"Ophelia" > ha scritto nel messaggio
>
> I must say, you do have a way with words...

Thank you, O.

Bob Terwilliger wrote:
> Marty wrote:
>
>> At this point in the thread I have to ask... Why is it not alright
>> if they don't stick around?
>>
>> Who decided there was something wrong with someone who accesses a
>> newsgroup only once, or rarely, to ask a question pertinent to that
>> group's charter topic? Why is it NOT alright if they get their
>> answer and move on?
>
> Common courtesy dictates at least a "Thank you" for answers to
> whatever question was posed. Don't you agree?

Besides, they *don't* ask questions, they make a big show of
saying hello, I'm new here, this is a little bit about myself, blah
blah blah. So people say HI, welcome, blah blah and they
disappear.

nancy

Marty wrote:
>
> At this point in the thread I have to ask... Why is it not alright
> if they don't stick around?
>
> Who decided there was something wrong with someone who accesses a
> newsgroup only once, or rarely, to ask a question pertinent to that
> group's charter topic? Why is it NOT alright if they get their
> answer and move on?

Because Newsgroups are about reciprocity, give and take. Those who
stop in to ask their question but contribute nothing, not even an
acknowlegement are simply users... like you, Moishe "no value
whatsoever" Schmendric.

Terry Pulliam Burd wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:59:22 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>
>> I usually do too, now. I forget whether I welcomed ImStillMags in
>> a timely fashion. Sometimes, you can tell from the intro that
>> someone is really a foodie.
>
> I don't generally respond to the Hi-I'm-New-Here posts anymore unless
> there's something substantial in the initiating post, such as a
> recipe, a cooking tip or the like. It just seems that the overwhelming
> number of newbies who post such things are never heard from again.
> Whether that's from snarky responses to the OP or not, empirical
> evidence seems to point to an initial newbie post being the only
> thread from which the newbie's ever heard. Just sayin'
>
> Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd
>
Yes, that's about the way I do it too.

--
Jean B.

Ophelia wrote:
> "Giusi" > wrote:
>
>> When people who have haunted this group for decades consistently act like
>> insane, shit-gathering warthogs in heat with Tourette's syndrome, how is
>> it logical to expect please and thank you from those who merely peek in?
>
> I must say, you do have a way with words...

I loved it and I want the recipe. ;^)

Barb wrote:

>> Recipe By???? : Sitara
<snip>

> ROTFLMAO!!! Well, so much for not needing any reformatting! LOL!
> On my screen, when I was posting, it looked just fine.

Looked fine to me, too. I didn't see anything weird until this message.

FWIW, whenever I'm going to post something which was copied from a rich text
or otherwise formatted source, I paste it into Notepad, then copy and paste
from there. That removes all but the plain text.

Bob

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 00:34:37 -0700 (PDT), "
> wrote:

> I never introduce myself as a special post.
<snip>
> it seems to be an attention getting thing which
> doesn't appeal to me that much.
<snip>
>
> I also dislike the posts where people announce they are leaving the
> group and why.

Ditto.

--

Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 09:54:35 -0700, Bob Terwilliger wrote:

> Barb wrote:
>
>>> Recipe By???? : Sitara
> <snip>
>
>> ROTFLMAO!!! Well, so much for not needing any reformatting! LOL!
>> On my screen, when I was posting, it looked just fine.
>
> Looked fine to me, too. I didn't see anything weird until this message.
>
> FWIW, whenever I'm going to post something which was copied from a rich text
> or otherwise formatted source, I paste it into Notepad, then copy and paste
> from there. That removes all but the plain text.
>
> Bob

i often use notepad to remove hypertext translations when posting to a
text-only venue (most often yahoo groups).

your pal,
blake

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 09:44:22 -0400, brooklyn1 wrote:

> Marty wrote:
>>
>> At this point in the thread I have to ask... Why is it not alright
>> if they don't stick around?
>>
>> Who decided there was something wrong with someone who accesses a
>> newsgroup only once, or rarely, to ask a question pertinent to that
>> group's charter topic? Why is it NOT alright if they get their
>> answer and move on?
>
> Because Newsgroups are about reciprocity, give and take. Those who
> stop in to ask their question but contribute nothing, not even an
> acknowlegement are simply users... like you, Moishe "no value
> whatsoever" Schmendric.

....unlike your value-laden post above.

blake

In article <yBF1o.33605$0e3.9845@hurricane>,
ChattyCathy > wrote:
>On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:18:49 -0500, Melba's Jammin' wrote:
>

[to link or not to link? that is the question.]
>>
>> Does including something like, "Star Tribune's Taste section, 7-03-1988"
>> suffice, without a link to it? IMO, it does ‹ I'd take that as an
>> acknowledgement of both the source and the fact that I didn't make the
>> recipe myself. My brownie recipe says that it's adapted from a Cook's
>> Illustrated recipe from March of 19something-or-other. Heck, most of
>> the recipes I have and use didn't come from an internets web site; more
>> likely to have come from a friend or family member and I'm deviled if
>> I'm going to try to find an "original" source for them.
>
>Yabbut (again) - as you said, you don't make a habit of 'lifting' recipes
>from websites (any websites) to post them here every other day - or put
>them up on some 'commercial' website you run yourself (and keep posting
>links to the site here). And from what I've seen you post with regards to
>recipe sources/attributions, I honestly don't think the Copyright Police
>are going to go after you any time soon ;-)

At very least they would get themselves some Very Bad Publicity on the
interwebz for doing so. (Reminds me, I should check with a friend who
is an Actual Trademark/Copyright Lawyer.)

Intellectual property has been berry berry good to me - I worked in
biotech for 9 years and the stock option cashout paid for my kitchen
remodel) - so I credit wherever I can. And I really get annoyed when
people take stuff I've posted and repost it without noting source. I get
extra annoyed when it is part of some money-making (for them, not for me)
venture. I know rfc collectively has been burned on that more than once,
which explains why TheCabal(tm)'s backs can get up mighty fast about it.

My joke is that I "steal" from the best but I *ALWAYS* credit my
sources. Not surprisingly, the ones I know IRL are still talking to me
.

Charlotte
--

In article >,
"Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:
> Common courtesy dictates at least a "Thank you" for answers to whatever
> question was posed. Don't you agree?
>
> Bob

<asbestos panties out> Actually, I don't. To me (and Alex knows it's
my opinion only), unless the requestor has something to say about the
reply besides "thank you," it's about the same as "me, too" or "I agree"
posts * unnecessary.
--
Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of
St. Pectina of Jella
"Always in a jam, never in a stew;
sometimes in a pickle."
Where are my pearls, Honey?

Melba's Jammin' wrote:
> In article >,
> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:
>> Common courtesy dictates at least a "Thank you" for answers to whatever
>> question was posed. Don't you agree?
>>
>> Bob
>
> <asbestos panties out> Actually, I don't. To me (and Alex knows it's
> my opinion only), unless the requestor has something to say about the
> reply besides "thank you," it's about the same as "me, too" or "I agree"
> posts * unnecessary.

Dontcha hate those twenty post strings of one line "thank you" posts in
response to every comment sent to some? I understand the manners behind
it but they could have been sent privately since they are usually
intended for one person. Just as I believe in doing when responding to
all those "Get Well" or "Happy Birthday" type notices here on RFC.
Sometimes it seems the responses are intended as a competition to show
their "caring" or "concern" to others on RFC rather than the supposed
recipient. Oy.

On Jul 21, 3:59 pm, Melba's Jammin' >
wrote:
> In article >,
> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:
>
> > Common courtesy dictates at least a "Thank you" for answers to whatever
> > question was posed. Don't you agree?
>
> <asbestos panties out> Actually, I don't. To me (and Alex knows it's
> my opinion only), unless the requestor has something to say about the
> reply besides "thank you," it's about the same as "me, too" or "I agree"
> posts * unnecessary.
> --
FWIW I agree with Barb. Cluttering up the airways (so to speak) with
content-free verbiage is not common courtesy. There is at least one
poster here who cannot refrain from replying to every post when she is
the OP. I skip those threads. -aem

Marty wrote:

> That works, but it's unnecessary effort with notepad I see you're using
> Outlook Express, which can be configured for mail and news separately,
> with a setting in tools>options>send tab where you specify the sending
> format for each.
>
> If you set OE to send news in text format, and you're pasting in content
> from a browser or rich text, as long as you aren't pasting in html code,
> OE will see it as surface text only and will not display or send any html
> code.
>
> If you are working on a post that is html or rich text and you want to
> send it as text, in your composition window, go to Format>and select Plain
> Text. It will change the post by removing all but the visible text, and
> will remove all formatting except the most basic.

That's less reliable than using Notepad; your line breaks get all weird.
When you paste into OE, the rich text gets pasted. Pasting into Notepad to
strip out the formatting and then pasting into OE, you see what you're going
to post, rather than relying on the software to remove the formatting once
you send the message.

It's just a personal choice, based on my lack of faith in OE's ability to
know what I want it to do.

Bob

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 22:18:50 +0000, Charlotte L. Blackmer wrote:

> [to link or not to link? that is the question.]
>
> And I really get annoyed when
> people take stuff I've posted and repost it without noting source. I
> get extra annoyed when it is part of some money-making (for them, not
> for me) venture. I know rfc collectively has been burned on that more
> than once, which explains why TheCabal(tm)'s backs can get up mighty
> fast about it.
>
> My joke is that I "steal" from the best but I *ALWAYS* credit my
> sources. Not surprisingly, the ones I know IRL are still talking to me
> .

I do my fair share of mooching around the 'net for recipes - and if I find
and make one that turns out 'great' (in my opinion) and I wanna share it
here, I generally just post the 'deep link' URL to it. To me that serves
three purposes: (Hopefully) I'm not violating any copyright laws by just
posting the link to it, interested parties only have to click on the link
if they are so inclined - and it also makes the post a bit shorter (which
seems important to some). JMTCW.

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

>
> What I forgot to include, though, is probably more important than my
> thoughts about the commercial nature of the site: *Posting the actual
> recipe here is far more likely to lead to discussion (also a stated purpose
> of the group) than is posting merely the link to the recipe.
>
>

True.

I can't speak for anybody else, but I rarely follow any links. I
figure some of them lead to commercial sites, so I'd rather not deal
with them. If it is here, I'll look. Otherwise, I don't bother.

So, more people will probably check it out if it is posted here rather
than a link.

On Jul 21, 3:59*pm, Melba's Jammin' >
wrote:
> In article >,
> *"Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:
>
> > Common courtesy dictates at least a "Thank you" for answers to whatever
> > question was posed. Don't you agree?
>
> > Bob
>
> <asbestos panties out> *Actually, I don't. *To me (and Alex knows it's
> my opinion only), *unless the requestor has something to say about the
> reply besides "thank you," it's about the same as "me, too" or "I agree"
> posts * unnecessary. *
>

Most of my questions hve been computer related, to an appropriate
group. I will say thank you because it lets people know that I Have
the solution. I also make sure that I state what worked because it
could be helpful to somebody later. In one case, I had the same
problem a couple years later, found my old question and answer, and
was able to use it again. When I have a question, I do search first as
I will often find that somebody else has already asked the question,
and one of the answers may work for me.

" > wrote in
:

>
> Most of my questions hve been computer related, to an appropriate
> group. I will say thank you because it lets people know that I Have
> the solution. I also make sure that I state what worked because it
> could be helpful to somebody later. In one case, I had the same
> problem a couple years later, found my old question and answer, and
> was able to use it again. When I have a question, I do search first as
> I will often find that somebody else has already asked the question,
> and one of the answers may work for me.
>
>


A recipe is so easy to find...... go to the Google Search bar, type in


recipe (and then either the name of the recipe, or a list of the ingredients
they have on hand)


and it'll bring up a bazillion choices.


--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

I didn't fight my way to the top of the food chain to be a vegetarian.

In article
>,
aem > wrote:

> On Jul 21, 3:59 pm, Melba's Jammin' >
> wrote:
> > In article >,
> > "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:
> >
> > > Common courtesy dictates at least a "Thank you" for answers to whatever
> > > question was posed. Don't you agree?
> >
> > <asbestos panties out> Actually, I don't. To me (and Alex knows it's
> > my opinion only), unless the requestor has something to say about the
> > reply besides "thank you," it's about the same as "me, too" or "I agree"
> > posts * unnecessary.
> > --
> FWIW I agree with Barb. Cluttering up the airways (so to speak) with
> content-free verbiage is not common courtesy. There is at least one
> poster here who cannot refrain from replying to every post when she is
> the OP. I skip those threads. -aem

Oh, crap! I hope it's not me.
--
Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of
St. Pectina of Jella
"Always in a jam, never in a stew;
sometimes in a pickle."
Where are my pearls, Honey?

On Jul 22, 7:23 am, Melba's Jammin' >
wrote:
> In article
> >,
>
>
>
> aem > wrote:
> > On Jul 21, 3:59 pm, Melba's Jammin' >
> > wrote:
> > > In article >,
> > > "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:
>
> > > > Common courtesy dictates at least a "Thank you" for answers to whatever
> > > > question was posed. Don't you agree?
>
> > > <asbestos panties out> Actually, I don't. To me (and Alex knows it's
> > > my opinion only), unless the requestor has something to say about the
> > > reply besides "thank you," it's about the same as "me, too" or "I agree"
> > > posts * unnecessary.
> > > --
> > FWIW I agree with Barb. Cluttering up the airways (so to speak) with
> > content-free verbiage is not common courtesy. There is at least one
> > poster here who cannot refrain from replying to every post when she is
> > the OP. I skip those threads. -aem
>
> Oh, crap! I hope it's not me.
>
You know it's not you. My objection is to content-free posts. The
content may be a joke, OT, a personal attack, or even something food
or cooking related. I just don't like wasting my time on posters who
don't say anything. -aem

On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 00:14:16 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

>>
>> What I forgot to include, though, is probably more important than my
>> thoughts about the commercial nature of the site: *Posting the actual
>> recipe here is far more likely to lead to discussion (also a stated purpose
>> of the group) than is posting merely the link to the recipe.
>>
>>
>
> True.
>
> I can't speak for anybody else, but I rarely follow any links. I
> figure some of them lead to commercial sites, so I'd rather not deal
> with them. If it is here, I'll look. Otherwise, I don't bother.
>
> So, more people will probably check it out if it is posted here rather
> than a link.

then you're missing the boat in maybe 80% of the cases. reputable sites
are pretty easy to tell from the URLs.

your pal,
blake

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 22:18:50 +0000 (UTC), Charlotte L. Blackmer wrote:

> In article <yBF1o.33605$0e3.9845@hurricane>,
> ChattyCathy > wrote:
>>On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 11:18:49 -0500, Melba's Jammin' wrote:
>>
>
> [to link or not to link? that is the question.]
>>>
>>> Does including something like, "Star Tribune's Taste section, 7-03-1988"
>>> suffice, without a link to it? IMO, it does ‹ I'd take that as an
>>> acknowledgement of both the source and the fact that I didn't make the
>>> recipe myself. My brownie recipe says that it's adapted from a Cook's
>>> Illustrated recipe from March of 19something-or-other. Heck, most of
>>> the recipes I have and use didn't come from an internets web site; more
>>> likely to have come from a friend or family member and I'm deviled if
>>> I'm going to try to find an "original" source for them.
>>
>>Yabbut (again) - as you said, you don't make a habit of 'lifting' recipes
>>from websites (any websites) to post them here every other day - or put
>>them up on some 'commercial' website you run yourself (and keep posting
>>links to the site here). And from what I've seen you post with regards to
>>recipe sources/attributions, I honestly don't think the Copyright Police
>>are going to go after you any time soon ;-)
>
> At very least they would get themselves some Very Bad Publicity on the
> interwebz for doing so. (Reminds me, I should check with a friend who
> is an Actual Trademark/Copyright Lawyer.)
>
> Intellectual property has been berry berry good to me - I worked in
> biotech for 9 years and the stock option cashout paid for my kitchen
> remodel) - so I credit wherever I can. And I really get annoyed when
> people take stuff I've posted and repost it without noting source. I get
> extra annoyed when it is part of some money-making (for them, not for me)
> venture. I know rfc collectively has been burned on that more than once,
> which explains why TheCabal(tm)'s backs can get up mighty fast about it.
>
> My joke is that I "steal" from the best but I *ALWAYS* credit my
> sources. Not surprisingly, the ones I know IRL are still talking to me
> .
>
> Charlotte

it seems to me to be a matter of basic honesty.

your pal,
blake

In article <WoR1o.33610$0e3.10177@hurricane>,
ChattyCathy > wrote:
>On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 22:18:50 +0000, Charlotte L. Blackmer wrote:
>
>> [to link or not to link? that is the question.]
>>
>> And I really get annoyed when
>> people take stuff I've posted and repost it without noting source. I
>> get extra annoyed when it is part of some money-making (for them, not
>> for me) venture. I know rfc collectively has been burned on that more
>> than once, which explains why TheCabal(tm)'s backs can get up mighty
>> fast about it.
>>
>> My joke is that I "steal" from the best but I *ALWAYS* credit my
>> sources. Not surprisingly, the ones I know IRL are still talking to me
>> .
>
>I do my fair share of mooching around the 'net for recipes - and if I find
>and make one that turns out 'great' (in my opinion) and I wanna share it
>here, I generally just post the 'deep link' URL to it. To me that serves
>three purposes: (Hopefully) I'm not violating any copyright laws by just
>posting the link to it, interested parties only have to click on the link
>if they are so inclined - and it also makes the post a bit shorter (which
>seems important to some). JMTCW.

I will link if one is available, but I almost never follow them, because I
am an OLD SKOOL BOFH and still read netnews with a *nix shell account and
totally-text-based trn. To follow linkies I have to find the same article
on Google Groups.

Personally I don't care if someone does a longish recipe post. Given the
proliferation of OT bullshit, an actual recipe post (esp if properly
credited) is a thing of beauty and a joy forever. I do, however,
appreciate it if responders EDIT their responses appropriately and don't
top-post. Once things are about three levels deep, it is time to start
some judicious snipping.

Charlotte

--

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 17:59:38 -0500, Melba's Jammin' wrote:

> In article >,
> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:
>> Common courtesy dictates at least a "Thank you" for answers to whatever
>> question was posed. Don't you agree?
>>
>> Bob
>
> <asbestos panties out> Actually, I don't. To me (and Alex knows it's
> my opinion only), unless the requestor has something to say about the
> reply besides "thank you," it's about the same as "me, too" or "I agree"
> posts * unnecessary.

i don't think so. someone asked a question, and someone answered it.
wouldn't you say 'thanks' in real life? and it lets the answerer know his
post was seen and appreciated.

a little more is involved than the 'me too' or 'i agree' posts.

your pal,
blake

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 19:44:29 -0400, Goomba wrote:

> Melba's Jammin' wrote:
>> In article >,
>> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:
>>> Common courtesy dictates at least a "Thank you" for answers to whatever
>>> question was posed. Don't you agree?
>>>
>>> Bob
>>
>> <asbestos panties out> Actually, I don't. To me (and Alex knows it's
>> my opinion only), unless the requestor has something to say about the
>> reply besides "thank you," it's about the same as "me, too" or "I agree"
>> posts * unnecessary.
>
> Dontcha hate those twenty post strings of one line "thank you" posts in
> response to every comment sent to some? I understand the manners behind
> it but they could have been sent privately since they are usually
> intended for one person. Just as I believe in doing when responding to
> all those "Get Well" or "Happy Birthday" type notices here on RFC.
> Sometimes it seems the responses are intended as a competition to show
> their "caring" or "concern" to others on RFC rather than the supposed
> recipient. Oy.

in cases like that, i would respond to the people as a group at the end of
the thread or that day's responses. i try to name the individuals in that
post if i remember to.

that being said, it's kind of hard to object to people being too polite
(especially on usenet).

your pal,
blake

On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 09:23:29 -0500, Melba's Jammin' wrote:

> In article
> >,
> aem > wrote:
>
>> On Jul 21, 3:59 pm, Melba's Jammin' >
>> wrote:
>>> In article >,
>>> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:
>>>
>>> > Common courtesy dictates at least a "Thank you" for answers to whatever
>>> > question was posed. Don't you agree?
>>>
>>> <asbestos panties out> Actually, I don't. To me (and Alex knows it's
>>> my opinion only), unless the requestor has something to say about the
>>> reply besides "thank you," it's about the same as "me, too" or "I agree"
>>> posts * unnecessary.
>>> --
>> FWIW I agree with Barb. Cluttering up the airways (so to speak) with
>> content-free verbiage is not common courtesy. There is at least one
>> poster here who cannot refrain from replying to every post when she is
>> the OP. I skip those threads. -aem
>
> Oh, crap! I hope it's not me.

but it is you!!! you have been tried *in absentia* and sentenced to death
by stoning with beets!!! get your boiled dirt chunk affairs in order,
missy!!!

your pals,
the cabal

In article
>,
aem > wrote:

> On Jul 22, 7:23 am, Melba's Jammin' >
> wrote:
> > In article
> > >,
> >
> >
> >
> > aem > wrote:
> > > On Jul 21, 3:59 pm, Melba's Jammin' >
> > > wrote:
> > > > In article >,
> > > > "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:
> >
> > > > > Common courtesy dictates at least a "Thank you" for answers to
> > > > > whatever
> > > > > question was posed. Don't you agree?
> >
> > > > <asbestos panties out> Actually, I don't. To me (and Alex knows it's
> > > > my opinion only), unless the requestor has something to say about the
> > > > reply besides "thank you," it's about the same as "me, too" or "I
> > > > agree"
> > > > posts * unnecessary.
> > > > --
> > > FWIW I agree with Barb. Cluttering up the airways (so to speak) with
> > > content-free verbiage is not common courtesy. There is at least one
> > > poster here who cannot refrain from replying to every post when she is
> > > the OP. I skip those threads. -aem
> >
> > Oh, crap! I hope it's not me.
> >
> You know it's not you.

Glad to hear it. Seriously, I did wonder. I have a recollection of
thanking folks for my birthday wishes - but also trying to include a
food-related comment or reference or something. And some days, I don't
remember what the heck day it is. And because I make noise occasionally
about the off topic crap that is entirely too prevalent here, I was
getting myself ready to be pounded. :-\

OB food: I had an amazing mixed berry lemon scone at coffee today with
a dear friend. The restaurant is Bread & Chocolate on St. Paul's Grand
Avenue. It was a good choice.

> My objection is to content-free posts. The
> content may be a joke, OT, a personal attack, or even something food
> or cooking related. I just don't like wasting my time on posters who
> don't say anything. -aem
--
Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
Holy Order of the Sacred Sisters of
St. Pectina of Jella
"Always in a jam, never in a stew;
sometimes in a pickle."
Where are my pearls, Honey?

On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 19:04:29 +0000 (UTC),
(Charlotte L. Blackmer) wrote:

>
> I will link if one is available, but I almost never follow them, because I
> am an OLD SKOOL BOFH and still read netnews with a *nix shell account and
> totally-text-based trn. To follow linkies I have to find the same article
> on Google Groups.

I don't have any idea what the above is/means, so I don't understand
why you can't bypass Google Groups and just copy the link & paste it
into your browser.

--

Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On Jul 22, 1:23*am, PL > wrote:
> " > wrote :
>
>
>
> > Most of my questions hve been computer related, to an appropriate
> > group. I will say *thank you because it lets people know that I Have
> > the solution. I also make sure that I state what worked because it
> > could be helpful to somebody later. In one case, I had the same
> > problem a couple years later, found my old question and answer, and
> > was able to use it again. When I have a question, I do search first as
> > I will often find that somebody else has already asked the question,
> > and one of the answers may work for me.
>
> A recipe is so easy to find...... go to the Google Search bar, type in
>
> recipe (and then either the name of the recipe, or a list of the ingredients
> they have on hand)
>
> and it'll bring up a bazillion choices.
>
> --
> Peter Lucas
> Brisbane
> Australia
>
> I didn't fight my way to the top of the food chain to be a vegetarian.

Usually a bazillion recipes that aren't what I want.

I would love to find a recipe for Jambalaya that is not spicy. I just
can't eat spicy food at all. I even react to some ingredients that are
not considered spicy. All I find are normal recipes.

" > wrote in
:

> On Jul 22, 1:23*am, PL > wrote:
>> " > wrote
innews:761a
> :
>>
>>
>>
>> > Most of my questions hve been computer related, to an appropriate
>> > group. I will say *thank you because it lets people know that I Have
>> > the solution. I also make sure that I state what worked because it
>> > could be helpful to somebody later. In one case, I had the same
>> > problem a couple years later, found my old question and answer, and
>> > was able to use it again. When I have a question, I do search first
as
>> > I will often find that somebody else has already asked the question,
>> > and one of the answers may work for me.
>>
>> A recipe is so easy to find...... go to the Google Search bar, type in
>>
>> recipe (and then either the name of the recipe, or a list of the
ingredie
> nts
>> they have on hand)
>>
>> and it'll bring up a bazillion choices.
>>
>> --
>> Peter Lucas
>> Brisbane
>> Australia
>>
>> I didn't fight my way to the top of the food chain to be a vegetarian.
>
> Usually a bazillion recipes that aren't what I want.
>
> I would love to find a recipe for Jambalaya that is not spicy. I just
> can't eat spicy food at all. I even react to some ingredients that are
> not considered spicy. All I find are normal recipes.
>
>



http://recipes.sparkpeople.com/recip...?recipe=340253


Google search bar: recipe non-spicy jambalaya

It came up in 0.22 seconds.


Non-Spicy Chicken and Shrimp Jambalaya
Submitted by: SMBURKHART

Non-Spicy Version of Jamalaya, for those of you who aren't into spice,
like me!



Ingredients

1.5 lbs. boneless, skinless, chicken breasts
1 tsp. salt
2 Tbsp. extra virgin olive oil
1/8 tsp. black pepper
2 large yellow onions, chopped
1 medium green bell pepper, chopped
1 cup of chopped celery
6 cloves of garlic, diced
1 can of no salt added, diced tomatoes, juice separated from
tomatoes
3 cups of fat free, low sodium chicken broth
8 oz. Jennie-O turkey ham, chopped
2 Tbsp. cilantro
1 cup green onion, chopped
3 lbs. medium sized, raw shrimp
2 cups brown rice, uncooked



Directions
Sprinkle chicken cubes with salt and pepper. Add the oil to a large pot or
Dutch oven over medium heat. Cook the chicken, stirring until brown on all
sides, about 8-10 minutes. Remove chicken to a bowl. Add ham to pot and
saute for about 5 minutes. Add to the chicken in bowl.

Add onions, green pepper, celery and garlic to pot and saute for about 5
minutes. Continually scrape the bottom of the pot to incorporate any
browned bits back into the mixture. The bits have lots of hidden flavor
inside. Add chicken and ham to pot, reduce heat to low, and cokk for 25
minutes, stirring occasionally. Add chicken broth and reserved tomato
juice to pot, cover and simmer for 45 minutes.

Mash cooked garlic against side of pot and stir into mixture. Add
tomatoes, cilantro, green onion, and shrimp. Taste to determine if you
like the seasoning or not.

Add rice. Cover the pot, bring to a boil, lower the heat, and simmer,
covered for 25-30 minutes.

Number of Servings: 12

Recipe submitted by SparkPeople user SMBURKHART.

Number of Servings: 12



--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

I didn't fight my way to the top of the food chain to be a vegetarian.

Marty wrote:

>> That's less reliable than using Notepad; your line breaks get all
>> weird.
>
> I've never had that happen using the methods I describe here and in the
> previous post.
>
> When you paste into OE, the rich text gets pasted. That's true... IF you
> have not set your preferences as I previously described to compose and
> send news messages in text only format. If you have set this correctly,
> and you open a new news message or reply to one, you will get a
> composition window in text only, and anything you paste will also be text
> only. If it doesn't look like it, go to format, switch it to rich text,
> and back again. Voila. But usually that step is not necessary.
>
> Re-read the part about setting your preferences for posting news in text
> format. All html formatting is stripped. Even if it looks like it's there,
> when you hit send, it's stripped.

Yes, I know. My preferences have always been as you recommend. I prefer a
WYSIWYG method of posting, rather than *hoping* that OE will do what I want
it to do.

And yes, the line breaks often get messed up when you just paste into OE and
send without fixing.

Bob

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 00:47:19 -0700 (PDT), "
> wrote:

> I would love to find a recipe for Jambalaya that is not spicy. I just
> can't eat spicy food at all. I even react to some ingredients that are
> not considered spicy. All I find are normal recipes.

Good heavens! What do you do to make it too spicy for yourself?
Surely you're capable of changing Andouille to Kielbasa or ham?

http://www.jambalaya-recipe.com/


--

Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On 7/23/2010 2:47 AM, wrote:
> Usually a bazillion recipes that aren't what I want.
>
> I would love to find a recipe for Jambalaya that is not spicy. I just
> can't eat spicy food at all. I even react to some ingredients that are
> not considered spicy. All I find are normal recipes.
>

Meghan, jambalaya will be fine if you leave out the cayenne. Use
chicken and sausage, avoiding andouille, which is hot.

Becca

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:06:07 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

> I'm running AVG in the background, which i think would warn me of shady
> sites.

It certainly does and it's too sensitive, IMO. How do you handle AVG
when it goes bonkers over a site that shouldn't be a problem? The
Ballroom restaurant at the Edison Hotel is a case in point.
http://www.edisonballroom.com/ I don't know how to disable AVG
anymore; it's not an easy right click option now.

--

Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On 7/23/2010 12:44 PM, Becca wrote:
> On 7/23/2010 2:47 AM, wrote:
>> Usually a bazillion recipes that aren't what I want.
>>
>> I would love to find a recipe for Jambalaya that is not spicy. I just
>> can't eat spicy food at all. I even react to some ingredients that are
>> not considered spicy. All I find are normal recipes.
>
> Meghan, jambalaya will be fine if you leave out the cayenne. Use chicken
> and sausage, avoiding andouille, which is hot.
>
> Becca

Not all andouille is hot Becca, I buy Richards at the local market and
they have both hot and mild. I like it better mild myself.

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 12:40:54 -0700, sf wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:06:07 -0400, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>> I'm running AVG in the background, which i think would warn me of shady
>> sites.
>
> It certainly does and it's too sensitive, IMO. How do you handle AVG
> when it goes bonkers over a site that shouldn't be a problem? The
> Ballroom restaurant at the Edison Hotel is a case in point.
> http://www.edisonballroom.com/ I don't know how to disable AVG
> anymore; it's not an easy right click option now.

<clicks on URL>

hmm...i've never encountered that dramatic a warning before. i don't know
how you would override it. maybe there is something nasty lurking there.

your pal,
blake

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 12:40:54 -0700, sf wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:06:07 -0400, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>> I'm running AVG in the background, which i think would warn me of shady
>> sites.
>
> It certainly does and it's too sensitive, IMO. How do you handle AVG
> when it goes bonkers over a site that shouldn't be a problem? The
> Ballroom restaurant at the Edison Hotel is a case in point.
> http://www.edisonballroom.com/

Thanks for proving the point. AVG can see that site is a problem, even
though you can't and think it's a perfectly benign URL.

-j

PS yes I had a quick look, and there is code on there that seems to point
to some iframe exploit. You might want to ask the site admins what that
first line in swobject.js is for.

On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 13:18:50 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

> well, AVG is free as well. i haven't had to tinker with it much, if at
> all.

That was the first web site AVG has ever told me has a problem. If
there was a way to suspend the program by right clicking on the icon
in systray, I would have done it - but I ended up skipping the site.
I wasn't interested enough to pursue the issue any further than
looking at settings to see if I could add it to a white list easily.
Thought I'd inquire if you had a problem with the site and what you
did about it when you mentioned being an AVG user too. <shrug>

--

Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 13:17:28 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 12:40:54 -0700, sf wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:06:07 -0400, blake murphy
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> I'm running AVG in the background, which i think would warn me of shady
> >> sites.
> >
> > It certainly does and it's too sensitive, IMO. How do you handle AVG
> > when it goes bonkers over a site that shouldn't be a problem? The
> > Ballroom restaurant at the Edison Hotel is a case in point.
> > http://www.edisonballroom.com/ I don't know how to disable AVG
> > anymore; it's not an easy right click option now.
>
> <clicks on URL>

Thanks
>
> hmm...i've never encountered that dramatic a warning before.
> i don't know how you would override it.

It was my first time too. When I looked up the problem, I read that
AVG does react that way under certain conditions, but I didn't see how
to fix it *easily*.

> maybe there is something nasty lurking there.
>

Seems unlikely. They'd lose customers that way.

Thanks

--

Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

In article >,
Christine Dabney > wrote:
>On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 22:18:50 +0000 (UTC),
>(Charlotte L. Blackmer) wrote:
>
>>My joke is that I "steal" from the best but I *ALWAYS* credit my
>>sources. Not surprisingly, the ones I know IRL are still talking to me
>>.


>I stole from you (but gave you credit) when I posted about your bread
>and tomato salad on my blog. I think I even asked you in advance!!

Original was by Michele Anna Jordan from _Kitchen Garden_ magazine. I
generally use chopped tomatoes and less dressing though. That dressing is
a reliable general viniagrette and is great to keep around, especially in
the summer (it's awesome on blanched green beans).

>I am probably going to "steal" again, as I want to make some of your
>deviled eggs, and if it becomes a blog post, I will again give you
>credit!

That recipe is pretty much the Cook's Illustrated recipe. I do wing it
when I have more than that number of eggs to prepare but I use the same
ingredients and start with the same proportions before I start adjusting.
I also find their hard-boiling method to be reliable.

Now I want to get some olives and boil eggs for salade nicoise (yeah,
Dav-eed posted one, and I've got lots of tomatoes).

Back to the subject of the OP, a lot of people have the "do my homework
for me" vibe, and don't seem to be interested in 'giving back' in some
way. The ObOldJokeThatReallyHappened "Do you have any European recipes"
is the extreme example, of course.

Charlotte

--