"Saerah" > wrote in message
...
>
> Vox Humana wrote in message ...
> >
> >"Nancree" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> Ann Coulter
> >> http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=39644
> >
> >You have to wonder why more papers aren't demanding the kind of
intelligent
> >analysis that Ann Coulter provided in that column. The following passage
> >seems to merit space in any newspaper.
> >
> >"My pretty-girl allies stick out like a sore thumb amongst the corn-fed,
no
> >make-up, natural fiber, no-bra needing, sandal-wearing, hirsute, somewhat
> >fragrant hippie-chick pie wagons they call 'women' at the Democratic
> >National Convention."
> >
> >(Just Kidding) I think Ann is damaged goods.
>
> This sandal-wearing, hirsute and sometimes fragrant (Ob food: hey, I made
> pesto tonight!) chick could give a shit what Ann Coulter thinks. Except
for
> the fact that since she looks like a bimbo, she on TV. So simple-minded
> people listen.
>

Bimbo? I think she looks like a transgendered person in transition.

"Jack Schidt®" wrote:
>
> "Nancree" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Ann Coulter
>
> Why you would inflict this crap on a cooking newsgroup is beyond me and
> beyond the pale. The woman is a twit and her cooking skills are
> non-existent. She can't even spread mayonnaise on bread and in one column,
> she said she avoided poached lobster because it was stolen and that was
> immoral. tic.

Okay, I admit it, I have *no* idea who you're talking about. I won't
ask, if I really wanted to know, I'd look it up. However, that is
the funniest thing, poached lobster. Hilarious. Too funny, like
the guy in the paper ranting about a car shop boasting of Foreign
Experts, Americans are just as good!

> Now can we get back to talking about cooking, as in rec.food.cooking?

Me, I'm still not cooking after my run in with some crab legs. I'm
just getting back on solid food.

nancy

"Jack Schidt®" wrote:
>
> "Nancree" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Ann Coulter
>
> Why you would inflict this crap on a cooking newsgroup is beyond me and
> beyond the pale. The woman is a twit and her cooking skills are
> non-existent. She can't even spread mayonnaise on bread and in one column,
> she said she avoided poached lobster because it was stolen and that was
> immoral. tic.

Okay, I admit it, I have *no* idea who you're talking about. I won't
ask, if I really wanted to know, I'd look it up. However, that is
the funniest thing, poached lobster. Hilarious. Too funny, like
the guy in the paper ranting about a car shop boasting of Foreign
Experts, Americans are just as good!

> Now can we get back to talking about cooking, as in rec.food.cooking?

Me, I'm still not cooking after my run in with some crab legs. I'm
just getting back on solid food.

nancy

In article >, "Saerah"
> wrote:

> Melba's Jammin' wrote in message ...
> >In article > , Dog3
> ><dognospam@adjfkdla;not> wrote:
> >(snip)
> >> No need to understand. This is a public forum.
> >
> >Yeah, a public forum whose *topic of discussion is supposed to be
> >food-related -- cooking-related, to be specific. * Drift off topic is
> >one thing, but there are other places where this crap is appropriate.
> >It just doesn't belong here, Michael.
> >
> >>Regardless of the group topic, most Usenet groups wander off course.
> >
> >Wandering off course is one thing -- *starting* there is another!
> >
> >>Most people that protest eventually leave
> >
> >Yeah, and a damn shame it is, too. There've been some good folks who've
> >bailed from here because of it.
>
> How hard is it too either killfile someone, or simply not read a
> thread you *gasp* have no interest in?
> Though, admittedly, this thread really should have an "OT" in the header.
> --
> saerah

It's not difficult; I do it often. And I skip 80-90% of the posts that
show up. That aside, there are groups where the political crap is
acceptable and appropriate to the charter of the group. This is not one
of them. HAND.
--
-Barb, <www.jamlady.eboard.com> An update on 7/22/04.

In article >, Michael Odom
> wrote:

> On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 04:02:57 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
> wrote:
(snip)
> >Ya' just can't censor a public group. It's like real life. Some people
> >will run the red light when everyone else will stop.
> >
> >Michael
>
> 'Taint a question o' censorship, my man. Censorship is done by
> someone powerful enough to enforce it. While Barb is a mighty
> presence hereabouts, she in no way represents an authority with the
> power to censor another participant in the discussion. At issue is
> the propriety of the forum into which the (cough) political screed was
> injected.
>
> As to those who have left the discussion, check Google for Shankar,
> evergene, Rich Tester, TJ, Meg Worley, RCC, and Ray Bruman, for
> example. Our discussion is diminished by the absence of these fine
> minds.

Add Kay Hartman, Mimi Hiller, Martha McLemore, Dan Masi, Anne Bourget --
and have you noticed how little Victor is posting these days? Harry,
Alan Zelt? They are people who possess a wealth of knowledge and some
mighty kitchen skill.
(Looks like my plan to take over the world with my Brownies is rather
ineffectual, Michael. Damn! I've a pan in the oven right now -- gotta
take it to the guys who are gonna change my car's oil in an hour.)

OB Food: I eat as I do to maintain my figure. "-)
--
-Barb, <www.jamlady.eboard.com> An update on 7/22/04.

"Melba's Jammin'" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Saerah"
> > wrote:
>
> > Melba's Jammin' wrote in message ...
> > >In article > , Dog3
> > ><dognospam@adjfkdla;not> wrote:
> > >(snip)
> > >> No need to understand. This is a public forum.
> > >
> > >Yeah, a public forum whose *topic of discussion is supposed to be
> > >food-related -- cooking-related, to be specific. * Drift off topic is
> > >one thing, but there are other places where this crap is appropriate.
> > >It just doesn't belong here, Michael.
> > >
> > >>Regardless of the group topic, most Usenet groups wander off course.
> > >
> > >Wandering off course is one thing -- *starting* there is another!
> > >
> > >>Most people that protest eventually leave
> > >
> > >Yeah, and a damn shame it is, too. There've been some good folks
who've
> > >bailed from here because of it.
> >
> > How hard is it too either killfile someone, or simply not read a
> > thread you *gasp* have no interest in?
> > Though, admittedly, this thread really should have an "OT" in the
header.
> > --
> > saerah
>
> It's not difficult; I do it often. And I skip 80-90% of the posts that
> show up. That aside, there are groups where the political crap is
> acceptable and appropriate to the charter of the group. This is not one
> of them. HAND.
> --

Then there is Sheldon who many people actually seek out, but who posts are
very often incredibly rude and vulgar. I think it is inconsistent to
condemn OT posts about politics while consorting with people who post some
the most breathtakingly vulgar, OT posts that I have ever read on Usenet.
Just an observation.

Melba's Jammin' wrote:
> In article >, Michael Odom
> > wrote:
>
>
>>On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 04:02:57 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
>>wrote:
>
> (snip)
>
>>>Ya' just can't censor a public group. It's like real life. Some people
>>>will run the red light when everyone else will stop.
>>>
>>>Michael
>>
>>'Taint a question o' censorship, my man. Censorship is done by
>>someone powerful enough to enforce it. While Barb is a mighty
>>presence hereabouts, she in no way represents an authority with the
>>power to censor another participant in the discussion. At issue is
>>the propriety of the forum into which the (cough) political screed was
>>injected.
>>
>>As to those who have left the discussion, check Google for Shankar,
>>evergene, Rich Tester, TJ, Meg Worley, RCC, and Ray Bruman, for
>>example. Our discussion is diminished by the absence of these fine
>>minds.
>
>
> Add Kay Hartman, Mimi Hiller, Martha McLemore, Dan Masi, Anne Bourget --
> and have you noticed how little Victor is posting these days? Harry,
> Alan Zelt? They are people who possess a wealth of knowledge and some
> mighty kitchen skill.
> (Looks like my plan to take over the world with my Brownies is rather
> ineffectual, Michael. Damn! I've a pan in the oven right now -- gotta
> take it to the guys who are gonna change my car's oil in an hour.)
>
> OB Food: I eat as I do to maintain my figure. "-)


Even Moosmeat doesn't post much anymore. :-(

BTW, you gotta use the brownies *and* the giant wooden spoon if you're
gonna take over the world. (Note to self: I probably shouldn't have
told her that; now she's dangerous...)

Bob

Curly Sue wrote in message >...
>On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 11:41:55 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
>wrote:
>
(Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
:
>>
>>> On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 04:01:21 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
>>> wrote:
>>>
(Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
:
>>>>
>>>>> There is no "regardless of the topic." This is rec.food.cooking.
>>>>> It's not "nancree.personal.political.forum." She has no friggin
>>>>> business constantly posting off-topic political stuff. She's not
>>>>> "wandering" off course, she's hijacking the group for her own mental
>>>>> masturbation.
>>>>
>>>>If this is the case, it is certainly her right to do so.
>>>
>>> It's not a right. She's taking ill-used advantage of an open forum.
>>> Please note that "open" doesn't imply that it should be a
>>> free-for-all.
>>
>>So, who is going to police this open forum to keep the rif raff out?
>
>No one is asking you to do so. But she doesn't have the "right" to
>post anything anywhere on Usenet.

well, actually....


>
>>>>She can also post it here.
>>>
>>> She can, but then she's a jerk. The point is that if she feels the
>>> need to express her opinions about politics, she certainly has some
>>> very good outlets. This is not one of them.
>>
>>Quite frankly, I think the Coulter post is the first post of the nancree
>>persona's I've ever read. Coulter caught my eye in the subject header and
>>I couldn't resist. Does this nancree character post this type of material
>>on a routine basis?
>
>Yes.
>
>>> And who are you to chastise people who complain about her
>>> inappropriate posts?
>>
>>Who is chastising? Not I. I'm simply pointing out there is no RFC
>>moderator and this is an open forum.
>
>You are. When you ask "Who are you/we to dictate someone else's
>posting habits?" When you imply that people who don't like OT
>political posts should "wander" off to a moderated group.
>

if you don't like OT posts, simply don't read them. why complain?

>>>
>>> We can point out that her rude behavior is unacceptable. You can
>>> help by refraining from supporting it, if you choose not to complain
>>> about it. So yes, there are things we can do about it.
>>
>>Why is it that when someone (not directing this at you) is simply stating
>>what is inevitable on Usenet, someone else always pipes up that they
person
>>is in support of the shit disturber?
>
>Because the people in support of the shit distributor consider it
>"fun." Just like some people at movies and concerts think it's "fun"
>to talk on the cell phone regardless of the people around them.
>

That is not a fair comparison. people on cellphones can't be killfiled.
unfortunately.

>> No, there is nothing you can do about
>>it but complain, and continue another long thread that is the very off
>>topic issue you are complaing about (again, *you* not being directed at
>>you). FWIW, which isn't much, I also believe her behavior is rude.
>
>Then what is the point of continuing the thread by claiming she has
>the "right" to post her political baloney?
>

because some people keep saying she has no right to post it, continuing it
as well.

--
saerah

TANSTAAFL

" I, as a good human being, love nonsense. It helps me understand the
world I live in.
- Carl Sherman

Curly Sue wrote in message >...
>On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 11:41:55 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
>wrote:
>
(Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
:
>>
>>> On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 04:01:21 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
>>> wrote:
>>>
(Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
:
>>>>
>>>>> There is no "regardless of the topic." This is rec.food.cooking.
>>>>> It's not "nancree.personal.political.forum." She has no friggin
>>>>> business constantly posting off-topic political stuff. She's not
>>>>> "wandering" off course, she's hijacking the group for her own mental
>>>>> masturbation.
>>>>
>>>>If this is the case, it is certainly her right to do so.
>>>
>>> It's not a right. She's taking ill-used advantage of an open forum.
>>> Please note that "open" doesn't imply that it should be a
>>> free-for-all.
>>
>>So, who is going to police this open forum to keep the rif raff out?
>
>No one is asking you to do so. But she doesn't have the "right" to
>post anything anywhere on Usenet.

well, actually....


>
>>>>She can also post it here.
>>>
>>> She can, but then she's a jerk. The point is that if she feels the
>>> need to express her opinions about politics, she certainly has some
>>> very good outlets. This is not one of them.
>>
>>Quite frankly, I think the Coulter post is the first post of the nancree
>>persona's I've ever read. Coulter caught my eye in the subject header and
>>I couldn't resist. Does this nancree character post this type of material
>>on a routine basis?
>
>Yes.
>
>>> And who are you to chastise people who complain about her
>>> inappropriate posts?
>>
>>Who is chastising? Not I. I'm simply pointing out there is no RFC
>>moderator and this is an open forum.
>
>You are. When you ask "Who are you/we to dictate someone else's
>posting habits?" When you imply that people who don't like OT
>political posts should "wander" off to a moderated group.
>

if you don't like OT posts, simply don't read them. why complain?

>>>
>>> We can point out that her rude behavior is unacceptable. You can
>>> help by refraining from supporting it, if you choose not to complain
>>> about it. So yes, there are things we can do about it.
>>
>>Why is it that when someone (not directing this at you) is simply stating
>>what is inevitable on Usenet, someone else always pipes up that they
person
>>is in support of the shit disturber?
>
>Because the people in support of the shit distributor consider it
>"fun." Just like some people at movies and concerts think it's "fun"
>to talk on the cell phone regardless of the people around them.
>

That is not a fair comparison. people on cellphones can't be killfiled.
unfortunately.

>> No, there is nothing you can do about
>>it but complain, and continue another long thread that is the very off
>>topic issue you are complaing about (again, *you* not being directed at
>>you). FWIW, which isn't much, I also believe her behavior is rude.
>
>Then what is the point of continuing the thread by claiming she has
>the "right" to post her political baloney?
>

because some people keep saying she has no right to post it, continuing it
as well.

--
saerah

TANSTAAFL

" I, as a good human being, love nonsense. It helps me understand the
world I live in.
- Carl Sherman

Vox Humana wrote in message ...
>
>"Saerah" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> Vox Humana wrote in message ...
>> >
>> >"Nancree" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> Ann Coulter
>> >> http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=39644
>> >
>> >You have to wonder why more papers aren't demanding the kind of
>intelligent
>> >analysis that Ann Coulter provided in that column. The following
passage
>> >seems to merit space in any newspaper.
>> >
>> >"My pretty-girl allies stick out like a sore thumb amongst the corn-fed,
>no
>> >make-up, natural fiber, no-bra needing, sandal-wearing, hirsute,
somewhat
>> >fragrant hippie-chick pie wagons they call 'women' at the Democratic
>> >National Convention."
>> >
>> >(Just Kidding) I think Ann is damaged goods.
>>
>> This sandal-wearing, hirsute and sometimes fragrant (Ob food: hey, I made
>> pesto tonight!) chick could give a shit what Ann Coulter thinks. Except
>for
>> the fact that since she looks like a bimbo, she on TV. So simple-minded
>> people listen.
>>
>
>Bimbo? I think she looks like a transgendered person in transition.

ok, ok, a transgendered bimbo, then.



--
saerah

TANSTAAFL

" I, as a good human being, love nonsense. It helps me understand the
world I live in.
- Carl Sherman


>
>

Vox Humana wrote in message ...
>
>"Saerah" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> Vox Humana wrote in message ...
>> >
>> >"Nancree" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> Ann Coulter
>> >> http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=39644
>> >
>> >You have to wonder why more papers aren't demanding the kind of
>intelligent
>> >analysis that Ann Coulter provided in that column. The following
passage
>> >seems to merit space in any newspaper.
>> >
>> >"My pretty-girl allies stick out like a sore thumb amongst the corn-fed,
>no
>> >make-up, natural fiber, no-bra needing, sandal-wearing, hirsute,
somewhat
>> >fragrant hippie-chick pie wagons they call 'women' at the Democratic
>> >National Convention."
>> >
>> >(Just Kidding) I think Ann is damaged goods.
>>
>> This sandal-wearing, hirsute and sometimes fragrant (Ob food: hey, I made
>> pesto tonight!) chick could give a shit what Ann Coulter thinks. Except
>for
>> the fact that since she looks like a bimbo, she on TV. So simple-minded
>> people listen.
>>
>
>Bimbo? I think she looks like a transgendered person in transition.

ok, ok, a transgendered bimbo, then.



--
saerah

TANSTAAFL

" I, as a good human being, love nonsense. It helps me understand the
world I live in.
- Carl Sherman


>
>

"Nancy Young" > wrote in message
...
> "Jack Schidt®" wrote:
> >
> > "Nancree" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Ann Coulter
> >
> > Why you would inflict this crap on a cooking newsgroup is beyond me and
> > beyond the pale. The woman is a twit and her cooking skills are
> > non-existent. She can't even spread mayonnaise on bread and in one
column,
> > she said she avoided poached lobster because it was stolen and that was
> > immoral. tic.
>
> Okay, I admit it, I have *no* idea who you're talking about. I won't
> ask, if I really wanted to know, I'd look it up. However, that is
> the funniest thing, poached lobster. Hilarious. Too funny, like
> the guy in the paper ranting about a car shop boasting of Foreign
> Experts, Americans are just as good!
>
> > Now can we get back to talking about cooking, as in rec.food.cooking?
>
> Me, I'm still not cooking after my run in with some crab legs. I'm
> just getting back on solid food.
>
> nancy

Damn, feel better, and quickly. I hadda laugh though, 'run in' with some
crab legs.

Jack Crustacean

"Nancy Young" > wrote in message
...
> "Jack Schidt®" wrote:
> >
> > "Nancree" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Ann Coulter
> >
> > Why you would inflict this crap on a cooking newsgroup is beyond me and
> > beyond the pale. The woman is a twit and her cooking skills are
> > non-existent. She can't even spread mayonnaise on bread and in one
column,
> > she said she avoided poached lobster because it was stolen and that was
> > immoral. tic.
>
> Okay, I admit it, I have *no* idea who you're talking about. I won't
> ask, if I really wanted to know, I'd look it up. However, that is
> the funniest thing, poached lobster. Hilarious. Too funny, like
> the guy in the paper ranting about a car shop boasting of Foreign
> Experts, Americans are just as good!
>
> > Now can we get back to talking about cooking, as in rec.food.cooking?
>
> Me, I'm still not cooking after my run in with some crab legs. I'm
> just getting back on solid food.
>
> nancy

Damn, feel better, and quickly. I hadda laugh though, 'run in' with some
crab legs.

Jack Crustacean

"Jack Schidt®" wrote:
>
> "Nancy Young" > wrote in message

> > Me, I'm still not cooking after my run in with some crab legs. I'm
> > just getting back on solid food.

> Damn, feel better, and quickly. I hadda laugh though, 'run in' with some
> crab legs.

(laugh) I didn't run sidewinder, better believe it. Didn't know I
could still move that fast. Look at it this way, no need to do
stomach crunches, I'm set for some time!

nancy

"Jack Schidt®" wrote:
>
> "Nancy Young" > wrote in message

> > Me, I'm still not cooking after my run in with some crab legs. I'm
> > just getting back on solid food.

> Damn, feel better, and quickly. I hadda laugh though, 'run in' with some
> crab legs.

(laugh) I didn't run sidewinder, better believe it. Didn't know I
could still move that fast. Look at it this way, no need to do
stomach crunches, I'm set for some time!

nancy

Nancy Young wrote:

> Me, I'm still not cooking after my run in with some crab legs. I'm
> just getting back on solid food.

I guess you should've microwaved them... =)

--
..-. .-. .---. .---. .-..-.|Experts in Linux/Unix: www.WildOpenSource.com
| |__ / | \| |-< | |-< > / |"Making the bazaar more commonplace"
`----'`-^-'`-'`-'`-'`-' `-' |Check out my new novel: "Cloud Realm" at:
home:www.smith-house.org:8000|http://www.smith-house.org:8000/books/list.html

Nancy Young wrote:

> Me, I'm still not cooking after my run in with some crab legs. I'm
> just getting back on solid food.

I guess you should've microwaved them... =)

--
..-. .-. .---. .---. .-..-.|Experts in Linux/Unix: www.WildOpenSource.com
| |__ / | \| |-< | |-< > / |"Making the bazaar more commonplace"
`----'`-^-'`-'`-'`-'`-' `-' |Check out my new novel: "Cloud Realm" at:
home:www.smith-house.org:8000|http://www.smith-house.org:8000/books/list.html

Nancy Young wrote:

> Me, I'm still not cooking after my run in with some crab legs. I'm
> just getting back on solid food.

I guess you should've microwaved them... =)

--
..-. .-. .---. .---. .-..-.|Experts in Linux/Unix: www.WildOpenSource.com
| |__ / | \| |-< | |-< > / |"Making the bazaar more commonplace"
`----'`-^-'`-'`-'`-'`-' `-' |Check out my new novel: "Cloud Realm" at:
home:www.smith-house.org:8000|http://www.smith-house.org:8000/books/list.html

In article >, "Vox Humana"
> wrote:

> "Melba's Jammin'" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >, "Saerah"
> > > wrote:
(serious snippage)
> > > How hard is it too either killfile someone, or simply not read a
> > > thread you *gasp* have no interest in? Though, admittedly, this
> > > thread really should have an "OT" in the header. -- saerah

> > It's not difficult; I do it often. And I skip 80-90% of the posts
> > that show up. That aside, there are groups where the political
> > crap is acceptable and appropriate to the charter of the group.
> > This is not one of them. HAND. --

> Then there is Sheldon who many people actually seek out, but who
> posts are very often incredibly rude and vulgar. I think it is
> inconsistent to condemn OT posts about politics while consorting with
> people who post some the most breathtakingly vulgar, OT posts that I
> have ever read on Usenet. Just an observation.

Sure; my life is full of inconsistencies. I find his filthy language
appalling and uncalled for -- I don't read most of what he writes. And
he's been helpful to me more than once. Whether I do or don't read
what he writes depends on a lot of things.

OB Food: Cherry Jam made, Cherry Amaretto Almond Jam made, spectacular
Cherry Jelly complete. I need to decide what I'll enter into
competition within the next three weeks. Blueberry Stuff, Bread and
Butter Pickles and Corn Relish are yet to be made. Watermelon Pickles
are done. The Cherry stuff is great -- all of it! I haven't decided
if I'll do any baking for the Fair this year.
--
-Barb, <www.jamlady.eboard.com> An update on 7/22/04.

In article >, "Vox Humana"
> wrote:

> "Melba's Jammin'" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >, "Saerah"
> > > wrote:
(serious snippage)
> > > How hard is it too either killfile someone, or simply not read a
> > > thread you *gasp* have no interest in? Though, admittedly, this
> > > thread really should have an "OT" in the header. -- saerah

> > It's not difficult; I do it often. And I skip 80-90% of the posts
> > that show up. That aside, there are groups where the political
> > crap is acceptable and appropriate to the charter of the group.
> > This is not one of them. HAND. --

> Then there is Sheldon who many people actually seek out, but who
> posts are very often incredibly rude and vulgar. I think it is
> inconsistent to condemn OT posts about politics while consorting with
> people who post some the most breathtakingly vulgar, OT posts that I
> have ever read on Usenet. Just an observation.

Sure; my life is full of inconsistencies. I find his filthy language
appalling and uncalled for -- I don't read most of what he writes. And
he's been helpful to me more than once. Whether I do or don't read
what he writes depends on a lot of things.

OB Food: Cherry Jam made, Cherry Amaretto Almond Jam made, spectacular
Cherry Jelly complete. I need to decide what I'll enter into
competition within the next three weeks. Blueberry Stuff, Bread and
Butter Pickles and Corn Relish are yet to be made. Watermelon Pickles
are done. The Cherry stuff is great -- all of it! I haven't decided
if I'll do any baking for the Fair this year.
--
-Barb, <www.jamlady.eboard.com> An update on 7/22/04.

On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 00:47:57 -0500, Michael Odom
> wrote:

<> Shankar - adios!
<> evergene - posts occasionally
<> Rich Tester - his wife posts now
<> TJ - oh, come on... you know she's here regularly
using a different persona
<> Meg Worley ???
<> RCC ???
<> Ray Bruman - wasn't driven away
times change - interests change



Practice safe eating - always use condiments

On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 00:47:57 -0500, Michael Odom
> wrote:

<> Shankar - adios!
<> evergene - posts occasionally
<> Rich Tester - his wife posts now
<> TJ - oh, come on... you know she's here regularly
using a different persona
<> Meg Worley ???
<> RCC ???
<> Ray Bruman - wasn't driven away
times change - interests change



Practice safe eating - always use condiments

On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 09:53:41 -0500, zxcvbob
> wrote:

> Even Moosmeat doesn't post much anymore. :-(

He will when he can get into newsgroups again.


Practice safe eating - always use condiments

On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 09:53:41 -0500, zxcvbob
> wrote:

> Even Moosmeat doesn't post much anymore. :-(

He will when he can get into newsgroups again.


Practice safe eating - always use condiments

Saerah wrote:

> How hard is it too either killfile someone, or simply not read a thread
you
> *gasp* have no interest in?
> Though, admittedly, this thread really should have an "OT" in the header.
>


This was/is a perennial problem in the alt.support.childfree newsgroup.
Apparently a bunch of posters think it's the place to discuss their
medical/relationship/life problems....it's become their whining blog. Some
such talk is to be expected in any newsgroup and it's a normal thing, no
biggie...I've done it, too. I generally enjoy reading some personal stuff
about people on this or any group...

BUT at least those *constantly* (and I am not referring to anyone on this
here froup, Nancree included, it's not reached that level here yet) posting
such stuff should put OT in their subject lines. It's become a chore on
that group, at least, to wade through the hundreds per day "me - Me - ME"
posts. As a result, several good posters have pretty much left....

Or maybe it's just the nature of the group. Quite a number of people on
alt.support.childfree strike me as maladjusted types who simply have no
friends in real life to talk to, so they use the group as a substitute. They
use the group as a foil for their personal problems. That doesn't seem to
be much of a problem here (and those that have evinced that type of behavior
here are largely gone)....

As for political posts, expect more - this election is going to be *very*
highly charged, and it will be the biggest topic since 9/11.

--
Best
Greg

Saerah wrote:

> How hard is it too either killfile someone, or simply not read a thread
you
> *gasp* have no interest in?
> Though, admittedly, this thread really should have an "OT" in the header.
>


This was/is a perennial problem in the alt.support.childfree newsgroup.
Apparently a bunch of posters think it's the place to discuss their
medical/relationship/life problems....it's become their whining blog. Some
such talk is to be expected in any newsgroup and it's a normal thing, no
biggie...I've done it, too. I generally enjoy reading some personal stuff
about people on this or any group...

BUT at least those *constantly* (and I am not referring to anyone on this
here froup, Nancree included, it's not reached that level here yet) posting
such stuff should put OT in their subject lines. It's become a chore on
that group, at least, to wade through the hundreds per day "me - Me - ME"
posts. As a result, several good posters have pretty much left....

Or maybe it's just the nature of the group. Quite a number of people on
alt.support.childfree strike me as maladjusted types who simply have no
friends in real life to talk to, so they use the group as a substitute. They
use the group as a foil for their personal problems. That doesn't seem to
be much of a problem here (and those that have evinced that type of behavior
here are largely gone)....

As for political posts, expect more - this election is going to be *very*
highly charged, and it will be the biggest topic since 9/11.

--
Best
Greg

On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 01:01:18 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
wrote:

(Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
:
>
>>
>> You are. When you ask "Who are you/we to dictate someone else's
>> posting habits?" When you imply that people who don't like OT
>> political posts should "wander" off to a moderated group.
>
>That is absolutely NOT what I said and I would appreciate it if you would
>discontinue attributing your misinterpretations to me.
>

That is certainly what you wrote; I checked before I quoted you. It's
right there in electrons and photons for all to see.

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

On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 01:01:18 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
wrote:

(Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
:
>
>>
>> You are. When you ask "Who are you/we to dictate someone else's
>> posting habits?" When you imply that people who don't like OT
>> political posts should "wander" off to a moderated group.
>
>That is absolutely NOT what I said and I would appreciate it if you would
>discontinue attributing your misinterpretations to me.
>

That is certainly what you wrote; I checked before I quoted you. It's
right there in electrons and photons for all to see.

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

Curly Sue wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 01:01:18 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
> wrote:
>
> (Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
> :
> >
> >>
> >> You are. When you ask "Who are you/we to dictate someone else's
> >> posting habits?" When you imply that people who don't like OT
> >> political posts should "wander" off to a moderated group.
> >
> >That is absolutely NOT what I said and I would appreciate it if you would
> >discontinue attributing your misinterpretations to me.
> >
>
> That is certainly what you wrote; I checked before I quoted you. It's
> right there in electrons and photons for all to see.


"Can't we all just get along...???"

{{{{{{ hugz }}}}}}

--
Best
Greg ;---)

In article > , Dog3
<dognospam@adjfkdla;not> wrote:

> zxcvbob > got ****ed off and typed
> :

> > Even Moosmeat doesn't post much anymore. :-(
>
> Isn't Moosmeat working on some big project these days? If not, I
> hope he's not sick.


> > BTW, you gotta use the brownies *and* the giant wooden spoon if you're
> > gonna take over the world. (Note to self: I probably shouldn't have
> > told her that; now she's dangerous...)
> >
> > Bob
>
> Better the big spoon than the big knife
>
> Michael


I don't use the spoon very often - sometimes the guys like it a little
too much.

OB Food: Supper tonight was a fake chicken cacciatore kind of thang
over angel hair. Not enough sauce. Pretty tasty, though.
--
-Barb, <www.jamlady.eboard.com> An update on 7/22/04.

In article > , Dog3
<dognospam@adjfkdla;not> wrote:

> zxcvbob > got ****ed off and typed
> :

> > Even Moosmeat doesn't post much anymore. :-(
>
> Isn't Moosmeat working on some big project these days? If not, I
> hope he's not sick.


> > BTW, you gotta use the brownies *and* the giant wooden spoon if you're
> > gonna take over the world. (Note to self: I probably shouldn't have
> > told her that; now she's dangerous...)
> >
> > Bob
>
> Better the big spoon than the big knife
>
> Michael


I don't use the spoon very often - sometimes the guys like it a little
too much.

OB Food: Supper tonight was a fake chicken cacciatore kind of thang
over angel hair. Not enough sauce. Pretty tasty, though.
--
-Barb, <www.jamlady.eboard.com> An update on 7/22/04.

On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 02:22:57 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
wrote:

(Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
:
>
>> On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 01:01:18 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
>> wrote:
>>
(Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> You are. When you ask "Who are you/we to dictate someone else's
>>>> posting habits?" When you imply that people who don't like OT
>>>> political posts should "wander" off to a moderated group.
>>>
>>>That is absolutely NOT what I said and I would appreciate it if you
>>>would discontinue attributing your misinterpretations to me.
>>>
>>
>> That is certainly what you wrote; I checked before I quoted you. It's
>> right there in electrons and photons for all to see.
>
>The post is a misinterpretation on your part and I'll ask you one more time
>to stop attributing your *impressions* of what was said, as something I
>said or implied.

And I will repeat one more time that you wrote it. I quoted it
directly. Go back and look yourself. There was no impression or
interpretation involved.

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

On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 02:22:57 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
wrote:

(Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
:
>
>> On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 01:01:18 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
>> wrote:
>>
(Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> You are. When you ask "Who are you/we to dictate someone else's
>>>> posting habits?" When you imply that people who don't like OT
>>>> political posts should "wander" off to a moderated group.
>>>
>>>That is absolutely NOT what I said and I would appreciate it if you
>>>would discontinue attributing your misinterpretations to me.
>>>
>>
>> That is certainly what you wrote; I checked before I quoted you. It's
>> right there in electrons and photons for all to see.
>
>The post is a misinterpretation on your part and I'll ask you one more time
>to stop attributing your *impressions* of what was said, as something I
>said or implied.

And I will repeat one more time that you wrote it. I quoted it
directly. Go back and look yourself. There was no impression or
interpretation involved.

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

On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 02:22:57 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
wrote:

(Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
:
>
>> On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 01:01:18 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
>> wrote:
>>
(Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> You are. When you ask "Who are you/we to dictate someone else's
>>>> posting habits?" When you imply that people who don't like OT
>>>> political posts should "wander" off to a moderated group.
>>>
>>>That is absolutely NOT what I said and I would appreciate it if you
>>>would discontinue attributing your misinterpretations to me.
>>>
>>
>> That is certainly what you wrote; I checked before I quoted you. It's
>> right there in electrons and photons for all to see.
>
>The post is a misinterpretation on your part and I'll ask you one more time
>to stop attributing your *impressions* of what was said, as something I
>said or implied.

And I will repeat one more time that you wrote it. I quoted it
directly. Go back and look yourself. There was no impression or
interpretation involved.

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

On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 02:18:26 GMT, "Gregory Morrow"
> wrote:

>
>Curly Sue wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 01:01:18 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
>> wrote:
>>
>> (Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
>> :
>> >
>> >>
>> >> You are. When you ask "Who are you/we to dictate someone else's
>> >> posting habits?" When you imply that people who don't like OT
>> >> political posts should "wander" off to a moderated group.
>> >
>> >That is absolutely NOT what I said and I would appreciate it if you would
>> >discontinue attributing your misinterpretations to me.
>> >
>>
>> That is certainly what you wrote; I checked before I quoted you. It's
>> right there in electrons and photons for all to see.
>
>
>"Can't we all just get along...???"
>
>{{{{{{ hugz }}}}}}
>

I'm trying :>

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

On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 02:18:26 GMT, "Gregory Morrow"
> wrote:

>
>Curly Sue wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 01:01:18 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
>> wrote:
>>
>> (Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
>> :
>> >
>> >>
>> >> You are. When you ask "Who are you/we to dictate someone else's
>> >> posting habits?" When you imply that people who don't like OT
>> >> political posts should "wander" off to a moderated group.
>> >
>> >That is absolutely NOT what I said and I would appreciate it if you would
>> >discontinue attributing your misinterpretations to me.
>> >
>>
>> That is certainly what you wrote; I checked before I quoted you. It's
>> right there in electrons and photons for all to see.
>
>
>"Can't we all just get along...???"
>
>{{{{{{ hugz }}}}}}
>

I'm trying :>

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

Dog3 wrote:
> (Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
> :
>
>
>>On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 01:01:18 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
(Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
:
>>>
>>>
>>>>You are. When you ask "Who are you/we to dictate someone else's
>>>>posting habits?" When you imply that people who don't like OT
>>>>political posts should "wander" off to a moderated group.
>>>
>>>That is absolutely NOT what I said and I would appreciate it if you
>>>would discontinue attributing your misinterpretations to me.
>>>
>>
>>That is certainly what you wrote; I checked before I quoted you. It's
>>right there in electrons and photons for all to see.
>
>
> The post is a misinterpretation on your part and I'll ask you one more time
> to stop attributing your *impressions* of what was said, as something I
> said or implied.
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>>Sue(tm)
>>Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!
>>


I just looked it up. Sue is quoting from 2 different messages of yours
in this thread. That's why you don't remember it -- you didn't say all
of that *at the same time*. But her quotes are accurate. Notice that
she quotes a little, then talks a little, and quotes a little more. ANd
nothing is really out of context.

Best regards,
Bob

Dog3 wrote:
> (Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
> :
>
>
>>On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 01:01:18 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
(Curly Sue) got ****ed off and typed
:
>>>
>>>
>>>>You are. When you ask "Who are you/we to dictate someone else's
>>>>posting habits?" When you imply that people who don't like OT
>>>>political posts should "wander" off to a moderated group.
>>>
>>>That is absolutely NOT what I said and I would appreciate it if you
>>>would discontinue attributing your misinterpretations to me.
>>>
>>
>>That is certainly what you wrote; I checked before I quoted you. It's
>>right there in electrons and photons for all to see.
>
>
> The post is a misinterpretation on your part and I'll ask you one more time
> to stop attributing your *impressions* of what was said, as something I
> said or implied.
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>>Sue(tm)
>>Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!
>>


I just looked it up. Sue is quoting from 2 different messages of yours
in this thread. That's why you don't remember it -- you didn't say all
of that *at the same time*. But her quotes are accurate. Notice that
she quotes a little, then talks a little, and quotes a little more. ANd
nothing is really out of context.

Best regards,
Bob

On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 01:44:56 -0000, Dog3 <dognospam@adjfkdla;not>
wrote:

>Michael Odom > got ****ed off and typed
:
>
[snippers]
> I have my dinner recipe for tonight below.
>Let me know what you think and please offer any suggestions.
>
>> While Barb is a mighty
>> presence hereabouts, she in no way represents an authority with the
>> power to censor another participant in the discussion. At issue is
>> the propriety of the forum into which the (cough) political screed was
>> injected.
>
>Exactly my point. Nothing can be done about it. Perhaps I did not make
>myself clear. Some people *try* to censor others posting habits. Better?
>
Well griping can vent some spleen, at least. Works for me often.

>OBFood: Tonight's dinner
>
>I found some really decent avocados today and I'm making an Avocado Salsa
>and Avocado Quesadillas tonight. The salsa is done and I'm snacking on it
>now.

What's in your salsa besides avocado? I find sweet, ever so slightly
acidic fruit like cantaloupe, or better, mango works well with avocado
in salsas. Maybe a little finely minced red onion and jalapeno with
lime juice, salt, pepper, olive oil and cilantro, too. Right now I'm
contemplating the Parker County peaches in the kitchen. Hmmm.

>Avocado Quesadillas
>
>2 avocados, pitted, peeled and I chopped them to about a medium chop
>1 cup Mexican cheese, shredded, cubed, crumbled... whatever you like.
> I'm using Panela tonight. I've never used it before and thought I'd
> give it a try.

There ya go! Experimentation is essential. I first had Oaxacan cheese
because of an impulse. Yum. Never had panela. IIRC, DaveR (who
might once have met a bimbo) told me here that Oaxacan cheese is usual
for quesadillas where his wife comes from in Mexico.
>
>1 can sliced ripe olives

Not my favorites. Maybe something with a little more assertive
flavor?

>2 tablespoons fine chopped red onion
>2 chopped jalapenos from my garden

Nice! I have no garden to speak of this summer.

>1 package of flour tortillas (I'm using plain but flavored would work
> too)
> Shredded lettuce
>1 small diced tomato
>2 chopped scallions
>
> Refried beans (make your own or use store bought)with or with jalapeno
> etc.
>
>If you're using the Avocado Salsa as an appetizer you can use some store
>bought for the salad (garnish).
>
> Sour cream

[rest of the recipe snipped reluctantly, but this post is getting
long]

Looks very good to me. Nice presentation idea, by the way. If you
can smoke the jalapenos, even a little, the flavor becomes richer.
You don't have to make chipotles out of them, just half an hour or so
in the smoker. Of course, firing up a pit for a couple of peppers is
silly.

Now what are we to make of the OP's suggestion for using capers in
puttanesca sauce? I mean Ann Coulter and puttanesca and...



modom

"Dallas is a rich man with a death wish in his eyes."
-- Jimmie Dale Gilmore

On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 21:18:54 -0500, Melba's Jammin'
> wrote:


>> > BTW, you gotta use the brownies *and* the giant wooden spoon if you're
>> > gonna take over the world. (Note to self: I probably shouldn't have
>> > told her that; now she's dangerous...)

>> Better the big spoon than the big knife
>
>I don't use the spoon very often - sometimes the guys like it a little
>too much.

*Snort-snurk-snark-wheeze* Okay, you got me back for my kill the
******* with doughnuts plot back whenever. I gotta clean the screen
now.
>
>OB Food: Supper tonight was a fake chicken cacciatore kind of thang
>over angel hair. Not enough sauce. Pretty tasty, though.

D made a really tasty couple of salads for dinner tonight. One with
leftover baked chicken and toasted almonds and I know not what was my
favorite. She preferred her roasted baby eggplant and roasted red
bell pepper salad, I believe. There were slices of Pecos cantaloupe,
too. Love those Pecos melons.



modom

"Dallas is a rich man with a death wish in his eyes."
-- Jimmie Dale Gilmore