most infuriating "Commanding Officer" of all time... I just hope he finds some way to make it up to Daniel.

sid: (J/D can't stay mad)

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[personal profile] sid 2009-04-28 03:27 am (UTC)(link)
Jack will be making this up to Daniel for the foreseeable future. :-D

It'll be one step forward, two steps back, unfortunately, because he'll never reform his ways.
ext_45525: Gleeful Baby Riding A Bouncy Horse Toy (ChickFlick)

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[identity profile] thothmes.livejournal.com 2009-04-27 07:41 pm (UTC)(link)
From: Sargent Francis X. O'Malley, Head of Security, SGC
To: Maj.Gen. George S. Hammond, SGC, Commanding

At 0817 today I was summoned to the office of Dr. Daniel Jackson by Capt. Carter, where I and my men were forced to subdue Dr. Jackson, who was attempting to pierce Col. O'Neill with a dagger [said to be of 18th Dynasty Egyptian design] brought back from PX3-396. Dr. Jackson appeared to be enraged and was shouting about memos and the necessity that Col. O'Neill prove that he was able to read. We subdued him, and confiscated the dagger, and eight similar implements, and at that point, Col. O'Neill said that our services were no longer needed. He stated that "What happens in SG-1 stays in SG-1, right, Daniel?" However, I felt you should be informed, in case there are further developments.
ext_45525: Gleeful Baby Riding A Bouncy Horse Toy (Default)

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[identity profile] thothmes.livejournal.com 2009-04-28 02:11 am (UTC)(link)
When he could enjoy the latest copy of Mad Magazine?!!! A man boy's gotta have his priorities! :-)
sid: (Daniel urge to kill)

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[personal profile] sid 2009-04-28 03:29 am (UTC)(link)
:-D

Love the details about the dagger, and the eight similar implements. Daniel's office is not a safe place when he's righteously pissed off!

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[personal profile] sid - 2009-04-28 22:21 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[identity profile] maab-connor.livejournal.com 2009-04-27 09:30 pm (UTC)(link)
BWAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!
sid: (Jack iz ded)

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[personal profile] sid 2009-04-28 03:31 am (UTC)(link)
*looks at your icon*

And... they'll never be an old married couple at this rate. Jack won't survive long enough! :-D

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[identity profile] chattycatsmeow.livejournal.com 2009-04-27 10:12 pm (UTC)(link)
Hee! Poor Daniel! It's nice that Teal'c and Sam had his back, even though Jack never read theirs either.
sid: (Teal'c topless)

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[personal profile] sid 2009-04-28 03:33 am (UTC)(link)
I'm not sure whose back Teal'c and Sam actually had. I think they were just trying to prevent bloodshed in general, lol.

(But Sam totally empathizes with Daniel, omg.)
sid: (Daniel heartless)

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[personal profile] sid 2009-04-28 03:34 am (UTC)(link)
But not, one hopes, too forcefully. ;-)

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[identity profile] magnavox-23.livejournal.com 2009-04-28 01:14 am (UTC)(link)
LOL!
sid: (Teal'c Oh Hai!)

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[personal profile] sid 2009-04-28 03:36 am (UTC)(link)
Jack just needs to watch his step, that's all I'm sayin'. (And all Teal'c's sayin'.)

*g*
(deleted comment)
sid: (Jack dimples)

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[personal profile] sid 2009-04-28 01:29 pm (UTC)(link)
He's hopeless! :-D

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[identity profile] djaddict.livejournal.com 2009-04-28 05:11 pm (UTC)(link)
Can't comment. Laughing too hard!
sid: (Daniel urge to kill)

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[personal profile] sid 2009-04-28 05:19 pm (UTC)(link)
That's what I like to hear! \o/
ext_2799: (Default)

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[identity profile] lavenderlocks.livejournal.com 2009-04-28 08:52 pm (UTC)(link)
Teal'c is, after all, awesomeness defined!

Daniel's passive aggressive notes and Sam's note deteriorating into waffle - so them!
sid: (Daniel quirks)

Re: Five memos Jack never read

[personal profile] sid 2009-04-28 10:15 pm (UTC)(link)
I'm glad the characterizations worked for you! Total blast to write this. *g*