On 2014-02-28 11:55 AM, A Moose in Love wrote:
>
>
> Mostly I don't mind her posts. But she sort of showed me the light
> when she wanted to know what a certain type of sweet pepper was
> called. The pepper was longish and red. I suggested shepards
> because they fit the colour and geometry description. She then said
> that the peppers that she was asking about weren't really red?
> WTF???
>

You got it.

"Cheri" wrote:

>
>"barbie gee" > wrote in message
ghcrg.pbz...
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 27 Feb 2014, sf wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 15:55:32 -0500, Dave Smith
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> It doesn't matter if the responses are kind and helpful or
>>>> mean and nasty, so long as it is about her.
>>>
>>> The other annoyance is if they aren't, then they soon do become about
>>> her.
>>
>> she has a habit of "participating" in threads that others have started by
>> replying with nothing of value, but just stating preferences or dislikes
>> of her own or of her family. It's like the old "me too" replies that are
>> dreaded in any electronic discussion boards. No value added, if it's not
>> a voting poll. Nobody cares if "I can't eat that" or "my husband doesn't
>> like that".
>
> I don't dread a "me too" at all, what I dread is when people don't snip for
>relevance and others have to scroll through a wall of text to see the "me
>too." That is annoying as Hell.

The worst offenders are those who don't trim attributions (makes me
wonder what a ******** they live in) and those with all those double
spaced lines (slovenly *******s). Today I decided to only trim the
last post's attribution.

On 2/28/2014 5:00 PM, barbie gee wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 28 Feb 2014, Brooklyn1 wrote:

>> The worst offenders are those who don't trim attributions (makes me
>> wonder what a ******** they live in) and those with all those double
>> spaced lines (slovenly *******s). Today I decided to only trim the
>> last post's attribution.
>>
>
> I thing using the Google Groups interface will create those double
> spaced replies.

If people would snip, it wouldn't be so annoying. I hardly
read those responses any more, you scroll and scroll and it's
one line at the end that wasn't worth it.

nancy

Nancy Young wrote:
>barbie gee wrote:
>>Brooklyn1 wrote:
>
>>> The worst offenders are those who don't trim attributions (makes me
>>> wonder what a ******** they live in) and those with all those double
>>> spaced lines (slovenly *******s). Today I decided to only trim the
>>> last post's attribution.
>>
>> I thing using the Google Groups interface will create those double
>> spaced replies.
>
>If people would snip, it wouldn't be so annoying. I hardly
>read those responses any more, you scroll and scroll and it's
>one line at the end that wasn't worth it.

Bwrrryan is not alone but is one of the biggest offenders... I rarely
read his posts anymore, and besides he's mostly arguing with his alter
ego, nothing about food.

sf > wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 14:26:36 -0700, Janet Bostwick
> > wrote:
>
>> What I suggested would feed them. I've just seen the bags of mw
>> veggies. It isn't something I would do, but it would get the job
>> done.
>
> I know she buys microwave rice, so there's your meal.
>


I have noted this product with intense scorn. I assumed it was produced to
provide ironic levity, not as a real food. I'm seeing a lot of 'food' like
this at the big store lately.

On Sat, 1 Mar 2014 09:01:25 +0000 (UTC), Oregonian Haruspex
> wrote:

>sf > wrote:
>> On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 14:26:36 -0700, Janet Bostwick
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> What I suggested would feed them. I've just seen the bags of mw
>>> veggies. It isn't something I would do, but it would get the job
>>> done.
>>
>> I know she buys microwave rice, so there's your meal.
>>
>
>
>I have noted this product with intense scorn. I assumed it was produced to
>provide ironic levity, not as a real food. I'm seeing a lot of 'food' like
>this at the big store lately.

We had a situation for a couple of week where there was little time
for cooking. I bought a couple of the prepared microwavable rice from
Uncle Ben. While not as good as a real home made rice dish, it is
better than some junk from a fast food place.

On Fri, 28 Feb 2014 17:07:03 -0800, "Cheri" >
wrote:

>
> "Nancy Young" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > If people would snip, it wouldn't be so annoying. I hardly
> > read those responses any more, you scroll and scroll and it's
> > one line at the end that wasn't worth it.
> >
> > nancy
>
> I'm to the point that if I have to scroll more than a few paragraphs, I just
> skip it...with the exception of a long recipe.
>

If it doesn't fit on one screen, the included text had better be
relevant.


--

Good Food.
Good Friends.
Good Memories.

On Sat, 1 Mar 2014 09:01:25 +0000 (UTC), Oregonian Haruspex
> wrote:

> sf > wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 14:26:36 -0700, Janet Bostwick
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> What I suggested would feed them. I've just seen the bags of mw
> >> veggies. It isn't something I would do, but it would get the job
> >> done.
> >
> > I know she buys microwave rice, so there's your meal.
> >
>
>
> I have noted this product with intense scorn. I assumed it was produced to
> provide ironic levity, not as a real food. I'm seeing a lot of 'food' like
> this at the big store lately.

If her DD and husband are fending for themselves, it might be the only
way they'll be able to eat without ordering in 3 meals a day.


--

Good Food.
Good Friends.
Good Memories.

On Friday, February 28, 2014 1:49:59 PM UTC-5, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2014-02-28 11:55 AM, A Moose in Love wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Mostly I don't mind her posts. But she sort of showed me the light
>
> > when she wanted to know what a certain type of sweet pepper was
>
> > called. The pepper was longish and red. I suggested shepards
>
> > because they fit the colour and geometry description. She then said
>
> > that the peppers that she was asking about weren't really red?
>
> > WTF???
>
> >
>
>
>
> You got it.

Why don't we ALL take the pledge? No response to or about JB. I'm game - is anyone else? It might be the only way to deal with her.

In fact, I'll take it here and now: " I will NOT open another JB thread."

On Friday, February 28, 2014 10:41:55 AM UTC-6, Nancy Young wrote:
> On 2/28/2014 11:07 AM, Janet Bostwick wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 21:56:34 -0800, "Cheri" >
>
> > wrote:
>
> > snip
>
> >>
>
> >> I don't dread a "me too" at all, what I dread is when people don't snip for
>
> >> relevance and others have to scroll through a wall of text to see the "me
>
> >> too." That is annoying as Hell.
>
>
>
> > How about a "LOL" at the end of hundreds of lines of text?
>
>
>
> Now we have the no-snipping with like 4 blank lines between
>
> each line of text. I guess it's a google thing. At least
>
> snip before adding that one line.
>
Google doesn't line wrap correctly. 99% of the time, I remember to use
the carriage return, but it's a hassle that I have to. Carriage return.
>
> nancy

--B 100,305 WORDS

On 2014-03-01 9:52 AM, Kalmia wrote:

>>
>> You got it.
>
> Why don't we ALL take the pledge? No response to or about JB. I'm game - is anyone else? It might be the only way to deal with her.
>
> In fact, I'll take it here and now: " I will NOT open another JB thread."
>


I have not replied to her for a long time. I have only replied to those
others who have, and I point out the problems.... the rejection of
advice and the twisted truths. If no one else replies to her you won't
be hearing anything from me. Bear in mind that some will consider a
mutual pledge to ignore her to be form of bullying.

On 2014-03-01 9:20 AM, sf wrote:

>> I'm to the point that if I have to scroll more than a few paragraphs, I just
>> skip it...with the exception of a long recipe.
>>
>
> If it doesn't fit on one screen, the included text had better be
> relevant.
>


My experience is that when there is a lot of quoted text included, there
is nothing at the end worth getting to. When you see >>>>>>>>>
anywhere in a post, there is no point in scrolling down.

Kalmia wrote:
>
> Why don't we ALL take the pledge? No response to or about JB. I'm game - is anyone else? It might be the only way to deal with her.
>
> In fact, I'll take it here and now: " I will NOT open another JB thread."

LOL! You are insane. I will not take that silly pledge. I will not
"shun" Julie. I like her long stories even though I will often save
them to read later when I have time. Julie is not some evil entity.
If you don't like her, set up your killfile (which you probably don't
know how to do). If a post comes through due to a response to her
from someone else, just click it away. How hard it that?

Julie is part of this group. She's just being Julie. Accept her.

G.

Bryan-TGWWW wrote:
>
> --B 100,305 WORDS

LOL! Quit counting how many words you've written and just finish
writing the darn book.

G.

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
> Kalmia wrote:
>>
>> Why don't we ALL take the pledge? No response to or about JB. I'm
>> game - is anyone else? It might be the only way to deal with her.
>>
>> In fact, I'll take it here and now: " I will NOT open another JB
>> thread."
>
> LOL! You are insane. I will not take that silly pledge. I will not
> "shun" Julie. I like her long stories even though I will often save
> them to read later when I have time. Julie is not some evil entity.
> If you don't like her, set up your killfile (which you probably don't
> know how to do). If a post comes through due to a response to her
> from someone else, just click it away. How hard it that?
>
> Julie is part of this group. She's just being Julie. Accept her.
>
> G.

Exactly! Really easy to skip after a line or two if you choose to do that no
matter who answers what.

Cheri

"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On 2014-03-01 9:52 AM, Kalmia wrote:
>
>>>
>>> You got it.
>>
>> Why don't we ALL take the pledge? No response to or about JB. I'm
>> game - is anyone else? It might be the only way to deal with her.
>>
>> In fact, I'll take it here and now: " I will NOT open another JB
>> thread."
>>
>
>
> I have not replied to her for a long time. I have only replied to those
> others who have, and I point out the problems.... the rejection of advice
> and the twisted truths. If no one else replies to her you won't be hearing
> anything from me. Bear in mind that some will consider a mutual pledge to
> ignore her to be form of bullying.

Not bullying at all, sensible for those that can't be bothered. She doesn't
bother me at all, and I choose who I wish to reply to or not. If we were all
in the fifth or sixth grade, a pledge might be useful. LOL

Cheri

On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 10:47:10 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:
....
>My experience is that when there is a lot of quoted text included, there
>is nothing at the end worth getting to. When you see >>>>>>>>>
>anywhere in a post, there is no point in scrolling down.

Usually. Because neewreasers are so varfies in their appropach to
displaying and editing piost when rerplying to them, there's a variety
of standards we see practiced. For example, mine here are to delete
all the material between your name line and that wghich you wrote to
which I'm replying to. That seems the best way to me, to retain the
context of your comment and then add my addional comment relating to
it.

I think there are two main reasonons we see the ">>>>>>>>" to which
you refer. Pure selfish laziness and interacting with posts on
people's phones with their tiny tiny screens. Often occuring
simultaneously, perhaps. I take great delight in chopping great deals
of meretricious piffle in my replies to ">>>>>>>>" posts, but
sometimes I revert to my former reasons for not doing it! :-)

Now if only I had a spellchecker! And narrower asndf nimbler fingers!
;-)

John Kuthe...

On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 12:03:16 -0500, Gary > wrote:

> Bryan-TGWWW wrote:
> >
> > --B 100,305 WORDS
>
> LOL! Quit counting how many words you've written and just finish
> writing the darn book.
>
It's probably built into the word processing program that he has. Hit
the button and the computer tells you how many words there are.



--

Good Food.
Good Friends.
Good Memories.

On Sat, 1 Mar 2014 09:21:26 -0800, "Cheri" >
wrote:

>
> "Gary" > wrote in message ...
> > Kalmia wrote:
> >>
> >> Why don't we ALL take the pledge? No response to or about JB. I'm
> >> game - is anyone else? It might be the only way to deal with her.
> >>
> >> In fact, I'll take it here and now: " I will NOT open another JB
> >> thread."
> >
> > LOL! You are insane. I will not take that silly pledge. I will not
> > "shun" Julie. I like her long stories even though I will often save
> > them to read later when I have time. Julie is not some evil entity.
> > If you don't like her, set up your killfile (which you probably don't
> > know how to do). If a post comes through due to a response to her
> > from someone else, just click it away. How hard it that?
> >
> > Julie is part of this group. She's just being Julie. Accept her.
> >
> > G.
>
> Exactly! Really easy to skip after a line or two if you choose to do that no
> matter who answers what.
>
I love my kill file. When I've had enough of a topic and don't want
to see it anymore, it's gone. Not "marked read" - it goes straight to
the Trash unread. When I've had enough of a poster and don't want to
see any more OPs, *poof*. Topics and trolls are permanent, but only a
very few real & long time posters here are in it for the long run.


--

Good Food.
Good Friends.
Good Memories.

On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 13:30:16 -0600, John Kuthe >
wrote:
>
> Usually. Because neewreasers are so varfies in their appropach to
> displaying and editing piost when rerplying to them, there's a variety
> of standards we see practiced. For example, mine here are to delete
> all the material between your name line and that wghich you wrote to
> which I'm replying to. That seems the best way to me, to retain the
> context of your comment and then add my addional comment relating to
> it.
>
> I think there are two main reasonons we see the ">>>>>>>>" to which
> you refer. Pure selfish laziness and interacting with posts on
> people's phones with their tiny tiny screens. Often occuring
> simultaneously, perhaps. I take great delight in chopping great deals
> of meretricious piffle in my replies to ">>>>>>>>" posts, but
> sometimes I revert to my former reasons for not doing it! :-)
>
> Now if only I had a spellchecker! And narrower asndf nimbler fingers!
> ;-)
>
I just don't understand how people can stand reading RFC on GG. I've
tried and it's awful. RFC goes from being interesting to the most
boring chore imaginable.



--

Good Food.
Good Friends.
Good Memories.

On Saturday, March 1, 2014 2:25:16 PM UTC-6, sf wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 12:03:16 -0500, Gary > wrote:
>
>
>
> > Bryan-TGWWW wrote:
>
> > >
>
> > > --B 100,305 WORDS
>
> >
>
> > LOL! Quit counting how many words you've written and just finish
>
> > writing the darn book.
>
> >
>
> It's probably built into the word processing program that he has. Hit
>
> the button and the computer tells you how many words there are.
>
Last week, I took the book that had been written entirely in
Word Pad, which has no word count feature, and saved it as
..docx then I finally activated the free 30 day trial of MS
Word, and I was just over 99,000 words, and 34x pages. First
novels, at least non-genre ones should be 90,000-110,000
words long. I'll likely be very near the maximum.

I sent the first 5 chapters to an agent last Friday. This
has been BY FAR the strangest year of my life, at least since
I turned 21. Almost exactly a year ago, after never having
written so much as a single page of fiction in my entire life,
never having any prior desire to write fictin and not having
read a newly published adult novel in over 20 years, I
completely illogically...for some reason I got it into my
head that those things made me more, not less qualified
to do it.

Then, all of a sudden, the characters came to life, and then
the weird shit started happening, uncanny coincidences,
many of which revolved around a ******* friend and
co-worker who was a fan of the book. The book took over
my life, and at one point I thought that if I'd known what it
would do to my life, there's no way I'd have started it, but
I knew that the only way out was to finish. That whole AA
thing about being powerless over alcohol?" Well, I was, and
I am powerless over the book. It *will* be written, or it'll
make me damned well wish I had.

I have cried more in the past year than the sum total of all
the years, again, since I was 21, and some parts were written
while sobbing continuously for hours. Many sections still floor
me emotionally in a way that only one other book ever has,
"A Christmas Carol." I'm sure it would sicken some folks
here the way that The Carpenters--or worse, Bread
(circa '72)--would. My hard-ass image is going to be ****ed.

--B

On 3/1/2014 3:25 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 12:03:16 -0500, Gary > wrote:
>
>> Bryan-TGWWW wrote:
>>>
>>> --B 100,305 WORDS
>>
>> LOL! Quit counting how many words you've written and just finish
>> writing the darn book.
>>
> It's probably built into the word processing program that he has. Hit
> the button and the computer tells you how many words there are.
>
If it's anything like the drivel he posts here no one will read it anyway.

Jill

On Sunday, March 2, 2014 8:29:16 AM UTC-6, jmcquown wrote:
> On 3/1/2014 3:25 PM, sf wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 12:03:16 -0500, Gary > wrote:
>
> >
>
> >> Bryan-TGWWW wrote:
>
> >>>
>
> >>> --B 100,305 WORDS
>
> >>
>
> >> LOL! Quit counting how many words you've written and just finish
>
> >> writing the darn book.
>
> >>
>
> > It's probably built into the word processing program that he has. Hit
>
> > the button and the computer tells you how many words there are.
>
> >
>
> If it's anything like the drivel he posts here no one will read it anyway.
>
It is nothing like what I post here, or have ever written in my life.
It's almost like someone else hijacked my life to get it written.
>
> Jill

--B