http://www.recfoodcooking.com
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

ChattyCathy wrote:
>
> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
> --
> Cheers
> Chatty Cathy

Really nice survey! <VBG> It's been awhile since I've added another TFH
to my collection I'd like to request the #14 TFH, please - I think
the copper color will enhance my kitchen <G>.

Sky

--
Ultra Ultimate Kitchen Rule - Use the Timer!
Ultimate Kitchen Rule -- Cook's Choice

"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
...
> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
> --
> Cheers
> Chatty Cathy

15th! That's the quickest off the mark I've ever been. Don't know why I'm
still up at 2 in the morning, though.

Sky wrote:

> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>> --
>> Cheers
>> Chatty Cathy
>
> Really nice survey! <VBG> It's been awhile since I've added another
> TFH
> to my collection

Heh. Only one MCINL so far, not too shabby, if I do say so myself ;-)

> I'd like to request the #14 TFH, please - I think
> the copper color will enhance my kitchen <G>.

It's yours...
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy - still looking for a 'bullet proof' survey

Hoges in WA wrote:

>
> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
> ...
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>> --
>> Cheers
>> Chatty Cathy
>
> 15th! That's the quickest off the mark I've ever been. Don't know
> why I'm still up at 2 in the morning, though.

Nice to see you here again regardless, Hoges.

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

ChattyCathy wrote:
> http://www.recfoodcooking.com

There s a difference between the recipes posted in mass without any sort
of narrative, and the recipes posted by regulars who can vouch for them.

The survey didn't distinguish between them so I vote here with:
Nay on the former. Yeah on the later.

-sw

Sqwertz wrote:

> ChattyCathy wrote:
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>
> There s a difference between the recipes posted in mass without any
> sort of narrative, and the recipes posted by regulars who can vouch
> for them.
>
> The survey didn't distinguish between them so I vote here with:
> Nay on the former. Yeah on the later.


Okaaaay. But I thought I had that covered with the "depends who posted
the recipes" in the first question, and the "only if the poster has
tried and can vouch for it" in the second one.

Obviously not. Damn.

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> ChattyCathy wrote:
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>
> There s a difference between the recipes posted in mass without any sort
> of narrative, and the recipes posted by regulars who can vouch for them.
>
> The survey didn't distinguish between them so I vote here with:
> Nay on the former. Yeah on the later.
>
> -sw

I agree, people who just post recipes for no apparent reason and with no
comment or narrative are a waste of time and bandwidth as well.

This is not a cut and paste training site.

Dimitri

"Hoges in WA" > wrote in
:

>
> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
> ...
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>> --
>> Cheers
>> Chatty Cathy
>
> 15th! That's the quickest off the mark I've ever been. Don't know
> why I'm still up at 2 in the morning, though.
>
>



35th!!!! I need to stay up later. Bugger this going to bed at 1am!!


--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia


If we are not meant to eat animals,
why are they made of meat?

I'm a MCINL on buying anything special due to recipes posted here, but only
because I rarely get recipes from here. I tend to post more of them than
the average person.

I mostly use Fidonet for my real recipe gleaning and will often get a new
ingredient based on a recipe there, or if i have one, ask and get good ideas
back.

Fidonet for those not familiar with it, is another system not related to
newsgroups nor is it a web group. Kinda predates both and been playing on
Fidonet since about 1987 or so.

Dimitri wrote:
>
> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>>
>> There s a difference between the recipes posted in mass without any
>> sort of narrative, and the recipes posted by regulars who can vouch
>> for them.
>>
>> The survey didn't distinguish between them so I vote here with:
>> Nay on the former. Yeah on the later.
>>
>> -sw
>
> I agree, people who just post recipes for no apparent reason and with no
> comment or narrative are a waste of time and bandwidth as well.
>
> This is not a cut and paste training site.
>
> Dimitri

So, I should cease and desist? I thought the recipes were
interesting for one reason or another. And I have been typing
them in, not cutting and pasting.

Oh well. If more people find them annoying rather than
interesting, I will stop.

--
Jean B.

On Wed 17 Sep 2008 06:12:24a, Jean B. told us...

> Dimitri wrote:
>>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>>>
>>> There s a difference between the recipes posted in mass without any
>>> sort of narrative, and the recipes posted by regulars who can vouch
>>> for them.
>>>
>>> The survey didn't distinguish between them so I vote here with:
>>> Nay on the former. Yeah on the later.
>>>
>>> -sw
>>
>> I agree, people who just post recipes for no apparent reason and with no
>> comment or narrative are a waste of time and bandwidth as well.
>>
>> This is not a cut and paste training site.
>>
>> Dimitri
>
> So, I should cease and desist? I thought the recipes were
> interesting for one reason or another. And I have been typing
> them in, not cutting and pasting.
>
> Oh well. If more people find them annoying rather than
> interesting, I will stop.
>

Don't stop. Those that don't want to read them don't have to.

--
Wayne Boatwright

*******************************************
Date: Wednesday, 09(IX)/17(XVII)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Today is: Citizenship Day
Countdown till Veteran's Day
7wks 5dys 17hrs 40mins
*******************************************
Militant Agnostic: I don't know and
you don't either.

Wayne Boatwright wrote:
> On Wed 17 Sep 2008 06:12:24a, Jean B. told us...
>
>> Dimitri wrote:
>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>>>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>>>> There s a difference between the recipes posted in mass without any
>>>> sort of narrative, and the recipes posted by regulars who can vouch
>>>> for them.
>>>>
>>>> The survey didn't distinguish between them so I vote here with:
>>>> Nay on the former. Yeah on the later.
>>>>
>>>> -sw
>>> I agree, people who just post recipes for no apparent reason and with no
>>> comment or narrative are a waste of time and bandwidth as well.
>>>
>>> This is not a cut and paste training site.
>>>
>>> Dimitri
>> So, I should cease and desist? I thought the recipes were
>> interesting for one reason or another. And I have been typing
>> them in, not cutting and pasting.
>>
>> Oh well. If more people find them annoying rather than
>> interesting, I will stop.
>>
>
> Don't stop. Those that don't want to read them don't have to.
>
Well... You ask so nicely. :-) I am going out for a while and
then will drag the third and final box of magazines up here.

--
Jean B.

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:48:25 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:

> ChattyCathy wrote:
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>
> There s a difference between the recipes posted in mass without any sort
> of narrative, and the recipes posted by regulars who can vouch for them.
>
> The survey didn't distinguish between them so I vote here with:
> Nay on the former. Yeah on the later.
>
> -sw

i was sorta thinking that. not even only clusters of recipes, but just one
starkly standing on its own seems a little odd.

but if that's what some people want to do, i won't bitch (too much).

your pal,
blake

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 09:12:24 -0400, Jean B. wrote:

> Dimitri wrote:
>>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>>>
>>> There s a difference between the recipes posted in mass without any
>>> sort of narrative, and the recipes posted by regulars who can vouch
>>> for them.
>>>
>>> The survey didn't distinguish between them so I vote here with:
>>> Nay on the former. Yeah on the later.
>>>
>>> -sw
>>
>> I agree, people who just post recipes for no apparent reason and with no
>> comment or narrative are a waste of time and bandwidth as well.
>>
>> This is not a cut and paste training site.
>>
>> Dimitri
>
> So, I should cease and desist? I thought the recipes were
> interesting for one reason or another. And I have been typing
> them in, not cutting and pasting.
>
> Oh well. If more people find them annoying rather than
> interesting, I will stop.

if i remember rightly, your posts at least have some intro or commentary.
i wouldn't be inhibited.

your pal,
blake

blake wrote on Wed, 17 Sep 2008 14:55:11 GMT:

>> Dimitri wrote:
>>>
>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>>>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>>>>
>>>> There s a difference between the recipes posted in mass
>>>> without any sort of narrative, and the recipes posted by
>>>> regulars who can vouch for them.
>>>>
>>>> The survey didn't distinguish between them so I vote here with:
>>>> Nay on the former. Yeah on the later.
>>>>
>>>> -sw
>>>
>>> I agree, people who just post recipes for no apparent reason
>>> and with no comment or narrative are a waste of time and
>>> bandwidth as well.
>>>
>>> This is not a cut and paste training site.
>>>
>>> Dimitri
>>
>> So, I should cease and desist? I thought the recipes were
>> interesting for one reason or another. And I have been
>> typing them in, not cutting and pasting.
>>
>> Oh well. If more people find them annoying rather than
>> interesting, I will stop.

> if i remember rightly, your posts at least have some intro or
> commentary. i wouldn't be inhibited.

I tend to ignore recipes posted without relevance or comment but I
expect recipes in r.f.c to have been tested. That's one of the reasons I
don't look at the moderated rec.food.recipes since the group is
frequented by people who think it a service to post dozens of untested
transcribed recipes. The moderation prevents me from posting criticism
in that group.

--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

James Silverton wrote:

> I tend to ignore recipes posted without relevance or comment but I
> expect recipes in r.f.c to have been tested. That's one of the reasons I
> don't look at the moderated rec.food.recipes since the group is
> frequented by people who think it a service to post dozens of untested
> transcribed recipes. The moderation prevents me from posting criticism
> in that group.

Some time back there was someone who came in here and started posting
dozens and dozens of unsolicited recipes. I objected but others defended
him. It was easy enough to deal with. I just filtered him. I am sure
that if he posted something worthwhile it would show up in a response.

"Jean B." > wrote in message
...
> Dimitri wrote:
>>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>>>
>>> There s a difference between the recipes posted in mass without any sort
>>> of narrative, and the recipes posted by regulars who can vouch for them.
>>>
>>> The survey didn't distinguish between them so I vote here with:
>>> Nay on the former. Yeah on the later.
>>>
>>> -sw
>>
>> I agree, people who just post recipes for no apparent reason and with no
>> comment or narrative are a waste of time and bandwidth as well.
>>
>> This is not a cut and paste training site.
>>
>> Dimitri
>
> So, I should cease and desist? I thought the recipes were interesting for
> one reason or another. And I have been typing them in, not cutting and
> pasting.
>
> Oh well. If more people find them annoying rather than interesting, I
> will stop.
>
> --
> Jean B.

You are cordially invited to do what you want.

I believe one could cook 3 recipes a day from the day of their birth until
they die and never run out of recipes that are available on the web.

When SOAR started there were over 80 thousand recipes
http://www.recipesource.com/ (New Soar). If you google the word recipe the
"Results 1 - 10 of about 205,000,000 for recipes [definition]. (0.05
seconds)"

If someone just posts a recipe with little information surrounding the
recipe for me its a so what.

If you find a recipe interesting tell me/us why, and if you have tried it
and how it came out and why you find it interesting. There are some
SENSATIONAL cooks here with an astounding degree of knowledge and talent.
There is not a day thet goes by that I read RFC and learn something new.

So like I said do what you want.


Dimitri

Jean B. wrote:
> Dimitri wrote:
>>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>>>
>>> There s a difference between the recipes posted in mass without any
>>> sort of narrative, and the recipes posted by regulars who can vouch
>>> for them.
>>>
>>> The survey didn't distinguish between them so I vote here with:
>>> Nay on the former. Yeah on the later.
>>>
>>> -sw
>>
>> I agree, people who just post recipes for no apparent reason and
>> with no comment or narrative are a waste of time and bandwidth as
>> well. This is not a cut and paste training site.
>>
>> Dimitri
>
> So, I should cease and desist? I thought the recipes were
> interesting for one reason or another. And I have been typing
> them in, not cutting and pasting.
>
> Oh well. If more people find them annoying rather than
> interesting, I will stop.


I didn't read rfc yesterday or much the day before so I couldn't figure out
what the "problem" was. Hey, I like that you got a bunch of old cooking
magazines and are sharing interesting recipes from them! Don't stop on my
account (And no, I don't think you're that Frannie loser.)

Jill

"Jean B." wrote
> Dimitri wrote:

>> I agree, people who just post recipes for no apparent reason and with no
>> comment or narrative are a waste of time and bandwidth as well.

> So, I should cease and desist? I thought the recipes were interesting for
> one reason or another. And I have been typing them in, not cutting and
> pasting.
>
> Oh well. If more people find them annoying rather than interesting, I
> will stop.

Naw Jean, I think he means the occasional drive by person who does it with
no relation to any post. I've posted plenty. In fact, you and I may be
some of the more prolific recipe posters here?

Last time I posted several while we were in chat because I mentioned them in
there and people asked for them, so added them to a chat line and annotated,
'based on request in chat'. Other times, I've added up to 10 or so based on
a specific thread asking for something (I think last time, was diabetic
acceptable recipes for one who liked to cook with a little Asian flair and
wasnt sure how to adapt so they had special comments all through them on
where to adapt the base recipe).

In fact, mini rant on that one! Some goober came back and said I was
terrible for not editing the whole recipe to render it 'DBA' and instead
inserting the shifts in a MM format as comments! I did it that way
specifically for 2 reasons.
1- The person wanted to know 'how to adapt it to Diabetic Acceptable (DBA)'
so needed to see the full version to get the idea (new diabetic).
2- others who were not diabetic, may have wanted the full version so they
had it as well as an idea of how to edit it if a friend with diabetes ever
came over.

All in MM format so they could save it easily to their own database if they
wished.

"Dimitri" wrote

> When SOAR started there were over 80 thousand recipes
> http://www.recipesource.com/ (New Soar). If you google the word recipe the
> "Results 1 - 10 of about 205,000,000 for recipes [definition]. (0.05
> seconds)"

Yeah, they have a grunch of mine but most have my finger prints filed off.
Probably the most common one of mine that shows on web pages is
'Bo-Peeps-A-Crock' (variations on the name).

Here's the original:

MMMMM----- Recipe via Meal-Master (tm) v8.05

Title: Bo-Peeps-a-Crock
Categories: Crockpot, Veal, Xxcarol, Diabetic
Yield: 8 Servings

1 lb Veal/lamb breast
2 tb Chicken bullion mix (or 1 qt
Water to 1 qt (or broth)
1 ts Nutmeg
1 ts Ginger, powdered
16 ea Cloves, whole
1 ea Medium/large carrot, chopped
1 c Grapes (optional)

Good sale? See that Veal or cut of Lamb? Many things go with it.
This is one varition.

Cut the meat as needed to fit in the crockpot, removing as much fat as
possible. Now toss in the rest. Cook on high for 4 hours, then cool
it and skim off the fat. Reheat and it's good heated for 6 hours at
a shot for 2 days. (refridgerate inbetween times!) Serves well with
an acorn or buttternut squash, cut in half and baked then served in a
bowl with the shell filled with meat and soup. Add rice (Basmati or
Jasmine prefered) and some blue lake green beans for a perfect but
easy meal.

Nutrition: High in fat, even when cooled and skimmed, but sugar free
and low in sodium. Use as a specialty now and again even if dieting.
Sastifies sweet tooth with no sugar added.

From the kitchen of: xxcarol From the kitchen of: xxcarol From: Carol
Shenkenberger Date: 01-16-00 Cooking

MMMMM

I'd lost my whole database and friends sent them back to me, which is why
the slightly odd format at the bottom. The mis-spellings are all my own ;-)

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:21:04 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:

>Don't stop. Those that don't want to read them don't have to.

Many of those people also complain about OT posts unrelated to cooking
and thread drift. At least she's posting on topic.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Wed 17 Sep 2008 08:23:30p, told us...

> On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:21:04 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> > wrote:
>
>>Don't stop. Those that don't want to read them don't have to.
>
> Many of those people also complain about OT posts unrelated to cooking
> and thread drift. At least she's posting on topic.

How right you are!



--
Wayne Boatwright

*******************************************
Date: Wednesday, 09(IX)/17(XVII)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Today is: Citizenship Day
Countdown till Veteran's Day
7wks 5dys 2hrs 50mins
*******************************************
Experiments should be reproducible:
They should all fail the same way

On Sep 17, 9:12*am, "Jean B." > wrote:
> Dimitri wrote:
>
> > "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> ChattyCathy wrote:
> >>>http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>
> >> There s a difference between the recipes posted in mass without any
> >> sort of narrative, and the recipes posted by regulars who can vouch
> >> for them.
>
> >> The survey didn't distinguish between them so I vote here with:
> >> Nay on the former. *Yeah on the later.
>
> >> -sw
>
> > I agree, people who just post recipes for no apparent reason and with no
> > comment or narrative *are a waste of time and bandwidth as well.
>
> > This is not a cut and paste training site.
>
> > Dimitri
>
> So, I should cease and desist? *I thought the recipes were
> interesting for one reason or another. *And I have been typing
> them in, not cutting and pasting.
>
> Oh well. *If more people find them annoying rather than
> interesting, I will stop.
>
> --
> Jean B.

Check out the poll results. A little 'splaination on why you're
sharing it would make the difference.
Is it technique, or ingredients, a combination, the context is all.

maxine in ri

maxine in ri wrote:
> On Sep 17, 9:12 am, "Jean B." > wrote:
>> Dimitri wrote:
>>
>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>>>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>>>> There s a difference between the recipes posted in mass without any
>>>> sort of narrative, and the recipes posted by regulars who can vouch
>>>> for them.
>>>> The survey didn't distinguish between them so I vote here with:
>>>> Nay on the former. Yeah on the later.
>>>> -sw
>>> I agree, people who just post recipes for no apparent reason and with no
>>> comment or narrative are a waste of time and bandwidth as well.
>>> This is not a cut and paste training site.
>>> Dimitri
>> So, I should cease and desist? I thought the recipes were
>> interesting for one reason or another. And I have been typing
>> them in, not cutting and pasting.
>>
>> Oh well. If more people find them annoying rather than
>> interesting, I will stop.
>>
>> --
>> Jean B.
>
> Check out the poll results. A little 'splaination on why you're
> sharing it would make the difference.
> Is it technique, or ingredients, a combination, the context is all.
>
> maxine in ri

I have generally been doing that. Will try to do more of that. I
might get the the third of three containers today. :-)

--
Jean B.

Jean wrote on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 08:10:59 -0400:

> maxine in ri wrote:
>> On Sep 17, 9:12 am, "Jean B." > wrote:
>>> Dimitri wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>>>>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>>>>> There s a difference between the recipes posted in mass
>>>>> without any sort of narrative, and the recipes posted by
>>>>> regulars who can vouch for them. The survey didn't
>>>>> distinguish between them so I vote here with: Nay on the
>>>>> former. Yeah on the later. -sw
>>>> I agree, people who just post recipes for no apparent
>>>> reason and with no comment or narrative are a waste of
>>>> time and bandwidth as well. This is not a cut and paste
>>>> training site. Dimitri
>>> So, I should cease and desist? I thought the recipes were
>>> interesting for one reason or another. And I have been
>>> typing them in, not cutting and pasting.
>>>
>>> Oh well. If more people find them annoying rather than
>>> interesting, I will stop.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jean B.
>>
>> Check out the poll results. A little 'splaination on why
>> you're sharing it would make the difference. Is it technique,
>> or ingredients, a combination, the context is all.
>>
>> maxine in ri

> I have generally been doing that. Will try to do more of
> that. I might get the the third of three containers today.
> :-)

I don't think I am likely to try an unsolicited recipe unless it is
relevant to an ongoing discussion or the poster has tested it and likes
the results. Possibly, a very unusual or unlikely recipe might get my
attention.
--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

James Silverton wrote:
> I don't think I am likely to try an unsolicited recipe unless it is
> relevant to an ongoing discussion or the poster has tested it and likes
> the results. Possibly, a very unusual or unlikely recipe might get my
> attention.

Heh! Well, I am selecting some of the recipes precisely because
they ARE unusual or unlikely. Does this mean you are shopping for
that pudding? :-)

--
Jean B.

Jean wrote on Thu, 18 Sep 2008 10:54:47 -0400:

> James Silverton wrote:
>> I don't think I am likely to try an unsolicited recipe unless
>> it is relevant to an ongoing discussion or the poster has
>> tested it and likes the results. Possibly, a very unusual or
>> unlikely recipe might get my attention.

> Heh! Well, I am selecting some of the recipes precisely
> because they ARE unusual or unlikely. Does this mean you are
> shopping for that pudding? :-)

On that one, thanks but no thanks!

--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not