On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 20:45:09 -0500, Janet Wilder >
wrote:

> On 9/16/2014 7:14 PM, sf wrote:
> >
> >
> > I went to alt.food.barbecue to see what that's all about. It's filled
> > with trolls and spam. Not one decent thread since June when Piedmont
> > wondered where everyone went. Hope there's a decent BBQ group to join
> > on Facebook.
> >
> >
> Go to the web site. It's filled with excellent information.

No idea what you're talking about, sorry. That was the first time
I've ever looked at that group and wasn't inspired to hunt for a FAQ
if there is such a thing.


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 20:17:21 -0700, sf > wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 20:45:09 -0500, Janet Wilder >
>wrote:
>
>> On 9/16/2014 7:14 PM, sf wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > I went to alt.food.barbecue to see what that's all about. It's filled
>> > with trolls and spam. Not one decent thread since June when Piedmont
>> > wondered where everyone went. Hope there's a decent BBQ group to join
>> > on Facebook.
>> >
>> >
>> Go to the web site. It's filled with excellent information.
>
>No idea what you're talking about, sorry. That was the first time
>I've ever looked at that group and wasn't inspired to hunt for a FAQ
>if there is such a thing.

http://www.eaglequest.com/~bbq/faq/toc.html

You have to go about halfway down the index page to begin cooking and
Qing. This document dates from when Usenet was alive.
Janet US

On 9/16/2014 6:03 PM, Janet Wilder wrote:
> On 9/16/2014 6:05 PM, Mayo wrote:
>> On 9/16/2014 4:56 PM, Janet Wilder wrote:
>>> On 9/15/2014 10:51 PM, Mayo wrote:
>>>> On 9/15/2014 8:43 PM, sf wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 15 Sep 2014 21:17:09 -0500, "Pete C." >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9/15/2014 5:34 PM, sf wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thinking I'll try a brisket this week. Is it wrapped and cooked
>>>>>>>>>> longer with a slurry too?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> prepare for a long cooking time 18-20 hours.
>>>>>>>>> Janet US
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Holy cow! That's more than double the times I've been reading. I
>>>>>>>> wasn't going to make a huge one, just 4-5 lbs.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You mean a flat? Different than doing packer cut. Flats are
>>>>>>> trimmed
>>>>>>> and can easily be dried out. Sometimes they are larded to prevent
>>>>>>> drying.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I do packer cuts trimmed a bit and smoke at 250 to 275 for 10 to 12
>>>>>>> hours. Flat will probably be half that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Drying out is definitely an issue with just a flat. Some folks top
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> bacon to baste it a bit. I never do small briskets, or small
>>>>>> anything.
>>>>>> If I'm going to manage the smoker all day I'm going to fill it up,
>>>>>> then
>>>>>> portion, vac bag and freeze the extra for future use. Making BBQ is
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> something you do for a quick meal, but pulling BBQ from the freezer
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> reheating is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For a full large packer cut brisket I find the smoke/cook times are
>>>>>> more
>>>>>> like the noted 18-20 hours at 275. Time isn't as important as temp
>>>>>> though on a brisket, you need to install your Polder type probe
>>>>>> thermometer and monitor the temp. The temperature will rise steadily
>>>>>> until it gets somewhere around 190F then it will plateau and hold at
>>>>>> that temp for some time. This is the time the collagen is breaking
>>>>>> down
>>>>>> and the brisket is becoming tender.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When the temperature begins to rise again it's time to check it
>>>>>> with a
>>>>>> fork twist and remove it from the smoker. Wrapping in foil and a
>>>>>> towel
>>>>>> and putting it in a cooler will let you hold it ready to slice and
>>>>>> serve
>>>>>> for a couple hours if needed. Since the brisket won't absorb any
>>>>>> smoke
>>>>>> after a few hours you don't need to keep adding smoking wood, and you
>>>>>> can get away with moving the brisket to an oven at the same 275 for
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> remainder of the cook.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you're going to cook in a "slurry" that isn't BBQ it's braising. A
>>>>>> valid cooking method for sure, but not at all BBQ. In BBQ some people
>>>>>> use a "mop" which would be like the "slurry" but applied periodically
>>>>>> with a brush or mop during the cook, and usually after the first few
>>>>>> hours so it doesn't interfere with smoke absorption. The only time
>>>>>> foil
>>>>>> is ever valid in BBQ is when the cook is over and you need to hold
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> meat at serving temperature in a cooler.
>>>>>
>>>>> Okay, but now I'm confused. Apparently there are diverging opinions
>>>>> on this subject.
>>>>
>>>> He's sort of right.
>>>>
>>>> Wrapping or foiling a brisket with some slurry to finish is not
>>>> braising
>>>> as the smoke has already done it's job on an open cut of beef.
>>>>
>>>> Foiling allows the natural brisket juices to keep it moist and provides
>>>> a base sauce for re-hydrating it before serving.
>>>>
>>>> The wrap and hold, be it in a cooler or an old blanket is sound
>>>> strategy
>>>> and lets the meat rest and re-absorb juices.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I do wrap and hold in a styrofoam cooler.
>>
>> I have one too, they're cheap and hose out well.
>>
>>> The meat is foiled then
>>> wrapped in a couple of old towels before going into the cooler. I do
>>> this with brisket and pork butt.
>>
>> Nice.
>>
>>> I seem to have perfected smoking ribs on the gas grill (it has 6 burners
>>> so it's perfect for offset cooking) and they always come out perfect. I
>>> use a wrapped chunk of pecan or hickory to create smoke.
>>
>> The technique works as well with gas as charcoal or other fuels.
>>
>> That Weber "Smoke" book I mentioned has some really good recipes.
>>
>> Btw, 6 burners is a LOT! Would one of those be a rotisserie burner?
>>
>
> No. There are 6 burners in the grill and one side burner. This was the
> toy of my late husband of blessed memory. We named it "Grillzilla"

Oh heck yes!!!

> We would have anywhere from 30 to 60 guests and he would grill hot dogs
> and burgers and I'd make all the salads myself.

That is real living.

> After I finish my radiation treatment and get my scan, I'm throwing a
> barbecue for all the people who drove me, helped me, called me, etc. My
> oncologist says he'll come, too. I will probably smoke something
> earlier and have dogs and burgers, too. If prices are low enough, I
> could also do some ribs, but they'd be an advanced thing, too.
>
> I'll make all the salads myself and do some baking.
>
> Probably won't happen until early December as they wait quite a while to
> do the PET scan after the last radiation treatment.

YOU are one very cool person, no kidding.

On 9/16/2014 3:11 PM, sf wrote:
re.
>
> I'll probably end up with a flat, so I'll use foil the last hour. Do
> you use any liquid with beef? What's your view about cooking it the
> day before and reheating? I don't normally like leftovers, but that's
> a long cooking time and I'm not so sure I'll finish it at a reasonable
> hour.

With brisket there is enough fat that I'd not need other liquid.

Brisket reheats well. Given the size you will have some left. I prefer
to slice off what we are going to eat for the meal and microwave it for
a short time on medium power. Makes good sandwiches cold too.

On 9/16/2014 9:09 PM, sf wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 16:28:32 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
>
>> On 9/16/2014 4:06 PM, sf wrote:
>>> On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 13:22:44 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
>>>
>>>> I tend to use a few (2) ounces of good cider, and a dash of cider vinegar.
>>>
>>> Oh, sounds good! It would have taken me a long time to figure that
>>> one out.
>>>
>>>
>> One of those small laundry squirt bottle does the trick.
>>
>> Just don't forget it's not water and spritz your yeast dinner rolls ;-(
>
> Oh, how well aquatinted I am with that. I keep an ammonia and water
> mixture in one that I want kept next to the sink, but hubby always
> puts next to the stove. I have bad dreams about spritzing that into
> the oven by accident one day.
>
>
Oh boy!

Yeah, we have all been there.

On 9/16/2014 8:14 PM, sf wrote:
>
>
> I went to alt.food.barbecue to see what that's all about. It's filled
> with trolls and spam. Not one decent thread since June when Piedmont
> wondered where everyone went. Hope there's a decent BBQ group to join
> on Facebook.
>
>

Used to be a good group with a lot of good information and knowledgeable
posters.. Faded away over a year ago.

On 9/16/2014 10:32 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 9/16/2014 8:14 PM, sf wrote:
>>
>>
>> I went to alt.food.barbecue to see what that's all about. It's filled
>> with trolls and spam. Not one decent thread since June when Piedmont
>> wondered where everyone went. Hope there's a decent BBQ group to join
>> on Facebook.
>>
>>
>
> Used to be a good group with a lot of good information and knowledgeable
> posters.. Faded away over a year ago.


Killed off by Marty and Squishy.

On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 00:32:21 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

> On 9/16/2014 8:14 PM, sf wrote:
> >
> >
> > I went to alt.food.barbecue to see what that's all about. It's filled
> > with trolls and spam. Not one decent thread since June when Piedmont
> > wondered where everyone went. Hope there's a decent BBQ group to join
> > on Facebook.
> >
> >
>
> Used to be a good group with a lot of good information and knowledgeable
> posters.. Faded away over a year ago.

Too bad I wasn't in the Q zone when it was a decent group. Have you
found an online or Facebook group that tolerates newbies?


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On 2014-09-17, Janet Bostwick > wrote:

> Qing. This document dates from when Usenet was alive.

.....and it's obvious the document not been updated since Jesus wore knee
pants.

I'd also like to argue your "Usenet" claim. Usenet is still very much
alive and well. Notice how you are posting on it! Jes because most
web users have little of no knowledge of it, due to it's not being
trumpeted by some commercial entity with a $$$$ making agenda, doesn't
mean it is dead. What it means is, most of today's youth is too lazy
to carry on a civil conversation with actual syllables in the mix.
Note the "app" trap? Application apparently has waaay too many
syllables.

What cracks me up, is, they can't touch-type, but they can "txt" type
like the wind. Not sure if that is a step forward or back. Gee, too
bad the technologists can't come up with some sorta advanced device you could
jes talk into and the other party could talk back to you, like a real
convers.... wait a minute! 8|

nb

On 2014-09-17, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

> Used to be a good group with a lot of good information and knowledgeable
> posters.. Faded away over a year ago.

No doubt due to trolls like that "bregs" idiot.

I've seen it happen to more than a few usenet rooms. It happened to
alt.coffee, too. It's gonna happen to this group, if ppl don't start
seeing the trolls for what they really are instead of interacting with
them. I'll answer a jillion "how to peel hard boiled egg" threads
before I'll respond to one idiotic "bovine" thread.

In fact, it's the fault of the regulars who let the trolls drive them
out!! I've seen rfc survive several troll assaults, over the yrs, but
this last one, with the Bove and a couple other socks, peddling their
brand of soft-sell trolling and today's directionless regulars kidding
themselves into believing it's all jes harmless entertainment, is
gonna be the death of rfc.

Usenet has some rules. The kinda rules that make it easier to for
participants to interact, easily. But, today's regulars don't seem to
want to be bothered. Top post! It's harmless. Don't trim yer
posts! No-one can tell me I gotta bottom post and trim quotes! I'll
do what I wanna do!! Configure my newsreader client so it will be
easier to read my replies?? So what my crappy client double spaces
every line and doesn't correctly attribute quotes!? I'll run my crappy cell appy
or mis-configured Windows client the way I want!! Cuz I'm me and I
matter!!

Fine by me. I've bailed before and am about to bail again. Usta be
this was a fun group. Now, jes a buncha gossips who will post
whatever hurtful reply they can think of and post it however they damn
well please!! This, plus articles (individual posts) that run 200
lines with a lousy stinkin' one line reply. Arrghhh!!!!.....

nb --disgusted (but here)

On 9/17/2014 11:58 AM, Sqwertz wrote:
> Are you going to start following me around contradicting everything I
> say because you're having some sort of mental breakdown?
>
> -sw

Still a D+ - try harder, Squishy.

On 9/16/2014 10:32 PM, Janet Bostwick wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 20:17:21 -0700, sf > wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 20:45:09 -0500, Janet Wilder >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/16/2014 7:14 PM, sf wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I went to alt.food.barbecue to see what that's all about. It's filled
>>>> with trolls and spam. Not one decent thread since June when Piedmont
>>>> wondered where everyone went. Hope there's a decent BBQ group to join
>>>> on Facebook.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Go to the web site. It's filled with excellent information.
>>
>> No idea what you're talking about, sorry. That was the first time
>> I've ever looked at that group and wasn't inspired to hunt for a FAQ
>> if there is such a thing.
>
> http://www.eaglequest.com/~bbq/faq/toc.html
>
> You have to go about halfway down the index page to begin cooking and
> Qing. This document dates from when Usenet was alive.
> Janet US
>

Thanks for giving her the URL, Janet.

I know the site is dated, but there is still some excellent information
there.

--
From somewhere very deep in the heart of Texas

On 9/17/2014 4:40 PM, Janet Wilder wrote:
> On 9/16/2014 10:32 PM, Janet Bostwick wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 20:17:21 -0700, sf > wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 20:45:09 -0500, Janet Wilder >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 9/16/2014 7:14 PM, sf wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I went to alt.food.barbecue to see what that's all about. It's filled
>>>>> with trolls and spam. Not one decent thread since June when Piedmont
>>>>> wondered where everyone went. Hope there's a decent BBQ group to join
>>>>> on Facebook.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Go to the web site. It's filled with excellent information.
>>>
>>> No idea what you're talking about, sorry. That was the first time
>>> I've ever looked at that group and wasn't inspired to hunt for a FAQ
>>> if there is such a thing.
>>
>> http://www.eaglequest.com/~bbq/faq/toc.html
>>
>> You have to go about halfway down the index page to begin cooking and
>> Qing. This document dates from when Usenet was alive.
>> Janet US
>>
>
> Thanks for giving her the URL, Janet.
>
> I know the site is dated, but there is still some excellent information
> there.
>
I'll toss in two mo


http://amazingribs.com/index.html

http://www.thesmokering.com/


Just a wealth of great recipes and tips on these sites!

On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 17:40:09 -0500, Janet Wilder >
wrote:

>On 9/16/2014 10:32 PM, Janet Bostwick wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 20:17:21 -0700, sf > wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 20:45:09 -0500, Janet Wilder >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 9/16/2014 7:14 PM, sf wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I went to alt.food.barbecue to see what that's all about. It's filled
>>>>> with trolls and spam. Not one decent thread since June when Piedmont
>>>>> wondered where everyone went. Hope there's a decent BBQ group to join
>>>>> on Facebook.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Go to the web site. It's filled with excellent information.
>>>
>>> No idea what you're talking about, sorry. That was the first time
>>> I've ever looked at that group and wasn't inspired to hunt for a FAQ
>>> if there is such a thing.
>>
>> http://www.eaglequest.com/~bbq/faq/toc.html
>>
>> You have to go about halfway down the index page to begin cooking and
>> Qing. This document dates from when Usenet was alive.
>> Janet US
>>
>
>Thanks for giving her the URL, Janet.
>
>I know the site is dated, but there is still some excellent information
>there.

You're welcome. Strange group of people here today. Most have an
answer and most won't read.
Janet US

On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 17:40:09 -0500, Janet Wilder >
wrote:

> Thanks for giving her the URL, Janet.
>
> I know the site is dated, but there is still some excellent information
> there.
>
> --
I thought I thanked her for it, but it looks like I didn't. Thanks
Janet Boswick!


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 17:14:08 -0600, Janet Bostwick
> wrote:

> You're welcome. Strange group of people here today. Most have an
> answer and most won't read.

I read it and really did think I'd thanked you.

Thanks for the site!


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 19:34:03 -0400, jmcquown >
wrote:

> At least texts are silent.

Yes! Texting does not intrude the way talking on the phone does.
Text away strangers that I'm passing judgment on, I'm all for it.


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On 9/17/2014 6:31 PM, sf wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 19:34:03 -0400, jmcquown >
> wrote:
>
>> At least texts are silent.
>
> Yes! Texting does not intrude the way talking on the phone does.
> Text away strangers that I'm passing judgment on, I'm all for it.
>
>
But NOT whilst driving, killers!

On 9/17/2014 6:40 PM, Janet Wilder wrote:

>>
>> http://www.eaglequest.com/~bbq/faq/toc.html
>>
>> You have to go about halfway down the index page to begin cooking and
>> Qing. This document dates from when Usenet was alive.
>> Janet US
>>
>
> Thanks for giving her the URL, Janet.
>
> I know the site is dated, but there is still some excellent information
> there.
>

We wrote that before the newsgroup existed. It was the bbq mailing list
that had some really experienced people. A few years old, but the same
rules apply.

On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 18:34:09 -0600, Mayo > wrote:

> On 9/17/2014 6:31 PM, sf wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 19:34:03 -0400, jmcquown >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> At least texts are silent.
> >
> > Yes! Texting does not intrude the way talking on the phone does.
> > Text away strangers that I'm passing judgment on, I'm all for it.
> >
> >
> But NOT whilst driving, killers!

I didn't know testing while driving was being discussed. My bad.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

On 9/17/2014 11:19 PM, sf wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 18:34:09 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
>
>> On 9/17/2014 6:31 PM, sf wrote:
>>> On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 19:34:03 -0400, jmcquown >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> At least texts are silent.
>>>
>>> Yes! Texting does not intrude the way talking on the phone does.
>>> Text away strangers that I'm passing judgment on, I'm all for it.
>>>
>>>
>> But NOT whilst driving, killers!
>
> I didn't know testing while driving was being discussed. My bad.
>
My addition, and it is a true killer.

On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 17:19:28 -0700, sf > wrote:

>On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 17:14:08 -0600, Janet Bostwick
> wrote:
>
>> You're welcome. Strange group of people here today. Most have an
>> answer and most won't read.
>
>I read it and really did think I'd thanked you.
>
>Thanks for the site!
No problem.
Janet US