OK, some quick suggestions.  I know you didn't ask for them, but you do allow me to comment, so I take that as tacitly saying, "any recommendations?"

1) Ask them to I.M. you later
2) Say, "Do you really care?  If you do, then we should schedule a time to discuss."  The benefits of this are at least twofold.  One, they will be unlikely to set up a time and therefore conversation is ended. Two, they will be reluctant to ask you again, thus saving further conversations/pressure.  Of course there is that slight chance that they wish to schedule time with you so it does have an associated risk.
3) Give them a scale answer for the how questions.  (Q: How was your weekend?  A: I give it a 6).  This is a little less uncomfortable for the asker than the previous suggestion.  Once they get the number, they will be well on their way, because frankly, they probably care as much about this conversation as you do.  The warning here is that if you say 1,2,9, or 10, they may ask some follow-ups.

Maybe for the "What's New" question, a response of "Pass...next question" might work.

A scale answer is a great idea, as is "Pass ... next."  This is the kind of advice I was hoping for.

First - Rus I'm laughing uncontrollably at work at thinking of how the two of you (Rus & Dave) would enact this numbering system (thanks for the laugh!). The thing is - it wouldn't be that out of character for Dave he likes numb3rs! So my vote is for 3).

Second, Rus I'm sensing a little Jersey coming out in your response 2). I can't see you or Dave actually executing this unless there was a plan to hit them and run afterwards.

My response to "What's new?"
1) Modeled after the infamous Kripa, "I'm building a time machine". The only caveat to this is you need to get in a menacing laugh afterwards. That would silence whoever asked.
2) My other suggestion is to tell them something completely science-y. Most people don't like/comprehend/care about it and so you can say, "I'm looking into the Archimedes principle in order to discredit the show Numb3rs." The downside to this response is you would need to think of a different response for the science-y types because that answer will just start an even longer discussion.

You know...it would be a good challenge to try number 2.  Even more so as I try it in "polite" North Carolina.  I may have to try it and let you know...or better yet I could blog about it. 

Also, I think I should try the numbering system as well.  I actually have a similar frustration with these questions as Dave.  People ask me how my weekend is, and frankly, I have already forgotten about it more times than not.  So the "OK" or "good" answer is often inaccurate.  I often stop and think...and if it was bad, I think even harder in how I can be truthful without getting into a long conversation.  Perhaps the trick for me would be to "marry" 2 and 3.  Meaning that I would never answer 1,2,9 or 10, but in those cases I would go to response 2.

if (question = "How was your weekend")
     if( weekend_rating gt 2) && (weekend_rating lt 9)
            output (weekend_rating);
     else
             output "Do you really care?  If you do, then we should schedule a time to discuss.";
     //end if
//end if

get_on_with_life();

I can't believe you used code in a comment.  That's awesome.

So, this is what goes on on my little brother's blog site?!  You have way too much time on your hands, David!  And the code cracked me up . . . especially when I tried to read it out loud to Dave (my hubby), and he said "oh, that's Excel, I think," rather than laughing at the fact that someone used code in a response!  I'm surrounded by geeks!!!  AND - wow, you won't let me put the wrong answer to the math problem?!  And here I thought I was the nerdy sister!

Rus you're officially a cs geek! But, the sadder thing is realizing I am on a similar wavelength when I can read ur code comment and understand it!

Wow...I get more comments on your blog, Dave, than on my own.  Anyhow, I'm on the high pressure "soft side" of IT now so I miss the code.   One of the advantages of working with computers is that when you tell them to do something, they do exactly what you say 95+% of the time.  Managing people isn't quite as efficient.

For the record...I was asked and my response was a 7.

Did it end the conversation?

You know it sort of did.  It needed work. I sort of answered both: "It was good, I'd say about a 7."  I think this was important as it was my first attempt and I did not want to confuse the listener.  Next week I may just say "7"  and they may get it.  Although there is another pitfall:  What about the inquisitive mind who responds, "well, what's the scale range?"  Is 1-10 universal enough?  Only time will tell.

Dana:  Yes I have time on my hands.  Just the right amount in my opinion.