On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 21:54:01 -0700 (PDT), "Dominic T."
> wrote:

>On Sep 25, 1:09*pm, Prof Wonmug > wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 14:05:55 -0700 (PDT), Space Cowboy
>>
>> > wrote:
>> >This is the best way to prove you dont like tea.
>>
>> Really? It sounds like you are saying that my way is invalid.
>>
>> >Forget the
>> >spreadsheet and let your subconscious do the categorizing.
>>
>> I accept that this is what works for you. It doesn't work very well
>> for me. I do better with hard data. Is it OK if we have different
>> styles?
>>
>> >Youll find
>> >for some reason youll like one tea over another. *
>>
>> And part of the enjoyment for me is trying to tease out what those
>> reasons might be.
>>
>> >One day youll like a
>> >tea you that you didnt before.
>>
>> Sure. I understand that there might not be any absolute answers and
>> that they might change over time, but the exercise still has value for
>> me.
>>
>> >Enjoying tea is independent of
>> >determination.
>>
>> I accept that this is how you see it and what works for you. Can you
>> accept that more of an engineering approach works better for me?
>>
>> I'm actually willing to try your way, especially if I am not put down
>> for mine or told that it's invalid. Are you willing to try mine?
>>
>> >We have guys show up preaching the gospel of
>> >differentiation then disappear when they get bored.
>>
>> Was I preaching? I intended to ask some questions. I feel like I got
>> preached at. Projection?
>>
>> >The mental notes
>> >come from experience. *You need to build an internal reference point.
>>
>> This is how I do that.
>>
>> >Trust your instinct, forget the database. *
>>
>> Goodness. Did you have a bad experience as a child with an abusive
>> database?
>>
>> >I go to tea tastings
>> >because they dont cost me anything extra. *I have more fun trying to
>> >find one of my teas. * For a long time I had an organized cuppard. *I
>> >still have one more or less.
>>
>> >Jim
>
>Look, we all get your concept... tons of folks have made the exact
>same claims and comments. It never works. It's fundamentally not how
>tea works, and never has in it's entire history. You are not some new
>exception that will crack the code.

Wow. What is it about a simple suggestion to collect data that is so
upsetting to you?

>No one here is ****ing in your
>cornflakes,

What do you call it? Do you eve read your own posts?

>it's just reality...
>and one we've all seen and been told
>we are wrong about and that we'll surely be shown... it hasn't
>happened.

Please tell me where I said that anyone was wrong about anything? I
merely asked a question about how go about collecting data. You afre
the one telling me that I am wrong and then blaming me. What is so
threatening to you about collecting data?

>There are too many variables in tea to do what you claim. To try to
>claim otherwise is foolish.

And now the name-calling...

>It isn't science, it isn't repeatable.
>Each batch of tea is different, each growing season is too, harvest
>days even are different. The water, the heating method and vessel and
>cup, the list goes on and on.

Well, there are commercial labs all over the world that do just that.
Now, I'm not comparing myself to them. I'm just making the point that
collecting data is never futile. At the very least, it will show that
the problem is more complex that thought.

>Best of luck in your endeavors, no one
>here is interested in this approach (AFAIK)

Really. I thought you said that "tons of folks have made the exact
same claims and comments...". I don't know how many people are in a
ton, but cetainly more than zero. ;-)

>so you won't get much
>guidance or help,

Certainly not from you or Space Cowboy.

>but if it is a personal need then scratch it and
>enjoy it. Just understand we aren't really interested in your results
>or work. Most of us here enjoy tea. No more, no less.

I love it that you speak for everyone. Who annointed you?