On Sun, 01 May 2005 12:41:26 -0400, Sheryl Rosen
> wrote:

>Wayne Boatwright at wrote on 5/1/05 12:36 PM:
>
>> On Sun 01 May 2005 08:02:19a, Sheryl Rosen wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>
>>>
>>> Well, for some reason, this morning when I did my search, the first
>>> recipe that came up was the one where Barb stated she originally posted
>>> an incorrect amount of sugar, it was really 1 cup of sugar, not two.
>>
>> If the cake doesn'y fall, it'll be fine.
>
>why would it fall???
>
>Once again, no one answers the question.
>"Has anyone made it with the 2 cups of sugar?"
>
>No.
>Ok, thanks.

<rest of snippy note snipped>

We're all sorry that you are having problems with the cake, but it's
not our fault.

Listen, this has happened before. You ask a question and others reply
but not to the question you asked. Then you get ****ed, toss off a
sarcastic response, and can't deal with the consequences.

By now you should know what to expect; even if people don't know the
answer to your question, they will try to help. Apparently you don't
like that.

So here's a suggestion- the next time you want a specific question
answered, and you don't want to read anything that others have to say,
put a notice in your post saying "Don't bother to respond if you
cannot answer the following question...."

It will save others the bother of giving suggestions to someone who
doesn't want to read other responses and can't just say "thanks for
the suggestions." or even just ignoring them.

Sue(tm)
Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!