Dave Smith wrote:
>
> You are a paranoid loonie. There is no moderator

For Americans, in this case Dave is _not_ referring
to the Canadian dollar coin.

In article >,
Sqwertz > wrote:

> On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 12:17:48 -0500, George Leppla wrote:
>
> > On 10/28/2011 12:04 PM, Pennyaline wrote:
> >
> >> The "more results" takes me to Bing and page after page of everything it
> >> can find that has "RFC" and "Facebook" in its name... except
> >> rec.food.cooking's FB page.
> >>
> >> When I type "RFC," "RFC o," "RFC on," "RFC on Facebook" or "RFC on
> >> FaceBook" into the search bar, nothing happens automatically. I've got
> >> to tell it to start the search.
> >
> > Congratulations... you are officially dumber than a stump. You may be
> > on a Facebook page, but you are typing your search query in your browser
> > search bar, not the Facebook search bar.
>
> That's what it sounds like to me, too. I'm sure of it.

It does sound strange, but then, FB is weird. I don't know how much
searching you have done in FB, but it is very frustrating. Either it
magically finds what you want right away, or you can never find it, even
after spending many minutes viewing many screens. And yes, it does go
to Bing and starts searching the entire web!

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On 10/28/2011 4:18 PM, Christine Dabney wrote:
> Got them. And you are correct..you are typing in the right spot. I
> am not sure why it is not showing up for you.
>
> However, I found you on FB..and sent you a friend request. Once you
> respond, I can add you to the group. We can work around it that
> way...


And you saw the shots of the kinds of results I was getting? That I
couldn't even bring *you* up searching from your own page--multiple
Christine Dabneys, none of them you?!

On 10/28/2011 4:58 PM, Pennyaline wrote:
> Over one hundred people didn't join the group just this morning, George,
> right after doing a little Facebook search. I'm confident of that.


I've already proved to you that I joined this morning with no trouble at
all.

But you are right. It was much easier for everyone else who joined the
group before today. THEY had easy access... then they made it harder to
join just because they knew you were coming.

Face it... you couldn't find you way out of a paper bag with both hands
and a road map.

George L

On 10/28/2011 3:52 PM, George Leppla wrote:

> So explain how over 100 people we able to find the group and join
> without much problem.... but dear Penny couldn't and instead of figuring
> it out, blamed members of the group for excluding her.

In case you missed it, George (as many did), I was telling people here
that it wasn't working, which provoked the response from some members of
the group about how paranoid, unstable, unmedicated, stupid,
dumb/bag/rocks, Officially Dumb, to moronic to use the right search bar,
to addled to stay away from the browser search bar, etc., I must be.

And I hadn't blamed anyone of excluding *me.* I was using statements
from others to support how the FB group seemed to want to exclude PERIOD.

But no, you'll never see that, will you.

sf wrote:
>
> On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 14:09:00 -0800, Mark Thorson >
> wrote:
>
> > "gloria.p" wrote:
> > >
> > > Keeping it "obscure" has prevented much of the obnoxious noise and
> > > pointless bickering from migrating from the Usenet site to FB.
> >
> > RFC is a newsgroup, not a site.
>
> Usenet is made up of newsgroups, so Usenet = newsgroups.

Yes, but singular or plural it's still not a site.

In article >,
Mark Thorson > wrote:

> Dan Abel wrote:
> >
> > In article >,
> > "Pete C." > wrote:
> >
> > > I can think of three losses in the time I've been following this group.
> >
> > Here's a list of ten. Hopefully Blake will be added:
> >
> > http://www.recfoodcooking.com/memoriam.html
>
> I didn't realize some of those people were dead.
> Susan Hattie Steinsapir is not listed.

She died in 1996, before that page was established. She does have an
entry on the signature dishes page.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Dan Abel wrote:
> In article >,
> Christine Dabney > wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 09:46:57 -0700, sf > wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, "RFC on Facebook" works. Sorry about the post to Becca, when I
>>> actually tried it - it took me to the rfc unofficial website.
>>> Didn't realize FB did that.
>>
>> When I start to put it in the search bar on FB, the group is the
>> first thing that pops up. Don't even have to get beyond RFC...
>
> I suspect FB is too smart for itself. I think the only reason it does
> that is that you are already subscribed to the group.

Most likely, it has to do with cookies. Not necessarily those evil, "phone
home" cookies, but with face book, who knows.

On 10/28/2011 5:35 PM, Christine Dabney wrote:

> George, she is right. Her searches DO NOT pull up RFC on Facebook.
> She is not lying. She is doing it correctly. I saw the screen shots
> she sent me.

Then I certainly apologize for that part of the discussion. Pennyaline,
you were correct and I apologize.

> Just a reminder, if Pennyaline decides to be added to the group:
> Insulting one another on the RFC on Facebook group is a good way to
> get yourself kicked off the group....

Sheesh... I just joined this morning and haven't even got my decoder
ring yet and already with the warnings! <vbg>

George L

On 10/28/2011 5:00 PM, George Leppla wrote:
> On 10/28/2011 5:35 PM, Christine Dabney wrote:
>
>> George, she is right. Her searches DO NOT pull up RFC on Facebook.
>> She is not lying. She is doing it correctly. I saw the screen shots
>> she sent me.
>
> Then I certainly apologize for that part of the discussion. Pennyaline,
> you were correct and I apologize.

Accepted.

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 18:00:06 -0500, George Leppla
> wrote:

> Sheesh... I just joined this morning and haven't even got my decoder
> ring yet and already with the warnings! <vbg>

<psssst> Keep your non-food posts out of rfc chat or you'll get your
hands slapped and a warning. They aren't kidding about staying on
topic! A couple of us have screwed up already and posted to chat when
we thought we were on our home page... so *pay attention*.

--
All you need is love. But a little chocolate now and then doesn't hurt.

On 10/28/2011 5:15 PM, sf wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 18:00:06 -0500, George Leppla
> > wrote:
>
>> Sheesh... I just joined this morning and haven't even got my decoder
>> ring yet and already with the warnings!<vbg>
>
> <psssst> Keep your non-food posts out of rfc chat or you'll get your
> hands slapped and a warning. They aren't kidding about staying on
> topic! A couple of us have screwed up already and posted to chat when
> we thought we were on our home page... so *pay attention*.
>

Hehehehehehe!

On 10/28/2011 5:00 PM, George Leppla wrote:
> Then I certainly apologize for that part of the discussion. Pennyaline,
> you were correct and I apologize.

And of course, I extend an apology to you. Name calling was certainly
unnecessary.

On 10/28/2011 6:44 PM, Pennyaline wrote:
> On 10/28/2011 5:00 PM, George Leppla wrote:
>> Then I certainly apologize for that part of the discussion. Pennyaline,
>> you were correct and I apologize.
>
> And of course, I extend an apology to you. Name calling was certainly
> unnecessary.


OK... accepted. We're cool.

George L

In article >,
Michel Boucher > wrote:

> Melba's Jammin' > wrote in
> :
>
> > Very strange. The group is called "RFC on Facebook" --
> > without the quotation marks. When I am logged into Facebook
> > and type that in the search window in the blue bar at the top
> > of the page, it turns up the group. No clue as to why it
> > doesn't work when you do it.
>
> You're on the group. Now that I am too, doing that works. It
> didn't before. So all these insults that were lobbed earlier did
> not take a simple fact into account. It doesn't work the same from
> the inside as it does from the outside.
>
> I believe some people (George, Dave, and others) have apologies to
> offer.

Interest. You learn something new every day. <shrug>
--
Barb,
http://web.me.com/barbschaller September 5, 2011

On 28/10/2011 5:52 PM, George Leppla wrote:
> On 10/28/2011 4:39 PM, Michel Boucher wrote:
>> You're on the group. Now that I am too, doing that works. It
>> didn't before. So all these insults that were lobbed earlier did
>> not take a simple fact into account. It doesn't work the same from
>> the inside as it does from the outside.
>>
>> I believe some people (George, Dave, and others) have apologies to
>> offer.
>
>
> So explain how over 100 people we able to find the group and join
> without much problem.... but dear Penny couldn't and instead of figuring
> it out, blamed members of the group for excluding her.
>
> If you are looking for an apology from me, don't hold your breath.
>
>
Ditto from me. It was the suggestion that someone was purposefully with
holding information.

sf > wrote:

>On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 16:58:25 -0400, Dave Smith

> wrote:
>
>> Sad news.... for those of you not on FaceBook.... I just got news on FB
>> from Stephanie, a friend of Blake's, that he has died. I don't know the
>> details, just that his father contacted her and said that he is not
>> longer with us.
>
>Holy mackerel! RIP, blake. You will be missed.

Indeed. I just read this. Wow this is sad news.

Steve

sf wrote:

> The whole point of the rfc FB page is to stay away from the nastiness that
> happens here. What's nice about FB is that if there's someone you don't
> want to ever see posting on the rfc page, you can set it so you don't see
> them and they won't see you. It's a two way kill.

I'm not sure that's correct. Maybe that's how it's *supposed* to work, but
it doesn't seem to work that way.

Bob

On 10/28/2011 6:49 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 28/10/2011 5:52 PM, George Leppla wrote:
>> On 10/28/2011 4:39 PM, Michel Boucher wrote:
>>> You're on the group. Now that I am too, doing that works. It
>>> didn't before. So all these insults that were lobbed earlier did
>>> not take a simple fact into account. It doesn't work the same from
>>> the inside as it does from the outside.
>>>
>>> I believe some people (George, Dave, and others) have apologies to
>>> offer.
>>
>>
>> So explain how over 100 people we able to find the group and join
>> without much problem.... but dear Penny couldn't and instead of figuring
>> it out, blamed members of the group for excluding her.
>>
>> If you are looking for an apology from me, don't hold your breath.
>>
>>
> Ditto from me. It was the suggestion that someone was purposefully with
> holding information.


Suit yourself.

Dave Smith > wrote:

>I was the OP. Yes you are on FB, but since you weren't on his friends
>list and you aren't a member of the RFC group, I wonder why you expect
>to be notified.

Actually, the notifies on FB are so screwed up that someone on your
friends list might pass away without you noticing it, at least
on the first opportunity, or first several. This happened to me about
a month ago; it was not until a mutual friend happend to post their
condolences on the decedant's wall, and I happened to see the notify for
THAT, that I learned my friend had died the previous week.

It is a heluva flaky way to find out about these things, but it's
the best we got in some cases.


Steve

Steve wrote:

>> Well, now, it's not THAT exclusive. I'm a member.
>>
>> I just want to cry when I see that this is how RFC pays respect to a
>> lost friend.
>
> For me it's a separate thread since Bob changed the subject, which
> SHOULD start a new thread in your browser.
>
> Besides, Blake would understand.

I think this is just one shining example of how Facebook leads to
high-school behavior. If not for my in-laws using Facebook as their primary
means of communication, I wouldn't have an account.

Bob

Dave Smith wrote:
>
> Ditto from me. It was the suggestion that someone was purposefully with
> holding information.

But I was! I had all the information in a little
metal box, and it's staying right where it is!

On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 18:23:48 -0700, "Bob Terwilliger"
> wrote:

> sf wrote:
>
> > The whole point of the rfc FB page is to stay away from the nastiness that
> > happens here. What's nice about FB is that if there's someone you don't
> > want to ever see posting on the rfc page, you can set it so you don't see
> > them and they won't see you. It's a two way kill.
>
> I'm not sure that's correct. Maybe that's how it's *supposed* to work, but
> it doesn't seem to work that way.
>
I can say "it works for me", thank goodness.

--
All you need is love. But a little chocolate now and then doesn't hurt.

Dave Smith > wrote in
om:

>> If you are looking for an apology from me, don't hold your
>> breath.
>
> Ditto from me. It was the suggestion that someone was
> purposefully with holding information.

I don't care about that but insulting someone who is using the
search item you are providing and lo and behold it doesn't actually
work is beyond the Pale. Think about it.

--

If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn’t
help the poor, either we’ve got to pretend that Jesus
was just as selfish as we are, or we’ve got to acknowledge
that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy
without condition, and then admit that we just don’t
want to do it.

Stephen Colbert (via videcormeum)

On 29/10/2011 9:42 AM, Michel Boucher wrote:
> Dave > wrote in
> om:
>
>>> If you are looking for an apology from me, don't hold your
>>> breath.
>>
>> Ditto from me. It was the suggestion that someone was
>> purposefully with holding information.
>
> I don't care about that but insulting someone who is using the
> search item you are providing and lo and behold it doesn't actually
> work is beyond the Pale. Think about it.
>


It is the paranoid accusations I resent:
"Nah. I've been on this group since 2003. If I can't get access to a FB
page without kissing other members' asses, well that's just horse shit.
And if other n.g. members want to restrict access, they're just horse
shit, too. "

Nobody here was restricting her access.

Dave Smith > wrote in
om:

> It is the paranoid accusations I resent:
> "Nah. I've been on this group since 2003. If I can't get
> access to a FB page without kissing other members' asses, well
> that's just horse shit. And if other n.g. members want to
> restrict access, they're just horse shit, too. "

But it wasn't directed at you personally. You however, directed
insults at her, and more insulting, speaking of her as thougfh she
was not there. I direct you to

Message id:

> I found it easy enough with R.F.C.
>
> It is unusual to encounter people who are both paranoid and
> stupid. I don't know what her problem is.

We know now that it was NOT "easy enough with R.F.C." so the
suggestion is outré at the very least.

--

If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn’t
help the poor, either we’ve got to pretend that Jesus
was just as selfish as we are, or we’ve got to acknowledge
that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy
without condition, and then admit that we just don’t
want to do it.

Stephen Colbert (via videcormeum)

On 10/29/2011 7:53 AM, Dave Smith wrote:

> It is the paranoid accusations I resent:
> "Nah. I've been on this group since 2003. If I can't get access to a FB
> page without kissing other members' asses, well that's just horse shit.
> And if other n.g. members want to restrict access, they're just horse
> shit, too. "
>
> Nobody here was restricting her access.

That statement was made very early in the thread, after I'd been told by
a couple of members that things were made intentionally "obscure" to
keep unwanted elements out/from migrating over from the newsgroup. That
tactic restricts everybody's access, not just mine. That is a shitty
thing to do, for two reason. First, the FB group requires membership for
participation, so filtering access at the n.g. level is unnecessary.
Second, it suggests that only a special stratum of n.g. member can have
access. That kind of segregation is horse shit, and the people who
practice it are horse shit--middle-schoolish, adolescent-girlish,
whispering-behind-your-hands-at-the-lunch-tableish horse shit.

But it's time for you to get over it now, Dave. Everyone else has moved
on. If you don't want to apologize, nobody cares.

Pennyaline > wrote in
:

> That statement was made very early in the thread, after I'd
> been told by a couple of members that things were made
> intentionally "obscure" to keep unwanted elements out/from
> migrating over from the newsgroup. That tactic restricts
> everybody's access, not just mine. That is a shitty thing to
> do, for two reason. First, the FB group requires membership
> for participation, so filtering access at the n.g. level is
> unnecessary. Second, it suggests that only a special stratum
> of n.g. member can have access. That kind of segregation is
> horse shit, and the people who practice it are horse
> shit--middle-schoolish, adolescent-girlish,
> whispering-behind-your-hands-at-the-lunch-tableish horse shit.

I have to admit that that was concern as well.

--

If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn’t
help the poor, either we’ve got to pretend that Jesus
was just as selfish as we are, or we’ve got to acknowledge
that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy
without condition, and then admit that we just don’t
want to do it.

Stephen Colbert (via videcormeum)

On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 22:10:13 -0500, Lou Decruss > wrote:

>It's unfortunate life has no rewind.

Thanks for the memory jog, Lou:

If your life was on videotape
Wouldn't everything be alright?
When your head hurts the morning after
You could roll it back to late last night.
Replay all the good parts
Cut out what you don't like --
Wouldn't you be in good shape
If your life was on videotape?

If everybody had ESP
Everything would be OK.
We could see trouble coming
And we could step out of the way.
When the grim reaper comes to call
We could arrange to be out of town.
It would be the great escape
And you could put it on videotape.

(the late, great Steve Goodman)

RIP, Blake.

Your friend,
-- Larry

Mark Thorson wrote:
>Pennyaline wrote:
>>
>> Second, it suggests that only a special stratum of n.g. member can have
>> access. That kind of segregation is horse shit, and the people who
>> practice it are horse shit--middle-schoolish, adolescent-girlish,
>> whispering-behind-your-hands-at-the-lunch-tableish horse shit.
>
>It wouldn't be an exclusive club if we didn't exclude
>anybody.
>
>> But it's time for you to get over it now, Dave. Everyone else has moved
>> on. If you don't want to apologize, nobody cares.
>
>Dave has my vote for student body president.

I vote for Pennyaline, I'm a sucker for a nice rack.

On 10/29/2011 11:21 AM, Brooklyn1 wrote:
> Mark Thorson wrote:
>> Pennyaline wrote:
>>>
>>> Second, it suggests that only a special stratum of n.g. member can have
>>> access. That kind of segregation is horse shit, and the people who
>>> practice it are horse shit--middle-schoolish, adolescent-girlish,
>>> whispering-behind-your-hands-at-the-lunch-tableish horse shit.
>>
>> It wouldn't be an exclusive club if we didn't exclude
>> anybody.
>>
>>> But it's time for you to get over it now, Dave. Everyone else has moved
>>> on. If you don't want to apologize, nobody cares.
>>
>> Dave has my vote for student body president.
>
> I vote for Pennyaline, I'm a sucker for a nice rack.


http://tinyurl.com/3donkxc

Pennyaline wrote:
>
> Second, it suggests that only a special stratum of n.g. member can have
> access. That kind of segregation is horse shit, and the people who
> practice it are horse shit--middle-schoolish, adolescent-girlish,
> whispering-behind-your-hands-at-the-lunch-tableish horse shit.

It wouldn't be an exclusive club if we didn't exclude
anybody.

> But it's time for you to get over it now, Dave. Everyone else has moved
> on. If you don't want to apologize, nobody cares.

Dave has my vote for student body president.

On Sat, 29 Oct 2011 11:50:19 -0600, Pennyaline
> wrote:

>On 10/29/2011 11:21 AM, Brooklyn1 wrote:
>> Mark Thorson wrote:
>>> Pennyaline wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Second, it suggests that only a special stratum of n.g. member can have
>>>> access. That kind of segregation is horse shit, and the people who
>>>> practice it are horse shit--middle-schoolish, adolescent-girlish,
>>>> whispering-behind-your-hands-at-the-lunch-tableish horse shit.
>>>
>>> It wouldn't be an exclusive club if we didn't exclude
>>> anybody.
>>>
>>>> But it's time for you to get over it now, Dave. Everyone else has moved
>>>> on. If you don't want to apologize, nobody cares.
>>>
>>> Dave has my vote for student body president.
>>
>> I vote for Pennyaline, I'm a sucker for a nice rack.
>
>
>http://tinyurl.com/3donkxc

I just knew you're a dish. LOL

Christine Dabney wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 10:49:00 -0600, Pennyaline
> > wrote:
>
>> That was one of the variations I searched for. No dice. This RFC was not
>> found. The group/page still does not come up for me during any search. I
>> am only able to get there using the link I was given last evening.
>
> When I go to the FB search bar, and type in "RFC on Facebook", it is
> the first thing that pops up. I don't even have to get beyond the
> word RFC, to get it to pop up. Not sure why you don't see it... Are
> you doing the search thru FB or a web search?
>
> Christine

Chris, you probably see it because its "cached" in your facebook
settings already. At least I think that might be it?

Christine Dabney wrote:

> You have a totally different search bar than I do, then. Where it
> says Facebook on my page, it is a white font on a blue background. No
> where that I see, except in the web browser, is there a black font.
> Below that, is the search bar that I use.
>
> Wish I could see a screen shot of your page...
>
> Christine

Chris- I just signed on to Facebook using my real name and then tried to
search for RFC on Facebook. I couldn't find it in the return list
either! So its private and not easily found, as Penny has attested.
I looked under "groups" as well as "pages" too.
(Justa) Goomba

Goomba > wrote in
:

> Chris- I just signed on to Facebook using my real name and
> then tried to search for RFC on Facebook. I couldn't find it
> in the return list either! So its private and not easily
> found, as Penny has attested. I looked under "groups" as well
> as "pages" too.

Thank you for taking the time to point this out. And given that, I
think Penny is definitely owed an apology by the bully boys.

--

If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn’t
help the poor, either we’ve got to pretend that Jesus
was just as selfish as we are, or we’ve got to acknowledge
that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy
without condition, and then admit that we just don’t
want to do it.

Stephen Colbert (via videcormeum)

Melba's Jammin' wrote:

> Very strange. The group is called "RFC on Facebook" -- without the
> quotation marks. When I am logged into Facebook and type that in the
> search window in the blue bar at the top of the page, it turns up the
> group. No clue as to why it doesn't work when you do it.

It didn't show up for my search when I was signed in under another name.
And Justa Goomba is a member, so *I* know its there...somewhere...?

On Oct 28, 2:19*pm, James Silverton >
wrote:
> On 10/28/2011 8:43 AM, Bull wrote:
>
> > In >, Andy > *wrote:
>
> > Surprised you would even show your low life mush for brains face in this
> > thread!
>
> > BULL
>
> Don't you think that it would be better if these personal attacks were
> transferred to a differently named thread?
>
> De mortuis nihil nisi bonum.
>
> --
>
> James Silverton, Potomac
>
> I'm *not*

Eat my cock, shitdick.

On 29/10/2011 1:00 AM, Kalmia wrote:
> On Oct 27, 9:20 pm, "Pete > wrote:
>> Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>>> Facebook is Evil.
>>
>>> -sw
>>
>> Agreed.
>
> You've all convinced me that I was correct never to sign up. MOre
> time for better endeavors.

I signed up under an alias (same as here) so that I could keep tabs on
my grand and great grandchildren who all seem to be scattered far and
wide in this country. They all seem to be on it and they know who I am
but the rest of the world doesn't. I try to impress on them to maintain
a modicum of privacy. Nobody knows the long term ramifications of
sharing private information on the internet but the potential for abuse
of said information is decidedly scary.

--

Krypsis

On 28/10/2011 3:15 PM, gloria.p wrote:
> On 10/27/2011 10:04 PM, Bob Terwilliger wrote:
>> Pennyaline wrote:
>>
>>> where is the RFC page? The only one I've ever found has no members
>>> and no
>>> activity.
>>
>> Apparently there are some who want to keep it obscure. (Of course,
>> that's in
>> complete disregard of the "all information should be shared" concept
>> espoused by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.
>
>
>
> Keeping it "obscure" has prevented much of the obnoxious noise and
> pointless bickering from migrating from the Usenet site to FB.
>
> gloria p
>
>
>
No need for obscurity as facebook has options for blocking people. Or
one could simply NOT INVITE unwanted guests (read .. pests)

--

Krypsis