General Cooking (rec.food.cooking) For general food and cooking discussion. Foods of all kinds, food procurement, cooking methods and techniques, eating, etc.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
Banned
 
Posts: 5,466
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

There are some of us who access this group via Google Groups.

I was not one of those who got in on the ground floor of Usenet or
other newsgroup feeds.

I've never subscribed to any of them.

It's fun to watch the Usenet and other newsgroup people snipe at each
other about how you are supposed to post, language, etc.

I'm sure I've made some netiquite errors myself by posting here
through Google, but
I'm relaxed enough about it till I don't really care.

All I want to do here is share with fellow foodies like ya'll.



  #2 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,122
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

ImStillMags wrote:
> There are some of us who access this group via Google Groups.
>
> I was not one of those who got in on the ground floor of Usenet or
> other newsgroup feeds.
>
> I've never subscribed to any of them.
>
> It's fun to watch the Usenet and other newsgroup people snipe at
> each
> other about how you are supposed to post, language, etc.
>
> I'm sure I've made some netiquite errors myself by posting here
> through Google, but
> I'm relaxed enough about it till I don't really care.
>
> All I want to do here is share with fellow foodies like ya'll.


Good for you!

  #3 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,723
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On 2011-03-13, ImStillMags > wrote:
> There are some of us who access this group via Google Groups.


Google groups is just a server. You need not use it or you can. The
reason many, including me, blanket killfile (KF) GG is because it's a
major source of spam. I have my score file set up to exclude many GG
users from my blanket ban. Obviously, you are one of them.

> It's fun to watch the Usenet and other newsgroup people snipe at each
> other about how you are supposed to post, language, etc.


Usenet is like church bingo. If a person comes in wearing their
underwear and a bathrob, smelling like they haven't bathed in 2 mos,
no doubt they'll be allowed to play, but they're not really welcome,
are they. If someone is rude or disruptive, you can get up and leave
or simply move across the room to another spot.

Likewise, usenet. No one can stop a person from top posting, not
trimming their posts, or making sure their client properly attributes
previous quotes, but it's not following commonly accepted usenet
guidelines and is not welcome behaviour. Again, you can leave or just
ignore the person. If you have a really good newsgroup client and
know how to use it, you can set it so you never even see posts from
ppl you consider ill mannered and unwelcome.

I've got a whole list of ppl I will not bother with. Never see 'em.
I know for a fact I'm in a few KFs, as well. You can or can not do the
same thing. It's up to you. If nothing else, there's a lot of
freedom in usenet.


> All I want to do here is share with fellow foodies like ya'll.


No one stopping you.

nb
  #4 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,175
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On Mar 12, 8:23*pm, notbob > wrote:
> On 2011-03-13, ImStillMags > wrote:
>
> > There are some of us who access this group via Google Groups.

>
> Google groups is just a server. *You need not use it or you can. *The
> reason many, including me, blanket killfile (KF) GG is because it's a
> major source of spam. *I have my score file set up to exclude many GG
> users from my blanket ban. *Obviously, you are one of them.
>
> > It's fun to watch the Usenet and other newsgroup people snipe at each
> > other about how you are supposed to post, language, etc.

>
> Usenet is like church bingo. *If a person comes in wearing their
> underwear and a bathrob, smelling like they haven't bathed in 2 mos,
> no doubt they'll be allowed to play, but they're not really welcome,
> are they. *If someone is rude or disruptive, you can get up and leave
> or simply move across the room to another spot.
>
> Likewise, usenet. *No one can stop a person from top posting, not
> trimming their posts, or making sure their client properly attributes
> previous quotes, but it's not following commonly accepted usenet
> guidelines and is not welcome behaviour. *Again, you can leave or just
> ignore the person. *If you have a really good newsgroup client and
> know how to use it, you can set it so you never even see posts from
> ppl you consider ill mannered and unwelcome.
>
> I've got a whole list of ppl I will not bother with. *Never see 'em.
> I know for a fact I'm in a few KFs, as well. *You can or can not do the
> same thing. *It's up to you. *If nothing else, there's a lot of
> freedom in usenet. *
>
> > All I want to do here is share with fellow foodies like ya'll.

>
> No one stopping you. *
>
> nb


==
So NB blanket kills all GG posters...he must miss a good bit of the
action.
==
  #5 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 46,524
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

ImStillMags wrote:
> There are some of us who access this group via Google Groups.
>
> I was not one of those who got in on the ground floor of Usenet or
> other newsgroup feeds.
>
> I've never subscribed to any of them.
>
> It's fun to watch the Usenet and other newsgroup people snipe at each
> other about how you are supposed to post, language, etc.
>
> I'm sure I've made some netiquite errors myself by posting here
> through Google, but
> I'm relaxed enough about it till I don't really care.
>
> All I want to do here is share with fellow foodies like ya'll.


I think a lot of those rules that once were are no longer needed. Back when
some people had to pay for the Internet per minute, it made sense not to top
post and to snip. It still makes sense from a readability standpoint but
that's about it.




  #6 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,396
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On Mar 12, 7:23*pm, notbob > wrote:
> On 2011-03-13, ImStillMags > wrote:
>
> > There are some of us who access this group via Google Groups.

>
> Google groups is just a server. *You need not use it or you can. *The
> reason many, including me, blanket killfile (KF) GG is because it's a
> major source of spam. *I have my score file set up to exclude many GG
> users from my blanket ban. *Obviously, you are one of them.


As ISPs drop Usenet, it becomes more and more obsolescent.
Googlegroups helps keep Usenet alive. Is it an avenue for spam? Of the
60 most recently active threads in rfc, only four are spams. There are
far more OT threads than spam right now.

>
> > It's fun to watch the Usenet and other newsgroup people snipe at each
> > other about how you are supposed to post, language, etc.

>
> Usenet is like church bingo. *If a person comes in wearing their
> underwear and a bathrob, smelling like they haven't bathed in 2 mos,
> no doubt they'll be allowed to play, but they're not really welcome,
> are they. *If someone is rude or disruptive, you can get up and leave
> or simply move across the room to another spot.


The youngest Usenet user I know is 35. Basically it's a boomer toy,
and as the boomers die off so will Usenet. As a result, a lot of
posters are quick to put on the crankypants.

>
> Likewise, usenet. *No one can stop a person from top posting, not
> trimming their posts, or making sure their client properly attributes
> previous quotes, but it's not following commonly accepted usenet
> guidelines and is not welcome behaviour. *Again, you can leave or just
> ignore the person. *If you have a really good newsgroup client and
> know how to use it, you can set it so you never even see posts from
> ppl you consider ill mannered and unwelcome.
>


Having a good newsgroup client is like having the latest version of
WordPerfect.. It's much easier just to open another browser tab. As
far as attributions go, Outlook does the worst job. Trimming is hard
with verbose posters -- you would practically have to rewrite their
posts.
  #7 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,927
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

"Julie Bove" > wrote:
-snip-
>
>I think a lot of those rules that once were are no longer needed. Back when
>some people had to pay for the Internet per minute, it made sense not to top
>post and to snip. It still makes sense from a readability standpoint but
>that's about it.
>


Isn't 'readability' the whole point? Why would someone post, if not
to have their post read? And why would they *not* want to have the
most number of people understand what they said?

[rhetorical questions, BTW- just my feelings on the whole deal]

Jim
  #8 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,244
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On 3/13/2011 12:34 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
> ImStillMags wrote:
>> There are some of us who access this group via Google Groups.
>>
>> I was not one of those who got in on the ground floor of Usenet or
>> other newsgroup feeds.
>>
>> I've never subscribed to any of them.
>>
>> It's fun to watch the Usenet and other newsgroup people snipe at each
>> other about how you are supposed to post, language, etc.
>>
>> I'm sure I've made some netiquite errors myself by posting here
>> through Google, but
>> I'm relaxed enough about it till I don't really care.
>>
>> All I want to do here is share with fellow foodies like ya'll.

>
> I think a lot of those rules that once were are no longer needed. Back when
> some people had to pay for the Internet per minute, it made sense not to top
> post and to snip. It still makes sense from a readability standpoint but
> that's about it.
>
>

Either can work. But what really screws things up is say everyone in a
particular group bottom posts and them someone shows up who announces
that top posting is the only way. That is like deciding that even though
everyone drives on the right that you think driving on the left is
better and everyone should change.


  #9 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On Sat, 12 Mar 2011 23:31:01 -0800 (PST), spamtrap1888
> wrote:

> As ISPs drop Usenet, it becomes more and more obsolescent.
> Googlegroups helps keep Usenet alive. Is it an avenue for spam? Of the
> 60 most recently active threads in rfc, only four are spams. There are
> far more OT threads than spam right now.


<sniffle> Even the spammers are forgetting about usenet.

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
  #10 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 848
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On 3/12/2011 2:59 PM, ImStillMags wrote:
> There are some of us who access this group via Google Groups.
>
> I was not one of those who got in on the ground floor of Usenet or
> other newsgroup feeds.
>
> I've never subscribed to any of them.
>
> It's fun to watch the Usenet and other newsgroup people snipe at each
> other about how you are supposed to post, language, etc.
>
> I'm sure I've made some netiquite errors myself by posting here
> through Google, but
> I'm relaxed enough about it till I don't really care.
>
> All I want to do here is share with fellow foodies like ya'll.
>
>
>


No need to make apologies for using Google Groups - it's pretty much the
future of Usenet. I have a news server but my guess is that I'll never
use up the rest of my bulk account because of it's unreliable service -
my guess is that it's gonna fold soon.

Forget about netiquette and all those rules that people came up with in
the age of line printers - this is 2011, not the 1980s. As it goes, the
future is wide open and Google Groups is pretty much Usenet's only
chance to survive into the future.


  #11 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,415
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>
> Here's my reason for using GG: I can click on stuff and read
> newsgroups.
> I don't have to set up anything, download anything, install anything.
> It's just there. If I had to do all that other stuff, I wouldn't be
> here. It just wouldn't be worth the effort.


I posted to UseNet 1983 until about 2000 with a newsreader.

For a long time I used google because I travelled for work and I never
knew what ports were blocked on the network of the week. Then I stopped
travelling and eventually the noise level drove me to install a
newsreader and switch to an NSP with better spam filtering. I'm back to
having a large kill file.

If I were to find an NSP with good spam filtering and a web interface to
it's groups that supported filtering I'd use it.
  #12 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 11:47:38 -0700 (PDT), dsi1
> wrote:

> I'm posting this through GG by cutting and pasting because my dopey
> news server is not allowing me to post at this time. Gosh, it's not
> like I even post a lot!


Why don't you change servers? You're not poor.

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
  #13 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 18:51:50 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger
> wrote:

> If I were to find an NSP with good spam filtering and a web interface to
> it's groups that supported filtering I'd use it.


Good luck with that. The last ISP I used that supplied it's own
usenet news reader was Pipeline.

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
  #14 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On 14 Mar 2011 17:40:06 GMT, notbob > wrote:

> When Comcast still provided access, it was farmed out to
> Giganews and Comcast wouldn't even acknowledge it.


That was just before Comcast gave usenet the boot. Before that, they
had their own servers.

> If there were
> problems, and there were, Comcast told you to call Giganews. Giganews
> pointed you right back to Comcast. If you finally nailed an aware
> Comcast support person, they'd tell you they were under no obligation
> because the service was gratis. In short, they disowned it even
> before they dumped it.


Yep. It was an exercise in frustration.



--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
  #16 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 10:21:33 -0700 (PDT), Kalmia
> wrote:

> Personally, I like arduous snipping and bottom post method.


Too much work for me, if you want to keep any context at all. Since
we're not paying by the minute/hour anymore and most of us are on high
speed of some sort, top posting is fine. If they're not going to trim
anyway, then keep everything I've read out of my sight. I shouldn't
have to clean up after idiots that don't know how to trim.

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
  #17 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,959
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

sf > wrote in news:6lqsn69occoavrhjgc6or8e0d9rh65of79@
4ax.com:

> On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 10:21:33 -0700 (PDT), Kalmia
> > wrote:
>
>> Personally, I like arduous snipping and bottom post method.

>
> Too much work for me, if you want to keep any context at all.


Precisely the opposite. Trimming ensures that context is appropriate. If
you post a one line "me too" in response to a 150 line messsage which
contains ten inputs, how are we supposed to guess where that "me too"
applies?

> I shouldn't
> have to clean up after idiots that don't know how to trim.


So, given what you are saying, it applies that we should not have to clean
up after you either (and you may also, by the way, be characterizing
yourself as an idiot) simply because you find trimming too much trouble.

:-)

I'd say you walked into that one on your own.

--

"A public union employee, a tea party activist, and a CEO are sitting at a
table with a plate of a dozen cookies in the middle of it. The CEO takes 11
of the cookies, turns to the tea partier and says, 'Watch out for that
union guy. He wants a piece of your cookie.'"
  #18 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 12:21:04 -0700 (PDT), spamtrap1888
> wrote:

> Maybe, like me, she''s too busy testing websites for lynx compatibility.


Point taken, but what are you going to use after they are all lynx
compatible?

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
  #19 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 12:24:52 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> wrote:

> I just can't bring myself to care about it.


At least you don't complain about all the spammers and people you
don't like but can't filter.

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
  #20 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,415
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

sf wrote:
> Doug Freyburger > wrote:
>
>> If I were to find an NSP with good spam filtering and a web interface to
>> it's groups that supported filtering I'd use it.

>
> Good luck with that. The last ISP I used that supplied it's own
> usenet news reader was Pipeline.


But just a web interface that knows how to store a killfile?
Recgroups.com has been doing that for ages so the NSP does not even have
to write it from scratch just ask for a copy of the software.

But you're definitely right as it still has not happened. I am
frustrated because it should be easy but I'm not out there doing it
myself ...


  #21 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,986
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On 3/12/2011 6:59 PM, ImStillMags wrote:
> There are some of us who access this group via Google Groups.
>
> I was not one of those who got in on the ground floor of Usenet or
> other newsgroup feeds.
>
> I've never subscribed to any of them.
>
> It's fun to watch the Usenet and other newsgroup people snipe at each
> other about how you are supposed to post, language, etc.
>
> I'm sure I've made some netiquite errors myself by posting here
> through Google, but
> I'm relaxed enough about it till I don't really care.
>
> All I want to do here is share with fellow foodies like ya'll.


You talk about food, you post interesting links, recipes and photos and
you don't flame anyone. What's not to like?

Becca
  #22 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,387
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On Mar 12, 5:59*pm, ImStillMags > wrote:
> There are some of us who access this group via Google Groups.
>
> I was not one of those who got in on the ground floor of Usenet or
> other newsgroup feeds.
>
> I've never subscribed to any of them.
>
> It's fun to watch the Usenet and other newsgroup people snipe at each
> other about how you are supposed to post, language, etc.
>
> I'm sure I've made some netiquite errors myself by posting here
> through Google, but
> I'm relaxed enough about it till I don't really care.
>
> All I want to do here is share with fellow foodies like ya'll.


I'm using it too, and for the same reasons. Some people sure get their
panties in a wad about it! I'm a cook, not a computer genius...
  #23 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,778
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On 3/15/2011 4:06 AM, dsi1 wrote:

>>> I'm posting this through GG by cutting and pasting because my dopey
>>> news server is not allowing me to post at this time. Gosh, it's not
>>> like I even post a lot!

>>
>> You might want to review your server settings and possible alternative
>> servers and ports they may offer. Most news hosts have a website where
>> you
>> can find this information. What server is it?

>
> usenet-news.net
>

I've been having the same problem with them lately. It might be time to
change news servers.


>>
>> MartyB


  #24 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,716
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On 3/15/2011 1:26 PM, Cheryl wrote:
> On 3/15/2011 4:06 AM, dsi1 wrote:
>
>>>> I'm posting this through GG by cutting and pasting because my dopey
>>>> news server is not allowing me to post at this time. Gosh, it's not
>>>> like I even post a lot!
>>>
>>> You might want to review your server settings and possible alternative
>>> servers and ports they may offer. Most news hosts have a website where
>>> you
>>> can find this information. What server is it?

>>
>> usenet-news.net
>>

> I've been having the same problem with them lately. It might be time to
> change news servers.


Yes, something's fishy in Denmark. I'm trying out eternal-september.org
as we type. :-)

>
>
>>>
>>> MartyB

>


  #25 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 13:40:57 -1000, dsi1
> wrote:

> Yes, something's fishy in Denmark. I'm trying out eternal-september.org
> as we type. :-)


I want binaries so I can read and post to abf.... and I'm satisfied
with my $3 a month news provider.

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.


  #26 (permalink)   Report Post  
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 31
Default

If a person comes in wearing their
underwear and a bathrob, smelling like they haven't bathed in 2 mos,
no doubt they'll be allowed to play, but they're not really welcome,
are they. If someone is rude or disruptive,You can or can not do the
same thing. It's up to you. If nothing else, there's a lot of
freedom in usenet. it made sense not to top
post and to snip. It still makes sense from a readability standpoint but
that's about it.
__________________
car MP3 Player

MP3 Player
  #27 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,959
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

afaqanjum28 > wrote in
:

> it made sense not to top
> post and to snip. It still makes sense from a readability standpoint
> but that's about it.


There's also the issue of politeness and concision. It's not related to
bandwidth anymore but it certainly has something to do with the time each
of us has to devote to discussion, and the opportunity cost of that time.

--

"A public union employee, a tea party activist, and a CEO are sitting at a
table with a plate of a dozen cookies in the middle of it. The CEO takes 11
of the cookies, turns to the tea partier and says, 'Watch out for that
union guy. He wants a piece of your cookie.'"
  #28 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,778
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On 3/16/2011 1:41 PM, Michel Boucher wrote:
> afaqanjum28<afaqanjum28.7c68629.475646@foodbanter. com> wrote in
> :
>
>> it made sense not to top
>> post and to snip. It still makes sense from a readability standpoint
>> but that's about it.

>
> There's also the issue of politeness and concision. It's not related to
> bandwidth anymore but it certainly has something to do with the time each
> of us has to devote to discussion, and the opportunity cost of that time.
>


This poster just repeats other posts verbatim. I suspect a bot.

  #29 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 20:22:46 -0400, Cheryl >
wrote:

> On 3/16/2011 1:41 PM, Michel Boucher wrote:
> > afaqanjum28<afaqanjum28.7c68629.475646@foodbanter. com> wrote in
> > :
> >
> >> it made sense not to top
> >> post and to snip. It still makes sense from a readability standpoint
> >> but that's about it.

> >
> > There's also the issue of politeness and concision. It's not related to
> > bandwidth anymore but it certainly has something to do with the time each
> > of us has to devote to discussion, and the opportunity cost of that time.
> >

>
> This poster just repeats other posts verbatim. I suspect a bot.


I suspect an idiot.

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
  #30 (permalink)   Report Post  
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 31
Default

I've never subscribed to any of them.

It's fun to watch the Usenet and other newsgroup people snipe at each
other about how you are supposed to post, language, etc.
I have my score file set up to exclude many GG
users from my blanket ban. Obviously, you are one of them.

It's fun to watch the Usenet and other newsgroup people snipe at each
other about how you are supposed to post, language, etc.
__________________
car MP3 Player

MP3 Player


  #31 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,380
Default Usenet vs. Google Groups

On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 12:56:08 -1000, dsi1 wrote:

>
> Well, my usenet-new.net block account seems to be working just spiffy at
> the moment. This happened right when I added the eternal-september.org
> server. Must be good luck or something. :-)


Must be. <laugh>
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Google Groups does not currently support posting to the following usenet groups: 'rec.food.cooking!'" John Kuthe[_2_] General Cooking 27 15-12-2011 06:12 PM
Usenet vs. Google Groups sf[_9_] General Cooking 24 19-03-2011 03:12 AM
USENET ABUSE -- GOOGLE GROUPS -- BELLSOUTH Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD General Cooking 1 20-03-2006 08:39 PM
USENET ABUSE -- GOOGLE GROUPS -- BELLSOUTH Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD General Cooking 0 20-03-2006 06:38 AM
(",) Good News for Google Groups, Usenet and Other Users [email protected] Winemaking 0 29-01-2005 03:07 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:15 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"