On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 12:20:58 GMT, Janet Baraclough
> wrote:

> Well, since you asked; the reason I don't take digicam pics of my
>food in restaurants is the same reason I don't use one in the theatre or
>at concerts, or use a mobile phone in those places; it impinges on the
>experience of other paying clients round about so is bad manners.

I don't see what's impinging on others if you're at an outdoor cafe,
or in a nice downstairs room all by yourselves and the crowd of eaters
is upstairs. As far as other people who post pictures of food, look
carefully. Their dining experience isn't 4 star dining. IOW, nobody
cares if you whip out a camera to take a food (or wine) picture. In
fact, the staff is often complimented by it and will say so.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

<sf> wrote in message ...
> On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 12:20:58 GMT, Janet Baraclough
> > wrote:
>
>> Well, since you asked; the reason I don't take digicam pics of my
>>food in restaurants is the same reason I don't use one in the theatre or
>>at concerts, or use a mobile phone in those places; it impinges on the
>>experience of other paying clients round about so is bad manners.
>
snip>

IOW, nobody
> cares if you whip out a camera to take a food (or wine) picture. In
> fact, the staff is often complimented by it and will say so.
>

True. And also a plus is that they might try harder to please you not
knowing if you are (and where) sharing these pictures -- or god forbid, you
might be a food critic and tell others how wonderful their food is.

Dee Dee

On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 19:53:28 +0100, "Giusi" >
wrote:
>
>I was just starting to be decent with the old camera when I had to change
>cameras. I wouldn't mind sharing photos here, but frankly, people can be so
>vicious it isn't very tempting. I know I am not a phenomenal photographer.
>Not horrible, but not wonderful.
>
Go to alt.binaries.food if you can. They are a very nice group of
people and won't make fun of you even if your picture does suck. One
poster over either has a bad camera or is the world's worst picture
taker, so if he posts food pictures - you can too w/o embarrassment.

>I'm a creative cook with a deep respect for food. It didn't instantly
>translate into fabulous pix. I'm working on it. I figure if it looks good
>enough to eat, it must be an OK pic.

My biggest problem is that I usually remember the picture taking part
*after* I've eaten. <oink>

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 07:31:00 -0800 (PST), "Bobo Bonobo(R)"
> wrote:

>On Nov 30, 10:14 am, ChattyCathy > wrote:
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com/
>
>Why would anyone mind you putting their pix up on your site? Weird
>that a few people chose that in the survey.
>
It seems like a no brainer: freedom of choice - send them in or not.
Nobody is going to hack personal computers for food pix to post on the
rfc web site.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

Janet Baraclough > wrote:
> The message >
> from sf contains these words:
>
> > On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 10:27:25 -0600, "jmcquown"
> > > wrote:
> > >And I certainly don't take a camera with me to restaurants (some
> > >people seem
> > >to do that) and photograph the food they serve. �That's just over the top
> > >IMHO. �After all, you didn't cook it!
> > I'm not good enough to do *that*, but it's the thing to do on
> > vacation. �You have a camera with you anyway and you're taking
> > pictures of other things, so why not photograph the food (or in my
> > case - wine)?
>
> � �Well, since you asked; the reason I don't take digicam pics of my
> food in restaurants is the same reason I don't use one in the theatre or
> at concerts, or use a mobile phone in those places; it impinges on the
> experience of other paying clients round about so is bad manners.


Yeah, right... one can only imagine your manners at other public
places if they're anything like you display here, Ms. Holier Thanthou.

ChattyCathy wrote:
> jmcquown wrote:
>
>>
>> I tried to get into the whole "photographing food" thing. I just
>> found it
>> tedious and the food gets cold! I'd rather eat the food than arrange
>> it and
>> take photos of it.
>
> Fair enough...

I don't find that it takes long to take a few photos of my plate as
I sit down to eat. My spotlight and camera are handy, and my
partners think it's cute.

>> And I certainly don't take a camera with me to restaurants (some
>> people seem
>> to do that) and photograph the food they serve. That's just over the top
>> IMHO. After all, you didn't cook it!
>
> Heh. That's where cell phone cameras come in handy <g>. I have been
> known to take a pic or two of something that was particularly good at a
> restaurant...

I would never take a photo at a restaurant. Not sure why it feels so
much ruder than at my own home. Might have to think on that one.

Serene

"Serene" > wrote in message
...
> I would never take a photo at a restaurant. Not sure why it feels so much
> ruder than at my own home. Might have to think on that one.
>
> Serene


People take pictures of each other at restaurants when there is a
celebration. You can just pretend you're doing that, or slip a picture in
of the food while taking pictures of your friends.

Just a thought,
Dee Dee

On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 13:22:44 -0800, Serene >
wrote:

>I would never take a photo at a restaurant. Not sure why it feels so
>much ruder than at my own home. Might have to think on that one.

It's that darned spotlight....

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

sf wrote in news
> On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 07:31:00 -0800 (PST), "Bobo Bonobo(R)"
> > wrote:
>
>>On Nov 30, 10:14 am, ChattyCathy > wrote:
>>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com/
>>
>>Why would anyone mind you putting their pix up on your site? Weird
>>that a few people chose that in the survey.
>>
> It seems like a no brainer: freedom of choice - send them in or not.
> Nobody is going to hack personal computers for food pix to post on the
> rfc web site.
>

I had the World Wildlife Fund e-mail me to ask if they could use a picture
I had on my website of prepared ankimo, steamed and adorned with minced
green onion and ginger, for a flyer they were producing. No problem. I
still cook and eat it.

Last picture on this page, if you want to know.

http://www.geocities.com/markpnelson...kimo/ankimo.ht
ml

Yeah, I know how to tinyurl it.

Mark.

--
While I'll admit that anyone can make a mistake once, to go on making
the same lethal errors century after century seems to me nothing short
of deliberate.--V.

In article >, sf wrote:

> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 22:10:54 +0200, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:
>
> >Sweetie, maybe I should change MCINL to MDANL on the surveys?
>
> Once again, I'm lost. You've defined MCINL to death, so I can finally
> remember it. What the heck does MDANL mean? If the rest is the same,
> then what is AN?

It's clearly a reference to my name (DAN).

Sqwertz > wrote in news:uduss60wbt38
:

> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 19:53:28 +0100, Giusi wrote:
>> I wouldn't mind sharing photos here, but frankly, people can be so
>> vicious it isn't very tempting.
>
> The only person I've seen being viscous about photography here is
> Sheldon. And his pictures aren't anything spectacular. But
> that's just his nature. Screw him (just don't let Gregory find
> out).
>
> Post in alt.binaries.food if you can. I'm the only viscous
> person there, and that's only to people who post pictures of
> construction workers and dirt piles.

I wouldn't say you are particularly viscous, but then again, I wouldn't
know. Maybe a bit *vicious* at times, but never as bad as Graeme was to
me, then or now...

Dee.Dee wrote:
> "Serene" > wrote in message
> ...
>> I would never take a photo at a restaurant. Not sure why it feels so much
>> ruder than at my own home. Might have to think on that one.
>>
>> Serene
>
>
> People take pictures of each other at restaurants when there is a
> celebration. You can just pretend you're doing that, or slip a picture in
> of the food while taking pictures of your friends.

Why would I want to find a way to do something I think is rude? :-)

Serene

Sqwertz > wrote in
:

> On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 05:41:09 GMT, Sarah Gray wrote:
>
>> I wouldn't say you are particularly viscous, but then again, I wouldn't
>> know. Maybe a bit *vicious* at times, but never as bad as Graeme was to
>> me, then or now...
>
> Yeah - yeah- yeah. I thought it looked strange, but it was the
> first thing under the spell-chucker.
>
> Usually if I'm in doubt, I'd never spell it wrong *twice* in the
> same post. I'd spell it one way, then the other. So I could play
> the 'typo' card.


At least your posts are more clear then Jerry's on affd...

On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 02:48:24 GMT, "Mark P. Nelson"
> wrote:

>
>Last picture on this page, if you want to know.
>
>http://www.geocities.com/markpnelson...kimo/ankimo.ht
>ml

bad link, sorry


--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

writes:
>http://www.recfoodcooking.com/

this is my favorite food related photo

http://ftupet.com/~tert/img/misc/misc/ouch.jpg

"Serene" > wrote in message
...
> Dee.Dee wrote:
>> "Serene" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> I would never take a photo at a restaurant. Not sure why it feels so
>>> much ruder than at my own home. Might have to think on that one.
>>>
>>> Serene
>>
>>
>> People take pictures of each other at restaurants when there is a
>> celebration. You can just pretend you're doing that, or slip a picture
>> in of the food while taking pictures of your friends.
>
> Why would I want to find a way to do something I think is rude? :-)
>
> Serene

Sorry, my error, I meant to say, "One can just....."
I didn't mean to write it to you so personally; but to the group.
I don't think YOU would ever want to do anything rude.
Sorry, Sorry, Sorrry if you thought I ever thought such a thing of you.

Dee Dee

Sqwertz wrote:

>
> I've seen much worse out there. And even they're pilfered.
> I have a few keepers in there. Some of the unique Asian
> ingredients, especially, might be used by cheap and Evil
> bloggers. That *has* happened to me before.

Heh. Don't talk to me about bloggers. They also think they're clever by
using 'deep linking' to pictures on other sites (usually without asking
permission), thereby getting around the copyrights... That is just as
annoying - and the same as stealing the pictures, IMHO.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Garlic: the element without which life as we know it would be impossible

"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
...
> Sqwertz wrote:
>
>>
>> I've seen much worse out there. And even they're pilfered.
>> I have a few keepers in there. Some of the unique Asian
>> ingredients, especially, might be used by cheap and Evil
>> bloggers. That *has* happened to me before.
>
> Heh. Don't talk to me about bloggers. They also think they're clever by
> using 'deep linking' to pictures on other sites (usually without asking
> permission), thereby getting around the copyrights... That is just as
> annoying - and the same as stealing the pictures, IMHO.
> --
> Cheers
> Chatty Cathy



Not a blogger, but just saying that, I thought it was legal to link to any
website or anything on a website without asking permission.

Dee Dee

Dee.Dee wrote:
> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>>> I've seen much worse out there. And even they're pilfered.
>>> I have a few keepers in there. Some of the unique Asian
>>> ingredients, especially, might be used by cheap and Evil
>>> bloggers. That *has* happened to me before.
>> Heh. Don't talk to me about bloggers. They also think they're clever by
>> using 'deep linking' to pictures on other sites (usually without asking
>> permission), thereby getting around the copyrights... That is just as
>> annoying - and the same as stealing the pictures, IMHO.
>> --
>> Cheers
>> Chatty Cathy
>
>
>
> Not a blogger, but just saying that, I thought it was legal to link to any
> website or anything on a website without asking permission.

Yes, apparently it's legal. However, having a "see what's here" obvious
link to a site is a totally different thing from using somebody else's
photo (via a 'deep link') on one's blog/site and passing it off as one's
own. That's why I said it's annoying...
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Garlic: the element without which life as we know it would be impossible

Dee.Dee wrote:
> "Serene" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Dee.Dee wrote:

>>> People take pictures of each other at restaurants when there is a
>>> celebration. You can just pretend you're doing that, or slip a picture
>>> in of the food while taking pictures of your friends.
>> Why would I want to find a way to do something I think is rude? :-)

> Sorry, my error, I meant to say, "One can just....."
> I didn't mean to write it to you so personally; but to the group.
> I don't think YOU would ever want to do anything rude.
> Sorry, Sorry, Sorrry if you thought I ever thought such a thing of you.

Oh, Dee Dee, please don't think anything of it. I was mostly teasing
(that's what the smiley was about). I find the whole
cameras-in-restaurants thing to be crass, but I really think it's
fine if other people have a different take on the matter. The only
person whose behavior I'm responsible for is my own. :-)

Serene

Serene wrote:

> Oh, Dee Dee, please don't think anything of it. I was mostly teasing
> (that's what the smiley was about). I find the whole
> cameras-in-restaurants thing to be crass, but I really think it's fine
> if other people have a different take on the matter. The only person
> whose behavior I'm responsible for is my own. :-)

(That said, if I have a dining partner who is rude in my presence in
a restaurant -- being rude to waitstaff, making cellphone calls at
the table, taking lots of flash photos -- I do reserve my right to
quietly stop accepting invitations to dine with that person in
public. There are a couple people like that in my life. They don't
know it -- I think it's even ruder to shame people -- but I either
have them over when we eat, or I decline their invitations to eat at
restaurants.)

Serene

"Serene" > wrote in message
...
> Dee.Dee wrote:
>> "Serene" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Dee.Dee wrote:
>
>>>> People take pictures of each other at restaurants when there is a
>>>> celebration. You can just pretend you're doing that, or slip a picture
>>>> in of the food while taking pictures of your friends.
>>> Why would I want to find a way to do something I think is rude? :-)
>
>> Sorry, my error, I meant to say, "One can just....."
>> I didn't mean to write it to you so personally; but to the group.
>> I don't think YOU would ever want to do anything rude.
>> Sorry, Sorry, Sorrry if you thought I ever thought such a thing of you.
>
> Oh, Dee Dee, please don't think anything of it. I was mostly teasing
> (that's what the smiley was about). I find the whole
> cameras-in-restaurants thing to be crass, but I really think it's fine if
> other people have a different take on the matter. The only person whose
> behavior I'm responsible for is my own. :-)
>
> Serene



I have to admit that I've been too shy with the exception of one time, I
believe an anniversary lunch right after I got my new camera. The lens
swivels so one doesn't have to look thru a view finder.

And a photo of a breakfast sandwich at McDo's that was too awful to eat,
I took a photo of it. Ugh!

Dee Dee

On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 11:31:26 -0800, Serene >
wrote:

>Serene wrote:
>
>> Oh, Dee Dee, please don't think anything of it. I was mostly teasing
>> (that's what the smiley was about). I find the whole
>> cameras-in-restaurants thing to be crass, but I really think it's fine
>> if other people have a different take on the matter. The only person
>> whose behavior I'm responsible for is my own. :-)
>
>(That said, if I have a dining partner who is rude in my presence in
>a restaurant -- being rude to waitstaff, making cellphone calls at
>the table, taking lots of flash photos -- I do reserve my right to
>quietly stop accepting invitations to dine with that person in
>public. There are a couple people like that in my life. They don't
>know it -- I think it's even ruder to shame people -- but I either
>have them over when we eat, or I decline their invitations to eat at
>restaurants.)

Louise had an acquaintance like that. Long before I was around they
would go out to eat. The woman was loud, rude, demanding and just
obnoxious. She never accepted the meal and always sent it back. She
even did it at McShitties. Louise finally got tired of it and
honestly told her she didn't have to go out to eat alone. They don't
speak much anymore, but it's certainly no loss.

Lou

On 30 Nov 2007 18:57:45 GMT, "Default User" >
wrote:

>ChattyCathy wrote:
>
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com/
>
>Don't take them, don't look at them. Pictures of food hold no
>fascination for me.
>
Nobody is holding a gun to your head and making you look either.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 08:12:37 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
wrote:

>Normal brained folks don't mention it's chilly and then mention they
>drink chilly beverages... makes one wonder the voracity of their other
>stories.

You're not making any sense. People drink hot beverages on hot days,
so why not drink a cold one on a cold day?

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 13:10:00 -0500, "Dee.Dee" >
wrote:

>
>"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
.. .
>> Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I've seen much worse out there. And even they're pilfered.
>>> I have a few keepers in there. Some of the unique Asian
>>> ingredients, especially, might be used by cheap and Evil
>>> bloggers. That *has* happened to me before.
>>
>> Heh. Don't talk to me about bloggers. They also think they're clever by
>> using 'deep linking' to pictures on other sites (usually without asking
>> permission), thereby getting around the copyrights... That is just as
>> annoying - and the same as stealing the pictures, IMHO.
>> --
>> Cheers
>> Chatty Cathy
>
>
>
>Not a blogger, but just saying that, I thought it was legal to link to any
>website or anything on a website without asking permission.
>
Not only that, but a neat solution to the problem of no decent picture
to post.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 05:41:09 GMT, Sarah Gray >
wrote:

>I wouldn't say you are particularly viscous, but then again, I wouldn't
>know. Maybe a bit *vicious* at times, but never as bad as Graeme was to
>me, then or now...

What's up with that man anyway? I don't get it.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

sf wrote in :

> On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 05:41:09 GMT, Sarah Gray >
> wrote:
>
>>I wouldn't say you are particularly viscous, but then again, I wouldn't
>>know. Maybe a bit *vicious* at times, but never as bad as Graeme was to
>>me, then or now...
>
> What's up with that man anyway? I don't get it.
>

Like I would know?

"ChattyCathy" > ha scritto nel messaggio
...
> Dee.Dee wrote:
>> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Sqwertz wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've seen much worse out there. And even they're pilfered.
>>>> I have a few keepers in there. Some of the unique Asian
>>>> ingredients, especially, might be used by cheap and Evil
>>>> bloggers. That *has* happened to me before.
>>> Heh. Don't talk to me about bloggers. They also think they're clever by
>>> using 'deep linking' to pictures on other sites (usually without asking
>>> permission), thereby getting around the copyrights... That is just as
>>> annoying - and the same as stealing the pictures, IMHO.
>>> --
>>> Cheers
>>> Chatty Cathy
>>
>>
>>
>> Not a blogger, but just saying that, I thought it was legal to link to
>> any website or anything on a website without asking permission.
>
> Yes, apparently it's legal. However, having a "see what's here" obvious
> link to a site is a totally different thing from using somebody else's
> photo (via a 'deep link') on one's blog/site and passing it off as one's
> own. That's why I said it's annoying...
> --
> Cheers
> Chatty Cathy

Nice people give credit AND a link to the site itself. If it is an
individual I ask and tell why I want it. With big newspapers, etc., that's
impossible.

The story may very well be about the published page itself, in which case
it's called link love and there's practically nobody who doesn't want that.

Most people with experience know how to check who is linking into their
stuff and can check how it's being used. They can then email cease and
desist, and give bad publicity to the scraper. There are so many scrapers
using original work of others that you pick your fights. In the case where
someone is translating and republishing in a foreign language, you can't
even tell what the intention was, but you are hardly likely to reach Korean,
for example, readers any other way.
--
http://www.judithgreenwood.com


--
http://www.judithgreenwood.com

Giusi wrote:

>
> Nice people give credit AND a link to the site itself. If it is an
> individual I ask and tell why I want it. With big newspapers, etc., that's
> impossible.
>
> The story may very well be about the published page itself, in which case
> it's called link love and there's practically nobody who doesn't want that.

I have no problem with that. I even have that 'useful links' section on
the RFC site. However, I am not trying to incorporate their stuff on the
site, and pass it off as my own.
>
> Most people with experience know how to check who is linking into their
> stuff and can check how it's being used. They can then email cease and
> desist, and give bad publicity to the scraper. There are so many scrapers
> using original work of others that you pick your fights. In the case where
> someone is translating and republishing in a foreign language, you can't
> even tell what the intention was, but you are hardly likely to reach Korean,
> for example, readers any other way.

Heh. Those myspace denizens are the worst offenders, IMHO. Many's the
time I've perused my server logs to find that some twit has
'deep-linked' into some of the pictures, etc, on the RFC site for use on
one of their pages - and believe you me, they didn't ask my permission.
This puts unnecessary load on my server because every time somebody hits
their page, it hits my server too to pull the URL in question, which
slows it down for the people who are trying to actually browse the site.
So I put a stop to them doing this when necessary - and I don't bother
with the 'cease and desist' emails either - there are many technical
ways that this nonsense can be stopped, it just burns my butt that I
have to do it.

One or two folks have been polite and asked to use some of the pictures
etc., from the site and I have passed their requests onto the folks who
donated them in the first place. Most people don't seem to mind as long
as one gives them the proper credits.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Garlic: the element without which life as we know it would be impossible

sf wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 08:12:37 -0800 (PST), Sheldon >
> wrote:
>
>> Normal brained folks don't mention it's chilly and then mention they
>> drink chilly beverages... makes one wonder the voracity of their other
>> stories.
>
> You're not making any sense. People drink hot beverages on hot days,
> so why not drink a cold one on a cold day?
>
We drink Iced Tea down south year round.

"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
...
> One or two folks have been polite and asked to use some of the pictures
> etc., from the site and I have passed their requests onto the folks who
> donated them in the first place. Most people don't seem to mind as long as
> one gives them the proper credits.
> --
> Cheers
> Chatty Cathy


I've always given credit for pictures that people have given me on my site,
and I usually encourage people to copy what they need. I do this hoping the
'good' will reign ;-))

But I out-did myself regarding one picture. It was so fantastic and so
wonderful and proved so much, that I didn't want people taking it to prove
their 'mistaken' and lying ways, so I kept it for myself -- Damn! if I can
find that picture -- looked high and low. I'll probably go to the grave with
it .... :-)))

Stuff like this makes me soooo tired.
Dee Dee

On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 13:10:00 -0500, "Dee.Dee" >
wrote:

>
>"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
.. .
>> Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I've seen much worse out there. And even they're pilfered.
>>> I have a few keepers in there. Some of the unique Asian
>>> ingredients, especially, might be used by cheap and Evil
>>> bloggers. That *has* happened to me before.
>>
>> Heh. Don't talk to me about bloggers. They also think they're clever by
>> using 'deep linking' to pictures on other sites (usually without asking
>> permission), thereby getting around the copyrights... That is just as
>> annoying - and the same as stealing the pictures, IMHO.
>> --
>> Cheers
>> Chatty Cathy
>
>
>
>Not a blogger, but just saying that, I thought it was legal to link to any
>website or anything on a website without asking permission.
>
>Dee Dee
>

i thought any blogger is pleased to be linked to. if they have
advertising, they get more revenue; if not, just personal satisfaction
from the increased number of page views. i'm sure some sites survive
on links prefaced by 'you won't believe what this fruitcake is going
on about now...'

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 15:00:45 -0500, "Dee.Dee" >
wrote:

>
>"Serene" > wrote in message
...
>> Dee.Dee wrote:
>>> "Serene" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Dee.Dee wrote:
>>
>>>>> People take pictures of each other at restaurants when there is a
>>>>> celebration. You can just pretend you're doing that, or slip a picture
>>>>> in of the food while taking pictures of your friends.
>>>> Why would I want to find a way to do something I think is rude? :-)
>>
>>> Sorry, my error, I meant to say, "One can just....."
>>> I didn't mean to write it to you so personally; but to the group.
>>> I don't think YOU would ever want to do anything rude.
>>> Sorry, Sorry, Sorrry if you thought I ever thought such a thing of you.
>>
>> Oh, Dee Dee, please don't think anything of it. I was mostly teasing
>> (that's what the smiley was about). I find the whole
>> cameras-in-restaurants thing to be crass, but I really think it's fine if
>> other people have a different take on the matter. The only person whose
>> behavior I'm responsible for is my own. :-)
>>
>> Serene
>
>
>
>I have to admit that I've been too shy with the exception of one time, I
>believe an anniversary lunch right after I got my new camera. The lens
>swivels so one doesn't have to look thru a view finder.
>
> And a photo of a breakfast sandwich at McDo's that was too awful to eat,
>I took a photo of it. Ugh!
>
>Dee Dee
>

perhaps you can blackmail them.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 17:38:08 GMT, blake murphy >
wrote:

>On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 13:10:00 -0500, "Dee.Dee" >
>wrote:
>
>>
>>"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
. ..
>>> Sqwertz wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've seen much worse out there. And even they're pilfered.
>>>> I have a few keepers in there. Some of the unique Asian
>>>> ingredients, especially, might be used by cheap and Evil
>>>> bloggers. That *has* happened to me before.
>>>
>>> Heh. Don't talk to me about bloggers. They also think they're clever by
>>> using 'deep linking' to pictures on other sites (usually without asking
>>> permission), thereby getting around the copyrights... That is just as
>>> annoying - and the same as stealing the pictures, IMHO.
>>> --
>>> Cheers
>>> Chatty Cathy
>>
>>
>>
>>Not a blogger, but just saying that, I thought it was legal to link to any
>>website or anything on a website without asking permission.
>>
>>Dee Dee
>>
>
>i thought any blogger is pleased to be linked to. if they have
>advertising, they get more revenue; if not, just personal satisfaction
>from the increased number of page views. i'm sure some sites survive
>on links prefaced by 'you won't believe what this fruitcake is going
>on about now...'
>
Sadly, I thought blogging was all about personal expression - not
personal gain. <sigh> Bubble bursting.... not that I actually read
any blogger more that one posted link to something that interests me.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first

<sf> ha scritto nel messaggio
...
> On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 17:38:08 GMT, blake
> Sadly, I thought blogging was all about personal expression - not
> personal gain. <sigh> Bubble bursting.... not that I actually read
> any blogger more that one posted link to something that interests me.
>
> --
> See return address to reply by email
> remove the smiley face first

I think they did start as diaries, but it's been years since they became
showcases for professional pursuits, any professional pursuit, not just
freelance writing. The good ones are like magazines that are re-published
everyday and use no paper. You are out of date, since several bloggers have
moved on to books, food columnists, major outlets of specialized product,
and political activism. It turned out to be a way to get the world see what
you could do, and the world said, "OK, do it for money." Ergo, Julia/Julie
becomes a movie.

More recently, because online advertising is the fastest growing segment of
the business, blogs dedicated just to how to make money online have become
the big money makers. Go figure.

Advertising is almost negligible on my sites, it was only added in hopes of
recouping some of the cost of putting the sites up. Web presence is very
pricey here.
--
http://www.judithgreenwood.com