When we all talked about cooking and not about
each other?

Dora

Sqwertz wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Aug 2011 14:43:49 -0400, Dora wrote:
>
>> When we all talked about cooking and not about
>> each other?
>
> When was that?!? ;-)
>
> -sw

Light years ago.

Dora wrote:
>
> Sqwertz wrote:
> > On Tue, 2 Aug 2011 14:43:49 -0400, Dora wrote:
> >
> >> When we all talked about cooking and not about
> >> each other?
> >
> > When was that?!? ;-)
> >
> > -sw
>
> Light years ago.

A light year is a measure of distance, not time.

yesterday was a slow day in cooking, i got a migraine and the dh ate stuff
from the frig, he went downstairs in the evening and got coldcuts and wine,
that is all i ate, no cooking here, lol, Lee
"Dora" > wrote in message
...
>
> When we all talked about cooking and not about
> each other?
>
> Dora

On Tue, 2 Aug 2011 14:43:49 -0400, "Dora" > wrote:

>
>When we all talked about cooking and not about
>each other?
>
>Dora
Why not submit a recipe or tell us what you are eating or finding at
the market. . . an article about food you found in the news.
Janet US

On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 00:47:30 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:

> > I know what Q.E.D. means. I thought you were referring to Mark
> > Thorson's comment. Frankly, I'm just weary of all the mean-spirited
> > attacks lately. It's ruining the group.
>
> Don't read 'em, Dora. If you find a thread has degenerated, bow out.

Ditto, especially if you think it's downgrading the group. IMO, the
group is the same as ever and I've been here since the mid '90's.
Only the names have changed.

--

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

Sqwertz wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Aug 2011 19:16:19 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:
>
>> That was the funniest post I've read all day (Dora's)
>
> I meant that in a good way Dora. BTW.
>
> Sometimes I'm so misunderstood. Just like Andy and notbob <cough>.
>
> -sw

I know you did. You're not so tough underneath.

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 00:47:30 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>
> > Don't read 'em, Dora. If you find a thread has degenerated, bow out.
>
> Ditto, especially if you think it's downgrading the group. IMO, the
> group is the same as ever and I've been here since the mid '90's.
> Only the names have changed.

Nope. My name has stayed the same the whole time.

:-)

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

sf wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 00:47:30 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>
>>> I know what Q.E.D. means. I thought you were referring to Mark
>>> Thorson's comment. Frankly, I'm just weary of all the mean-spirited
>>> attacks lately. It's ruining the group.
>> Don't read 'em, Dora. If you find a thread has degenerated, bow out.
>
> Ditto, especially if you think it's downgrading the group. IMO, the
> group is the same as ever and I've been here since the mid '90's.
> Only the names have changed.
>
Yes, it feels more that way if one manages to avoid the nastiness,
doesn't it? Sometimes I catch a post, but if I see something I
don't like, I usually skip to something else. Maybe check back in
on the thread in a while to see if things have improved. In spite
of that thread entitled something like "Is RFC Dying", I find
there are more than enough posts. In fact, that is a BIG reason
why I was up really late last night. It is always a VERY bad idea
to start on this group late at night (she says, as she glances at
the clock--not tooooo bad)

--
Jean B.

Dan Abel wrote:
> In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 00:47:30 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>>
>>> Don't read 'em, Dora. If you find a thread has degenerated, bow out.
>> Ditto, especially if you think it's downgrading the group. IMO, the
>> group is the same as ever and I've been here since the mid '90's.
>> Only the names have changed.
>
> Nope. My name has stayed the same the whole time.
>
> :-)
>
I know....

--
Jean B.

On 8/4/2011 10:43 AM, Dora wrote:
> Sqwertz wrote:
>> On Wed, 3 Aug 2011 19:16:19 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>>> That was the funniest post I've read all day (Dora's)
>>
>> I meant that in a good way Dora. BTW.
>>
>> Sometimes I'm so misunderstood. Just like Andy and notbob <cough>.
>>
>> -sw
>
> I know you did. You're not so tough underneath.
>
So are you saying he has a hard shell and a squishy center?

--
Cheryl
Come carpe diem baby - Metallica

On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 17:17:31 -0700, Dan Abel > wrote:

> In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 00:47:30 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
> >
> > > Don't read 'em, Dora. If you find a thread has degenerated, bow out.
> >
> > Ditto, especially if you think it's downgrading the group. IMO, the
> > group is the same as ever and I've been here since the mid '90's.
> > Only the names have changed.
>
> Nope. My name has stayed the same the whole time.
>
> :-)

Okay, yours hasn't... but there are many whose have and I sincerely
doubt they'll admit to it. Not many announce name their changes
although a few do. One who did was Sheldon. He may be a lot of
things, but he's not a nym shifter.

--

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

On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 22:36:59 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:

> Yes, it feels more that way if one manages to avoid the nastiness,
> doesn't it?

Oh, Jean... you *know* I don't shrink from that. I was only saying
that people have left due to the supposed nastiness. <shrug> That's
what kill files are for. Kill posters and threads that don't interest
you for whatever reason.... boring, nasty, redundant (the list goes
on).

--

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

On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 23:01:15 -0400, Cheryl >
wrote:

> On 8/4/2011 10:43 AM, Dora wrote:
> > Sqwertz wrote:
> >> On Wed, 3 Aug 2011 19:16:19 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:
> >>
> >>> That was the funniest post I've read all day (Dora's)
> >>
> >> I meant that in a good way Dora. BTW.
> >>
> >> Sometimes I'm so misunderstood. Just like Andy and notbob <cough>.
> >>
> >> -sw
> >
> > I know you did. You're not so tough underneath.
> >
> So are you saying he has a hard shell and a squishy center?

Like a bug under your heel.

--

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

sf replied to Dan:

>>> Ditto, especially if you think it's downgrading the group. IMO, the
>>> group is the same as ever and I've been here since the mid '90's.
>>> Only the names have changed.
>>
>> Nope. My name has stayed the same the whole time.
>>
>> :-)
>
> Okay, yours hasn't... but there are many whose have and I sincerely
> doubt they'll admit to it. Not many announce name their changes
> although a few do. One who did was Sheldon. He may be a lot of
> things, but he's not a nym shifter.

That's not true. To this date, he has *never* admitted his nym shift. He's
probably afraid he'll get banned again. Go ahead, try to find the post where
he admitted changing his nym: The post doesn't exist.

As for me, I used to post as "Bob" with no last name, but it was a pain
trying to search for my own posts when I wanted to refer to them later. So I
added "Terwilliger" in September 2005, and I announced it at the time.

Bob

Sqwertz wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Aug 2011 10:43:24 -0400, Dora wrote:
>
>> Sqwertz wrote:
>>> On Wed, 3 Aug 2011 19:16:19 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:
>>>
>>>> That was the funniest post I've read all day (Dora's)
>>>
>>> I meant that in a good way Dora. BTW.
>>>
>>> Sometimes I'm so misunderstood. Just like Andy and notbob
>>> <cough>.
>>
>> I know you did. You're not so tough underneath.
>
> Oh yeah? I still wear Underoos(tm).
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underoos>
>
> -sw

Superman, right? '
Dora

On Fri, 5 Aug 2011 01:13:26 -0700, "Bob Terwilliger"
> wrote:

> That's not true. To this date, he has *never* admitted his nym shift.

From Penmart to Brooklyn? He announced it when he did it.

--

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

Dan Abel wrote:
> In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
>
>>On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 00:47:30 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Don't read 'em, Dora. If you find a thread has degenerated, bow out.
>>
>>Ditto, especially if you think it's downgrading the group. IMO, the
>>group is the same as ever and I've been here since the mid '90's.
>>Only the names have changed.
>
>
> Nope. My name has stayed the same the whole time.
>
> :-)
>

I changed ISP's 7-8 years ago but i've otherwise always been
gh that includes an initial stint as "josfeph" and
Joseph Count de Money And M. JL Esq. is only since getting the letter
from Buckingham Palace

The mail man was as impressed as myself! But i didn't let on and let
somehting slip about not being able to attend the Ascot races that year

In the late 90's when i first accessed the net RFC had a reputation that
preceded it..

I first found several smaller usenet cooking groups (alt.cooking.recipes
& .chat whose opinion of RFC were critical of its confrontational,
argumentative and just plain rude nature.

But that very combativeness made RFC more interesting to me then, than
the bourgeoisie mediocrity of the other groups i were reading. A wider
selection of topics and a plethora of anecdote missing in a group of a
dozen people or less. Where everyone gets to know everyone's public
persona, quickly. Unfortunately nobody mentioned the bourgeoisie
mediocrity apparent only after prolonged exposure to RFC.

Signal to noise ratio seems the same usenet wide.

Hence my lessening interest in all of it even more than this one RFC group.
--
JL

sf wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 17:17:31 -0700, Dan Abel > wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> sf > wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 00:47:30 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Don't read 'em, Dora. If you find a thread has degenerated, bow out.
>>> Ditto, especially if you think it's downgrading the group. IMO, the
>>> group is the same as ever and I've been here since the mid '90's.
>>> Only the names have changed.
>> Nope. My name has stayed the same the whole time.
>>
>> :-)
>
> Okay, yours hasn't... but there are many whose have and I sincerely
> doubt they'll admit to it. Not many announce name their changes
> although a few do. One who did was Sheldon. He may be a lot of
> things, but he's not a nym shifter.
>
I have always been Jean B. (I figured it would be arrogant to
waltz into NGs as just Jean.) I think about just being Jean, but
by now everyone is used to Jean B.

--
Jean B.

sf wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 22:36:59 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>
>> Yes, it feels more that way if one manages to avoid the nastiness,
>> doesn't it?
>
> Oh, Jean... you *know* I don't shrink from that. I was only saying
> that people have left due to the supposed nastiness. <shrug> That's
> what kill files are for. Kill posters and threads that don't interest
> you for whatever reason.... boring, nasty, redundant (the list goes
> on).
>
Yup. I can do that. I wish threads stayed killed (which they
don't in the descendents of netscape).

--
Jean B.

sf wrote about clueless AOL newbie Sheldon "Pussy" Katz:

>> To this date, he has *never* admitted his nym shift.
>
> From Penmart to Brooklyn? He announced it when he did it.

Nope. Your memory is playing tricks on you. He stopped posting (because he'd
been banned) for a couple days, then started posting as "Brooklyn" as if
nothing had ever happened. He has never admitted that "Brooklyn" used to be
, although of course it was obvious by the ignorance
displayed in his posts.

Bob

Bob Terwilliger wrote:
> sf wrote about clueless AOL newbie Sheldon "Pussy" Katz:
>
>>> To this date, he has *never* admitted his nym shift.
>> From Penmart to Brooklyn? He announced it when he did it.
>
> Nope. Your memory is playing tricks on you. He stopped posting (because he'd
> been banned) for a couple days, then started posting as "Brooklyn" as if
> nothing had ever happened. He has never admitted that "Brooklyn" used to be
> , although of course it was obvious by the ignorance
> displayed in his posts.
>
> Bob
>
>
One way or another, it was obvious who it was. I sure don't think
he attempted to hide his identity. I don't recall whether he
announced the change.

--
Jean B.

On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 20:05:04 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:

> I wish threads stayed killed (which they don't in the descendents of netscape).

Really? I bet your filter is set to expire after a certain number of
days of no activity. It's a way to keep your filter list as short as
possible. Just extend the number of days you want the filter to be
active if one keeps coming back or pick a key word to filter that you
*never* want to see in any subject and make it a "forever" filter.

--

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

On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 20:00:12 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:

> Ah, so is that gonna contribute to the death of rfc as an NG?

No.

--

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

sf wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 20:05:04 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>
>> I wish threads stayed killed (which they don't in the descendents of netscape).
>
> Really? I bet your filter is set to expire after a certain number of
> days of no activity. It's a way to keep your filter list as short as
> possible. Just extend the number of days you want the filter to be
> active if one keeps coming back or pick a key word to filter that you
> *never* want to see in any subject and make it a "forever" filter.
>
I don't think there is any such option, but I'll check the next
time I am going through all of my settings.

--
Jean B.

On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 22:48:24 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:

> sf wrote:
> > On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 20:05:04 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
> >
> >> I wish threads stayed killed (which they don't in the descendents of netscape).
> >
> > Really? I bet your filter is set to expire after a certain number of
> > days of no activity. It's a way to keep your filter list as short as
> > possible. Just extend the number of days you want the filter to be
> > active if one keeps coming back or pick a key word to filter that you
> > *never* want to see in any subject and make it a "forever" filter.
> >
> I don't think there is any such option, but I'll check the next
> time I am going through all of my settings.

My general setting is under "kill filter initial settings", but you
can individualize as you set up a new filter too.

--

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

sf wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 22:48:24 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>
>> sf wrote:
>>> On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 20:05:04 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>>>
>>>> I wish threads stayed killed (which they don't in the descendents of netscape).
>>> Really? I bet your filter is set to expire after a certain number of
>>> days of no activity. It's a way to keep your filter list as short as
>>> possible. Just extend the number of days you want the filter to be
>>> active if one keeps coming back or pick a key word to filter that you
>>> *never* want to see in any subject and make it a "forever" filter.
>>>
>> I don't think there is any such option, but I'll check the next
>> time I am going through all of my settings.
>
> My general setting is under "kill filter initial settings", but you
> can individualize as you set up a new filter too.
>
I am not sure such things are available in seamonkey.

--
Jean B.

On Tue, 09 Aug 2011 22:30:39 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:

> sf wrote:
> > On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 22:48:24 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
> >
> >
> > My general setting is under "kill filter initial settings", but you
> > can individualize as you set up a new filter too.
> >
> I am not sure such things are available in seamonkey.

I know noting about seamonkey, hopefully the tutorial will help.
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Filters_(T...eating_filters

--

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

sf wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Aug 2011 22:30:39 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>
>> sf wrote:
>>> On Sat, 06 Aug 2011 22:48:24 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> My general setting is under "kill filter initial settings", but you
>>> can individualize as you set up a new filter too.
>>>
>> I am not sure such things are available in seamonkey.
>
> I know noting about seamonkey, hopefully the tutorial will help.
> http://kb.mozillazine.org/Filters_(T...eating_filters
>
I will see how similar Thunderbird and Seamonkey are. They feel
the same, and have the same ancestor, which is why I like them.

--
Jean B.