"Charles A Lieberman" ha scritto nel messaggio

> I could use honey recipes. I mostly drink coffee and my girlfriend likes >
> sugar in her tea, and yet we have lots of the stuff. I'll probably make >
> a sports drink with it when I get back to fencing.
> Charles A. Lieberman

Make baklava and it will disappear instantly.

blake murphy wrote:

> On Sun, 09 Nov 2008 19:02:58 -0800, Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
>> Dan Abel wrote:
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> sf > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 09 Nov 2008 12:55:40 -0800, Dan Abel > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >It appears that the site may be spam.
>>>> >There is master site with all of recipes on it.
>>>>
>>>> Now I'm curious. I didn't go to the original posters site and have
>>>> deleted all subsequent posts. Please post the url of the master site.
>>>
>>> CAUTION - spam ahead:
>>>
>>> http://www.householdrecipes.blogspot.com/
>>
>> I think there's a Blogspot 101 course where they teach
>>
>> HI!!1!!! I'M nEW TO YOuR GROOP! COME SEE mY BLOG!!!
>>
>> and that the idea is to never return to the group you've spammed.
>
> ...unless it is to whine piteously that they were only trying to help after
> they get flamed. *then* leave in a huff.

....or perhaps a minute and a huff.

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html

"Giusi"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7719281.stm

A new study shows how spam works and how they make money. I always wonder
who believes the outrageous claims in spam... must be some.

ChattyCathy wrote:

> PeterLucas wrote:
>
> <snip!>
>>
>> 3 cheers for Giusi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>
>> Well said mate :-)
>>
>>
> <sniff>
>
> I thought she was talking the biggest load of rubbish... how can she
> compare koko (or herself, for that matter) to spammers? Hmmmm? There

Irrationally.

> are many r.f.c.-ers that are into food blogging, but you don't see them
> pushing their blogs just to get the revenue from the the adverts (if
> they have them).

There's always the part about koko (et al) being *participants* here, and
not just drive-by advertisers.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html

On 2008-11-10, Giusi > wrote:


> When did rfc get to invent a new meaning for spam?

The "years ago" you said you've been here. We can invent any new definition
we want. That's how language evolves.


> She was naive. If she
> does come back look at what faces her!

Look at her very next post..... not even any pretense. Spammer!

www.householdrecipes.blogspot.com

I like reading your posts, Giusi, but in this instance I think it's you who
is being naive.

nb

In article >,
notbob > wrote:

> On 2008-11-10, Giusi > wrote:
>
> > Y'all are beginning to sound like a bunch of paranoid schizzos.
>
> You are starting to sound like a rank newb and shit stirrer!
>
> You been around here for how long? ...a few months?

Heh! Remember <decobabeone>? Tha'be Giusi. She's been around (with
time off) for years, nb.
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://www.caringbridge.org/visit/kilikini
(Send her a note!)

On 2008-11-10, Melba's Jammin' > wrote:

> Heh! Remember <decobabeone>? Tha'be Giusi. She's been around (with
> time off) for years, nb.

Hey, I thought Giusi was a guy. [shrug]

I guess now I'm the clueless one.

nb

Dan Abel wrote:
>
> I don't know if you'd call it plagiarized. It looks more like blog spam
> MLM, but I'm not really sure, and don't want to look at it much further.

Oh no! A new business model that combines blogspot
with MLM! What new evil is this?

It seems almost insane. Traditional MLM depends on
personal contact. How many "associates" do you need
to serve the entire Internet? One.

This new hybrid seems to skip actually having a
physical product. I guess the money is made
off of the suckers who join, which is part of
the traditional MLM business model. I wonder
how much up-front money they require? I certainly
doubt that the upline subsists solely on a share
of the advertising revenue generated by the
suckers recruited to spam. That would be almost
nothing.

In article >,
Melba's Jammin' > wrote:

> In article
> >,
> Dan Abel > wrote:
>
> > CAUTION - spam ahead:
> >
> > http://www.householdrecipes.blogspot.com/
>
> Looks like another food blog to me; what about it makes you warn of spam?

There's a link at the very bottom that takes you to an exact same copy
of the recipes. Looks like you just click a button and you have a web
site food blog.

There's another button that appears to let you copy Amy's site and make
a copy as your own. Sort of a MLM scheme.

I was first attracted by the pictures of little kids. I'm a sucker for
little kids. But there's just too many. Nobody can have that many
kids. Nobody can go to that many pumpkin farms.

Lastly, several people on this group that I respect, say that it appears
to be spam.

Here's a blog that I recommend:

http://butterislove.blogspot.com/

I've known the author for almost 20 years (since she was four). She's
my daughter's roommate. She cooks dinner most nights. My daughter
washes dishes. My daughter is actually a pretty good cook. Alana
normally creates her own recipes. There's a picture of their new kitten
on the current home page. My daughter is mentioned several times in the
blog (hint: look under cinnamon rolls, my daughter's favorite food in
the world).

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

"Dan Abel"
> In article
> Melba's Jammin' wrote:
>
>> In article
Dan Abel wrote:
>>
>> > CAUTION - spam ahead:
>> >
>> > http://www.householdrecipes.blogspot.com/
>>
>> Looks like another food blog to me; what about it makes you warn of spam?
>
> There's a link at the very bottom that takes you to an exact same copy >
> of the recipes.

The permalink?

Looks like you just click a button and you have a web site food blog.
This time you are wrong although there are pirates that do that.
>
> There's another button that appears to let you copy Amy's site and make >
> a copy as your own. Sort of a MLM scheme.

What's the scheme if she lets people link to her work?
>
> I was first attracted by the pictures of little kids. I'm a sucker for >
> little kids. But there's just too many. Nobody can have that many
> kids. Nobody can go to that many pumpkin farms.
>
> Lastly, several people on this >group that I respect, say that it appears
> > to be spam.

They are all wrong, I believe.

In article >,
notbob > wrote:

> On 2008-11-10, Giusi > wrote:
>
> > Y'all are beginning to sound like a bunch of paranoid schizzos.
>
> You are starting to sound like a rank newb and shit stirrer!
>
> You been around here for how long? ...a few months?

2002, but who's counting?

> What do you know about
> the longstanding traditions, mores, etc, of rfc? I could tell the poster
> was a spammer ....rfc def of spam: anyone who posts here for strictly
> commercial reasons.... in a heartbeat. If you payed attention to MY post, I
> agree there is nothing wrong with a food blog or making rfc aware of it.
> BUUUTTTT!! have you seen the OP post to rfc again as an interested party?
> No, you have not. Have you seen her post again as a blatant spammer?

No, she made two posts in one day and I haven't seen a post from her
since.

> If someone wants to become a part of the rfc culture and post their blog, no
> one will say boo. The "newbee" that originated this thread is not an rfc
> person and most of the rfc regulars see her for what she is. The only one
> clueless around here is you.

Can I join her? I want to be clueless like her!

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

In article >,
"Giusi" > wrote:

> "notbob" ha scritto nel messaggio > On 2008-11-10, Giusi wrote:

> > No, you have not. Have you seen her post again as a blatant spammer?
> > Yes,
>
> I refer more to Dan Abel saying 'go look, but warning, spam ahead.' That
> after he'd said it wasn't spam. A blog CANNOT be spam.

I looked at the site. It didn't look like spam to me. Some people said
it was spam. SF asked what the fuss was, but hadn't looked, had deleted
everything, didn't know how to look at it, and asked if somebody would
repost the URL. So I did, with a spam warning.

> When did rfc get to invent a new meaning for spam? She was naive. If she
> does come back look at what faces her!

Perhaps "spam" isn't the right word. What would you call it if someone
copied your site, word for word, and then inserted their name in place
of yours? I'm not sure that's what happened here, but it sure looks
like it.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Sun, 09 Nov 2008 16:37:38 -0800, Dan Abel > wrote:

>Four decades ago, when I was first in college, I had a roommate who made
>spaghetti one day. He bought this box. It had a few short noodles in
>it (long ones wouldn't fit in the box), a very small can of sauce and a
>packet of powdered cheese. He said his momma always doctored it up, at
>which point he started bringing out all of this stuff out of his grocery
>bag. I suggested that he could have skipped the box, bought some
>noodles and made the sauce out of the doctoring ingredients. Nope, that
>wasn't how his momma did it.

Huh. Sounds like Chef Boyardee except for the short noodles. That
was the only way my mom ever made spaghetti and she didn't "doctor it
up".


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

Mae West

"Dan Abel" <> In article
> notbob wrote:
>
>> On 2008-11-10, Giusi wrote:
>>
>> > Y'all are beginning to sound like a bunch of paranoid schizzos.
>>
>> You are starting to sound like a rank newb and shit stirrer!
>>
.. The only one
>> clueless around here is you.
>
> Can I join her? I want to be clueless like her!
> Dan Abel

actats chair next to this one
OK Dan, come on over, but you know this means you will work your rear off in
the kitchen. Thanks for the flattery.

"Dan Abel" > ha scritto nel messaggio
"Giusi" wrote:

> Perhaps "spam" isn't the right word. What would you call it if someone >
> copied your site, word for word, and then inserted their name in place
> of yours? I'm not sure that's what happened here, but it sure looks
> like it.
> Dan Abel

I think you mistook some common blog program details for piracy. Bloggers
do have the problem, but the sites that do it usuallly look like
conglomerators, not Mrs. Housewife like this one. This one looks very
personal. That looked like kindergarten trip to the pumpkin farm to me.
The recipes didn't have brand names in them.

Good blog software, not Blogger, have stats available and you can see who is
stealing from you. Food bloggers have a group blog where you can tell
others who is stealing and from what site. I currently have someone
stealing one image, but it is illustrating an article about one of the
people who helps with the Made in America series, so I am not bothered.

Giusi wrote:
> Thanks for the compliment. I really do try to make the food part
> accurate and cogent. The other stuff I make no guarantees at all.

She is right. Your site is excellent and most enjoyable.

In article >,
"Giusi" > wrote:

> "Dan Abel" <> In article

> > Can I join her? I want to be clueless like her!
> > Dan Abel
>
> actats chair next to this one
> OK Dan, come on over, but you know this means you will work your rear off in
> the kitchen. Thanks for the flattery.

That's how it always works. I've always sworn that I will never go into
cooking as a profession. I failed with my son. He is head cook at a
little place. It's funny. The guests will ask if he's a cook. Well,
yes. So he works for the other cook, right? Well. So the manager
steps in and says my son is the head cook. They just stare. The other
cook is old enough to be his mother!

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

In article >,
"Giusi" > wrote:

> "Dan Abel" > ha scritto nel messaggio
> "Giusi" wrote:
>
> > Perhaps "spam" isn't the right word. What would you call it if someone >
> > copied your site, word for word, and then inserted their name in place
> > of yours? I'm not sure that's what happened here, but it sure looks
> > like it.
> > Dan Abel
>
> I think you mistook some common blog program details for piracy. Bloggers
> do have the problem, but the sites that do it usuallly look like
> conglomerators, not Mrs. Housewife like this one. This one looks very
> personal. That looked like kindergarten trip to the pumpkin farm to me.

OK. I'm going to have to take your word for it.

> The recipes didn't have brand names in them.

Not many.

> Good blog software, not Blogger, have stats available and you can see who is
> stealing from you. Food bloggers have a group blog where you can tell
> others who is stealing and from what site. I currently have someone
> stealing one image, but it is illustrating an article about one of the
> people who helps with the Made in America series, so I am not bothered.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 17:17:57 +0000 (UTC), PeterLucas wrote:
<snip>
>
> But........ to give you a bit of a history........ I joined a ng a
> looooooooong while ago.
>
> I jumped in and joined the conversations.
>
> Then the 'older' ng members decided to take umbrage at the "newbie" who
> wouldn't bow down to them, or wouldn't take their insults and abuse whilst
> laying on the ground in a quivering mess.
>
> You see, these 'older' ng members thought that the ng was *theirs* and
> because they had been there for longer than anyone, they "owned" it. Their
> opinion was "I've been here longer than you, so you have to take my
> shit/kicks in the head till we decide not to do it anymore."
>
>
> Guess what??
>
> I gave back what they dished out, and they *really* didn't like it.
>

you're so heroic! whatta man!!!

blake

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:49:48 +0100, Giusi wrote:

> "blake murphy"
> Giusi wrote:
>>> As a group you sound sometimes like you are living in 1940 and you will
>>> only
>>> listen to the radio where you get all your news and entertainment.
>>
>> yes, but you're 'family' and so is koko. that's a little different from
>> parachuting in and dropping your u.r.l. bomb.
>>
>> maybe you can tell me this, though: as i understand it, you're paid for
>> the blog ads on the basis of page visits, right? does the system account
>> for those who visit but have some kind of ad-blocker software on their
>> browsers?
>>
>> your curious pal,
>> blake
>
> It counts pages viewed, for how long and clicks on the ads. My blog has
> been on for years and just started paying the monthly bill a few months ago.
> My subscribers are from Asia through Europe and Africa with most in the US.
> Google doesn't know if you have an ad blocker.

o.k., i sort of figured that.

i just wondered because i sometimes go to right-wing nutter blogs (pointed
to by other blogs who keep tabs on the most outlandish and hilariously
stupid ones), and wondered whether they profit from that.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:16:35 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:

> PeterLucas wrote:
>
>> ChattyCathy > wrote in
>> news:tzYRk.4340$2l5.3223 @newsfe01.iad:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> However, no matter what you think about Guisi's post, I won't hold it
>>> against you (for more than five minutes). <grin>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Well....... if you hold it against me...... you'd only come up to my
>> belly button anyway, short-stuff :-)
>
> Heh. There were rumors that Lucrezia Borgia was short. No worries mate.
> Here, have a glass of wine... ;-)

<snort>

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 10:45:50 -0600, Michel Boucher wrote:

> blake murphy > wrote in news:ktn7l6edxx0j
> :
>
>>>>> As a group you sound sometimes like you are living in 1940 and you
>>>>> will only listen to the radio where you get all your news and
>>>>> entertainment.
>>>
>>> Hey! Leave me out of this -- I listen to the wireless. :-)
>>
>> i bet the antipodean radio waves are upside-down anyway.
>
> And from right to left...

i guess the wireless receivers are wound for that.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:09:58 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >,
> "Giusi" > wrote:.
>
>> When did rfc get to invent a new meaning for spam? She was naive. If she
>> does come back look at what faces her!
>
> Perhaps "spam" isn't the right word.

the term i've seen at other blogs is 'blogwhoring.'

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:09:58 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> "Giusi" > wrote:.
>>
>>> When did rfc get to invent a new meaning for spam? She was naive.
>>> If she does come back look at what faces her!
>>
>> Perhaps "spam" isn't the right word.
>
> the term i've seen at other blogs is 'blogwhoring.'

Perfect!

nancy

blake murphy wrote:

> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 17:17:57 +0000 (UTC), PeterLucas wrote:
> <snip>
> >
> > But........ to give you a bit of a history........ I joined a ng a
> > looooooooong while ago.
> >
> > I jumped in and joined the conversations.
> >
> > Then the 'older' ng members decided to take umbrage at the "newbie" who
> > wouldn't bow down to them, or wouldn't take their insults and abuse
whilst
> > laying on the ground in a quivering mess.
> >
> > You see, these 'older' ng members thought that the ng was *theirs* and
> > because they had been there for longer than anyone, they "owned" it.
Their
> > opinion was "I've been here longer than you, so you have to take my
> > shit/kicks in the head till we decide not to do it anymore."
> >
> >
> > Guess what??
> >
> > I gave back what they dished out, and they *really* didn't like it.
> >
>
> you're so heroic! whatta man!!!


I really wonder why Oz even bothers having a Defence Ministry, what with a
big brave hero like Mucus in their midst...


--
Best
Greg

On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:46:32 -0500, Nancy Young wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:09:58 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> "Giusi" > wrote:.
>>>
>>>> When did rfc get to invent a new meaning for spam? She was naive.
>>>> If she does come back look at what faces her!
>>>
>>> Perhaps "spam" isn't the right word.
>>
>> the term i've seen at other blogs is 'blogwhoring.'
>
> Perfect!
>
> nancy

most folks are kinda apologetic when they do it.

your pal,
blake

In article
>,
Dan Abel > wrote:

> In article >,
> Melba's Jammin' > wrote:
>
> > In article
> > >,
> > Dan Abel > wrote:
> >
> > > CAUTION - spam ahead:
> > >
> > > http://www.householdrecipes.blogspot.com/
> >
> > Looks like another food blog to me; what about it makes you warn of spam?
>
> There's a link at the very bottom that takes you to an exact same copy
> of the recipes. Looks like you just click a button and you have a web
> site food blog.

Huh. I don't see any such button.
Her Blogger profile says she's been doing it since October 2008
>
> There's another button that appears to let you copy Amy's site and make
> a copy as your own. Sort of a MLM scheme.

I don't see that, either. May AdBlockPlus is responsible for that.

> I was first attracted by the pictures of little kids. I'm a sucker for
> little kids. But there's just too many. Nobody can have that many
> kids.

Sure they can! ;-)

> Nobody can go to that many pumpkin farms.

No? <g>

> Lastly, several people on this group that I respect, say that it appears
> to be spam.

That's worth something to me. Seriously.
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://www.caringbridge.org/visit/kilikini
(Send her a note!)

In article >,
notbob > wrote:

> On 2008-11-10, Melba's Jammin' > wrote:
>
> > Heh! Remember <decobabeone>? Tha'be Giusi. She's been around (with
> > time off) for years, nb.
>
> Hey, I thought Giusi was a guy. [shrug]
>
> I guess now I'm the clueless one.
>
> nb


Nah. You're our nb!
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://www.caringbridge.org/visit/kilikini
(Send her a note!)

On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 16:27:42 GMT, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:46:32 -0500, Nancy Young wrote:
>
>> blake murphy wrote:
>>> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:09:58 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps "spam" isn't the right word.
>>>
>>> the term i've seen at other blogs is 'blogwhoring.'
>>
>> Perfect!
>>
>> nancy
>
>most folks are kinda apologetic when they do it.
>
Apologetic blog whores? Since when?


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

Mae West

On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 18:28:02 -0800, sf wrote:

> On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 16:27:42 GMT, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:46:32 -0500, Nancy Young wrote:
>>
>>> blake murphy wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:09:58 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps "spam" isn't the right word.
>>>>
>>>> the term i've seen at other blogs is 'blogwhoring.'
>>>
>>> Perfect!
>>>
>>> nancy
>>
>>most folks are kinda apologetic when they do it.
>>
> Apologetic blog whores? Since when?

well, maybe on the leftist blogs they tend to be, despite the reputation
promulgated by right-wingers.

your pal,
blake