On 9/27/2015 7:27 PM, gtr wrote:
> On 2015-09-27 14:21:45 +0000, said:
>
>> OReverse it, would we like tribalism imposed on us? Though sometimes
>> with current politics I
>> begin to wonder.
>
> Tribalism isn't working out so great for American government, I can
> assure you.
>
>
There are no tribes in out government, you lying libitarded shitbag.

DROP DEAD!

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On 9/27/2015 7:29 PM, gtr wrote:
> Similarly Patton tendered to push past Berlin to Moscow. Makes you
> wonder how the 20th century would have ended had that taken place.


With none of eastern Yurop ENSLAVED, you gutless ninny.

Drop dead.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

Graham, I think those heros on the Belgian train were certainly equal
to the dam busters...speaking of young, brave men.

N.

On 2015-09-28 02:56:11 +0000, unwelcome trVth said:

> On 9/27/2015 7:27 PM, gtr wrote:
>> On 2015-09-27 14:21:45 +0000, said:
>>
>>> OReverse it, would we like tribalism imposed on us? Though sometimes
>>> with current politics I
>>> begin to wonder.
>>
>> Tribalism isn't working out so great for American government, I can
>> assure you.
>>
> There are no tribes in out government, you lying libitarded shitbag.
>
> DROP DEAD!

Libtard? Spoken by a true tribal lackey!

On 9/28/2015 4:41 AM, wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Sep 2015 18:27:19 -0700, gtr > wrote:
>
>> On 2015-09-27 14:21:45 +0000, said:
>>
>>> OReverse it, would we like tribalism imposed on us? Though sometimes
>>> with current politics I
>>> begin to wonder.
>>
>> Tribalism isn't working out so great for American government, I can assure you.
>>
> I didn't say that lol
>

STFU, you revisionist ****!

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:20:00 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

> On 9/26/2015 4:22 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
> >
>
>
> >
> > And what Nancy said is totally untrue. Some people, businesses and
> > groups only use Facebook now. The trend with restaurants here is to
> > have a Facebook page and not a website.
>
> They'd lose my business, I'd never see them. Makes sense for them to be
> there, but "in addition" not in place of, a regular web page.

Agree. However, when the owners don't have the expertise to design
and maintain a website and don't have the spare cash to hire someone
to do it for them - FB is a great online alternative.

--

sf

On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 15:51:40 +1000, Bruce > wrote:

> On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 22:49:54 -0700, sf > wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 12:44:32 +1000, Xeno >
> >wrote:
> >
> >> On 26/09/2015 1:49 AM, sf wrote:
> >> > On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 08:42:22 +1000, Xeno >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On 24/09/2015 8:09 AM, rosie wrote:
> >> >>> On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 11:49:43 AM UTC-5, gtr wrote:
> >> >>>> On 2015-09-20 16:28:18 +0000, William said:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>> Is this just typical end of summer traffic on RFC? Seems slow with few
> >> >>>>> postings. I guess things will pick up near Thanksgiving.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> I have not yet found anything of value in FaceBook. I don't doubt that
> >> >>>> there are brief twitter-like exchanges there, and lots of them. But I
> >> >>>> have not yet found substantive discussion of anything, cooking included.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I will say somethng positive about the FB RFC page. It is good, people talk about coking, eating and other food related things. There has been ( as far as can tell ) no name calling no wars or anythng nasty. I do not think the posts are censored, people just do the right thing in there.
> >> >>>
> >> >> That's because they cannot hide behind a pseudonym.
> >> >
> >> > Not true.
> >> >
> >> Post insults and see how long it is before you get 'kicked"... pseudonym
> >> or real name.
> >
> >Agree. The sort of behavior that is tolerated here on rfc usenet will
> >make the poster history in rfc FB.
>
> How would your troll friend go in Facebook?

Try concentrating on your own behavior for a change.

--

sf

On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:24:03 -0700, "Cheri" >
wrote:

>
> "Gary" > wrote in message ...
> > sf wrote:
> >>
> >> Xeno wrote:
> >> > Post insults and see how long it is before you get 'kicked"...
> >> > pseudonym
> >> > or real name.
> >>
> >> Agree. The sort of behavior that is tolerated here on rfc usenet will
> >> make the poster history in rfc FB.
> >
> > The Stepford Group
>
> LOL

It's just the old hierarchy (of people), moved to a new location. If
they got on your last nerve when they were here, then it's better they
stay where they are. They're happy and you're happy. <shrug>


--

sf

On Sun, 27 Sep 2015 08:31:51 -0400, Gary > wrote:

> "Jeßus" wrote:
> >
> > Gary wrote:
> > >No matter who is our president here, I will always honor the office
> > >that he was elected to.
>
> You don't have to like the person but you should treat them with
> respect when duly elected to that office.
>
> >
> > That is just moronic. At least these days it is and has been for
> > the past 52 years.
>
> Math equates to.... you think Kennedy was a great president?
> Oh man you are so clueless. Kennedy was a loose cannon.
> I believe to this day that it was our own government that
> took him out. And his little brother too the next election.
> Messed up Ted's chance and even took out JK junior as he was
> heading for a potential run in the future.
>
> Think about it. 4 Kennedy kids...all potential candidates,
> all dead now. What are the odds of that happening normally?

I had no idea you were a conspiracy theorist.

--

sf

sf wrote:
>
> Gary wrote:
> > Think about it. 4 Kennedy kids...all potential candidates,
> > all dead now. What are the odds of that happening normally?
>
> I had no idea you were a conspiracy theorist.

I don't wear a tin-foil hat but think about it... the odds of all
those members of one family that had presidential potential getting
shot down? Ted was disgraced, the others all died.

You could even throw in a 5th Kennedy, older son Joe Jr. Supposely he
was being groomed for president by Joe Sr. but he got killed early on.
JFK was next in line.

Caroline Kennedy has kept a lower profile. Smart lady.

sf wrote:
>
> It's just the old hierarchy (of people), moved to a new location. If
> they got on your last nerve when they were here, then it's better they
> stay where they are. They're happy and you're happy. <shrug>

I agree. It's always been said that you need thick skin to dwell in
RFC (indian country). If you can't take the heat, go to some safe
haven where everyone is polite. Each to their own.

wrote:
>
> I thought Joe Jr was killed in the war? Probably while Joe Snr was
> writing While England Slept, a nazi sympathiser. You need to consider
> his links to the Mafia in the USA too.

Joe Jr. was killed in the war. JFK was next in line for the family
plan. He luckily got named as a war hero.

Joe Sr. made his fortune during Prohibition. He was essentially a drug
runner, made his fortune illegally then set out to make his sons get
into politics and power.

JFK won the presidency but was assassinated after screwing up a few
important things. The rest of the family went down after that. Some
permanent govt agency didn't want that family in power ever again.
Many years later John Kennedy Jr. was looking good for a presidential
run eventually. He died in a small plane crash. How convenient.

On 10/1/2015 5:05 AM, Bruce wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 04:02:16 -0700, sf > wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 15:51:40 +1000, Bruce > wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 25 Sep 2015 22:49:54 -0700, sf > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 12:44:32 +1000, Xeno >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Post insults and see how long it is before you get 'kicked"... pseudonym
>>>>> or real name.
>>>>
>>>> Agree. The sort of behavior that is tolerated here on rfc usenet will
>>>> make the poster history in rfc FB.
>>>
>>> How would your troll friend go in Facebook?
>>
>> Try concentrating on your own behavior for a change.
>
> Thanks, I'll give it a go.
>

LOL!

Yeah?

Pffft!

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On 10/1/2015 7:48 AM, Gary wrote:
> sf wrote:
>>
>> It's just the old hierarchy (of people), moved to a new location. If
>> they got on your last nerve when they were here, then it's better they
>> stay where they are. They're happy and you're happy. <shrug>
>
> I agree. It's always been said that you need thick skin to dwell in
> RFC (indian country). If you can't take the heat, go to some safe
> haven where everyone is polite. Each to their own.
>

Thanks so VERY much for supporting the bully culture here!

So nice of you.

Say, how about I **** you face up with a 2X4?

That work for you?

Then I toss the damned ferret in the garbage disposer.

Done.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On 10/1/2015 8:56 AM, Gary wrote:
> JFK won the presidency but was assassinated after screwing up a few
> important things. The rest of the family went down after that. Some
> permanent govt agency didn't want that family in power ever again.

Oh really?

which one, pray tell?

And why are you blaming THEM and not he Mafia?

You're ****ing nutso, ferret man.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On 2015-10-01 10:56 AM, Gary wrote:
>
>
> JFK won the presidency but was assassinated after screwing up a few
> important things. The rest of the family went down after that. Some
> permanent govt agency didn't want that family in power ever again.
> Many years later John Kennedy Jr. was looking good for a presidential
> run eventually. He died in a small plane crash. How convenient.
>


I don't wear a tin foil hate. I attribute that to a rich kid with an
expensive toy.

On 10/1/2015 3:34 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2015-10-01 10:56 AM, Gary wrote:
>>
>>
>> JFK won the presidency but was assassinated after screwing up a few
>> important things. The rest of the family went down after that. Some
>> permanent govt agency didn't want that family in power ever again.
>> Many years later John Kennedy Jr. was looking good for a presidential
>> run eventually. He died in a small plane crash. How convenient.
>>
>
>
> I don't wear a tin foil hate.

What kind of hate do you wear?

> I attribute that to a rich kid with an
> expensive toy.

Like Lucrezia!

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On 9/26/2015 4:22 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "sf" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 06:12:57 -0700 (PDT), Nancy2
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Sf, your statement has an implied judgment, which I don't appreciate.
>>> Did
>>> you not see the part where I said I use email?
>>>
>>> I repeat, nobody "needs" FB.
>>>
>>> N.
>>
>> My threading has gone wacko, so I wish you'd included what I said.
>
> And what Nancy said is totally untrue. Some people, businesses and
> groups only use Facebook now. The trend with restaurants here is to
> have a Facebook page and not a website.

I don't know about restaurants in your area but I see ads on TV for
companies that will create a FB account for small businesses. One ad in
particular says their staff will create comments to generate interest.
Essentially they're saying they'll make up a bunch of stuff but the
comments will appear to have been added by happy customers. I call that
fraud!

Jill

On Sat, 03 Oct 2015 09:26:58 -0400, jmcquown >
wrote:

>On 9/26/2015 4:22 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> "sf" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 06:12:57 -0700 (PDT), Nancy2
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sf, your statement has an implied judgment, which I don't appreciate.
>>>> Did
>>>> you not see the part where I said I use email?
>>>>
>>>> I repeat, nobody "needs" FB.
>>>>
>>>> N.
>>>
>>> My threading has gone wacko, so I wish you'd included what I said.
>>
>> And what Nancy said is totally untrue. Some people, businesses and
>> groups only use Facebook now. The trend with restaurants here is to
>> have a Facebook page and not a website.
>
>I don't know about restaurants in your area but I see ads on TV for
>companies that will create a FB account for small businesses. One ad in
>particular says their staff will create comments to generate interest.
>Essentially they're saying they'll make up a bunch of stuff but the
>comments will appear to have been added by happy customers. I call that
>fraud!
>
>Jill


There are a lot of companies out there making money with online
promotion within FB, Twitter and Ihstagram, as well as ginning up the
waters to raise placement in Google searches. IT doesn't have to be
done illegally, either.

On 9/22/2015 5:21 PM, Bruce wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 14:45:13 +0100, "Ophelia" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> "Bruce" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 13:44:00 +0100, "Ophelia" >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Bruce" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 11:20:19 +0100, "Ophelia" >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Bruce" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 08:23:49 +1000, Xeno >
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 22/09/2015 7:26 AM, Bruce wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 07:05:19 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 05:13:49 -0700 (PDT), Nancy2
>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I don't "do" FB, Twitter, or any of those popular media venues.
>>>>>>>>>>> 95% of it is pure bullsh*t.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's amazing more people don't recognise that fact.
>>>>>>>>>> But that's what you get with the general public (from all
>>>>>>>>>> demographics) now on the Internet.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Its all in how you use it. People were against computers too once.
>>>>>>>>> Now
>>>>>>>>> look at them.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Precisely. We are a society in transition and not everyone can keep
>>>>>>>> up.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, and Usenet has become a 50+ thing. That's why you see a lot of
>>>>>>> bony fingers in the air here telling the world how bad smartphones and
>>>>>>> social media are
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oi !!! I will point a horny finger at you if you ain't careful young
>>>>>> fella
>>>>>> me lad ... ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> lol
>>>>>
>>>>>> O who does smartphones but not social media
>>>>>
>>>>> That makes us equally up to date. I do social media, but not
>>>>> smartphones.
>>>>
>>>> Ah! Do you do fb
>>>
>>> I resisted for a long time, but it's handy to stay in touch with
>>> friends and family on the other side of the world. I don't post much
>>> but I can see what they're up to
>>
>> If you are happy with it
>>
>> I was encourage by a poster here to join. Once was enough and I never went
>> back. The family have stopped trying now. D was persuaded to get onto
>> Granddaughters thingy to look at pics but that is all. He never posts.
>
> Yes, it's handy for that. He could always click the Like button
> occasionally, so they know he's seen it.
>
>> I just treasure emails and real letters)
>
> I can't remember the last time I've sent or received a real letter
>
My two remaining aunts are both in their 90's. Neither one owns a
computer. I get (and send) real letters to them.

Jill

On 03/10/2015 7:26 AM, jmcquown wrote:
> On 9/26/2015 4:22 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> "sf" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 06:12:57 -0700 (PDT), Nancy2
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sf, your statement has an implied judgment, which I don't appreciate.
>>>> Did
>>>> you not see the part where I said I use email?
>>>>
>>>> I repeat, nobody "needs" FB.
>>>>
>>>> N.
>>>
>>> My threading has gone wacko, so I wish you'd included what I said.
>>
>> And what Nancy said is totally untrue. Some people, businesses and
>> groups only use Facebook now. The trend with restaurants here is to
>> have a Facebook page and not a website.
>
> I don't know about restaurants in your area but I see ads on TV for
> companies that will create a FB account for small businesses. One ad in
> particular says their staff will create comments to generate interest.
> Essentially they're saying they'll make up a bunch of stuff but the
> comments will appear to have been added by happy customers. I call that
> fraud!
>
> Jill
Online reviews are sometimes fraudulent. I understand that that was the
case with that awful place that Gordon Ramsay tried in van to help on
Restaurant Nightmares.
Graham

On 2015-10-03 13:31, graham wrote:

> Online reviews are sometimes fraudulent. I understand that that was the
> case with that awful place that Gordon Ramsay tried in van to help on
> Restaurant Nightmares.

I heard a radio show about that. It seems there are companies that are
in the business of sending reviews to rating web sites. They will write
positive reviews for their clients and sometimes give negative reviews
for the competition.

On Saturday, October 3, 2015 at 3:26:59 PM UTC-10, Mirrror of TrVth wrote:
> On 10/3/2015 7:13 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> > On Saturday, October 3, 2015 at 12:46:12 PM UTC-10, Dave Smith wrote:
> >> On 2015-10-03 6:33 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> >>
> >>>> I heard a radio show about that. It seems there are companies that are
> >>>> in the business of sending reviews to rating web sites. They will write
> >>>> positive reviews for their clients and sometimes give negative reviews
> >>>> for the competition.
> >>>
> >>> My guess is that Yelp is your best bet for reviews of this sort because they only accept reviews from registered i.e., non-anonymous posters. Well that's my understanding anyway.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> After seeing some reviews on local restaurants and hearing that radio
> >> program, I have zero faith in online review sites.
> >
> > I think this is a good policy. Everybody looks at things differently. Some people just see everything in a negative light. It is the negative reviews, however, that most people remember. The only review that I remember about the place we stayed in Vegas was that the place had bedbugs.
> >
>
> Please confirm for us it did not!

Our bedroom had no bedbugs. We really liked that bed! It was big and comfy! Hoo boy! I'm not even sure if Las Vegas has any bedbugs. My guess is that they're easy enough to get rid of over there - just turn off the air conditioning and bake those little *******s to hell.

>
> Also, try this show and watch and learn from it:
>
> http://www.travelchannel.com/shows/hotel-impossible
>
> Some things to remember:
>
> ` Low price hotels are germ traps.
>
> ` Major chains are your best bet.
>
> ` Trip Advisor reviews are very much worth considering.
>
> --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

We stayed at a 2-bedroom condo/timeshare and it was a lot better than the usual cheapo places we're accustomed to. What a surprise it was to open the lanai curtain and see a giant 520 foot diameter Ferris wheel out back. I doubt we'll get a better room in Vegas unless I win the some super casino jackpot. Hee hee.

On 10/3/2015 9:04 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> On Saturday, October 3, 2015 at 3:26:59 PM UTC-10, Mirrror of TrVth wrote:
>> On 10/3/2015 7:13 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>>> On Saturday, October 3, 2015 at 12:46:12 PM UTC-10, Dave Smith wrote:
>>>> On 2015-10-03 6:33 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> I heard a radio show about that. It seems there are companies that are
>>>>>> in the business of sending reviews to rating web sites. They will write
>>>>>> positive reviews for their clients and sometimes give negative reviews
>>>>>> for the competition.
>>>>>
>>>>> My guess is that Yelp is your best bet for reviews of this sort because they only accept reviews from registered i.e., non-anonymous posters. Well that's my understanding anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> After seeing some reviews on local restaurants and hearing that radio
>>>> program, I have zero faith in online review sites.
>>>
>>> I think this is a good policy. Everybody looks at things differently. Some people just see everything in a negative light. It is the negative reviews, however, that most people remember. The only review that I remember about the place we stayed in Vegas was that the place had bedbugs.
>>>
>>
>> Please confirm for us it did not!
>
> Our bedroom had no bedbugs. We really liked that bed! It was big and comfy! Hoo boy! I'm not even sure if Las Vegas has any bedbugs. My guess is that they're easy enough to get rid of over there - just turn off the air conditioning and bake those little *******s to hell.

Surprisingly the use of high heat is actually one of the more effective
means of killing bedbugs!

But yes, Vegas has them regardless.

http://www.scrippsmedia.com/ktnv/new...303351371.html

Las Vegas, NV (KTNV) -- Bed bugs are spreading across the valley at a
record pace. You might have some in your home and not even know it!

So where are you most likely to find them? When you ask, we investigate.

Contact 13 Chief Investigator Darcy Spears is here with a story you'll
only see on Action News.

If you think bed bugs are most frequently found in hotels on the strip,
you're wrong. They're likely a lot closer than you think.


>>
>> Also, try this show and watch and learn from it:
>>
>> http://www.travelchannel.com/shows/hotel-impossible
>>
>> Some things to remember:
>>
>> ` Low price hotels are germ traps.
>>
>> ` Major chains are your best bet.
>>
>> ` Trip Advisor reviews are very much worth considering.
>>
>> --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---
>
> We stayed at a 2-bedroom condo/timeshare and it was a lot better than the usual cheapo places we're accustomed to. What a surprise it was to open the lanai curtain and see a giant 520 foot diameter Ferris wheel out back. I doubt we'll get a better room in Vegas unless I win the some super casino jackpot. Hee hee.

Outstanding you had such a great stay, just be sure to physically check
under the bedding at any hotel or condo before you drop your bags or
unpack.



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:46:13 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> On 2015-10-03 6:33 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>
> >> I heard a radio show about that. It seems there are companies that are
> >> in the business of sending reviews to rating web sites. They will write
> >> positive reviews for their clients and sometimes give negative reviews
> >> for the competition.
> >
> > My guess is that Yelp is your best bet for reviews of this sort because they only accept reviews from registered i.e., non-anonymous posters. Well that's my understanding anyway.
> >
>
>
> After seeing some reviews on local restaurants and hearing that radio
> program, I have zero faith in online review sites.

IMO, anyone who ever thought online reviews could reflect their
personal taste/expectation was a definite Pollyanna.

--

sf

On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:13:35 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
wrote:

> Everybody looks at things differently. Some people just see everything in a negative light. It is the negative reviews, however, that most people remember. The only review that I remember about the place we stayed in Vegas was that the place had bedbugs.

I was looking at both Yelp and Trip Advisor reviews for one restaurant
I want to try just a couple of hours ago and reviews from just the
last two months are all over the board. I saw the inside, I walked
inside... some of those reviews made it sound like a completely
different place (physically) and food/drink reviews were just as
vastly different too. My favorite review was the one who gave it
three stars, but said they'd been there 4 times (during a vacation)
and would return. HUH? You ate there 4 times on your vacation and
would eat there again if you come back to town, but it rated only 3
stars? I hope that person doesn't write performance reviews in an
official capacity.

--

sf

On 2015-10-04 17:47:23 +0000, sf said:

> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:13:35 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
> wrote:
>
>> Everybody looks at things differently. Some people just see everything
>> in a negative light. It is the negative reviews, however, that most
>> people remember. The only review that I remember about the place we
>> stayed in Vegas was that the place had bedbugs.
>
> I was looking at both Yelp and Trip Advisor reviews for one restaurant
> I want to try just a couple of hours ago and reviews from just the
> last two months are all over the board. I saw the inside, I walked
> inside... some of those reviews made it sound like a completely
> different place (physically) and food/drink reviews were just as
> vastly different too. My favorite review was the one who gave it
> three stars, but said they'd been there 4 times (during a vacation)
> and would return. HUH? You ate there 4 times on your vacation and
> would eat there again if you come back to town, but it rated only 3
> stars? I hope that person doesn't write performance reviews in an
> official capacity.

Seems feasible. People have very personal views of ratings limited to
five stars. 5 is the best ever, 1 is a nightmare, leaving only 3 stars
to cover 90% of restaurants. I might well go to a restaurant that is
pleasant enough, functional enough, with a limited menu, because it is
near my hotel and convenient. I might return a number of times; all
this and still not be willing to give it a 4th star, because I reserve
that for places that are more pleasant, more functional, etc.

As for me, I find Yelp and related review sites thoroughly usable. I
can throw out the reviews that claw their eyes over speed of service--I
don't go to a restaurant with 20 minutes before going to a bus station
or movie. I skim the 5-star ratings and can usually tell, from writing
style and from the things people find important, whether they would
likely be useful dinner companions.

I've been to joints that are rated sub-par and found them excellent,
and those rated excellent and found them sub-par. But I never seem to
have a nervous breakdown as a result. All-in-all when I find myself at
a crummy restaurant I usually get more laughs out of it than trauma. It
might just be a personality thing, or maybe it's that "bad" restaurants
in my neck of the woods aren't the same kind of "bad" you find in that
vast swath between the coasts.

Right now I'm taking a class, History of California Cuisine. I was damn
well surprised that most modern ideas, attitudes, menu styles, approach
to ingredients and all the rest not only originated either in
Berkeley/San Fran (Chez Pannis/French Laundry) or in Los Angeles
(Spago/Michaels), and then bloomed outwardly from there to encompass a
50-mile radius. Then took a plane to New York.

That was easy. But it undoubtedly warps my ideas of what restaurants
are and could be elsewhere.

On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 09:30:39 -0700, gtr > wrote:

> On 2015-10-04 17:47:23 +0000, sf said:
>
> > On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:13:35 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Everybody looks at things differently. Some people just see everything
> >> in a negative light. It is the negative reviews, however, that most
> >> people remember. The only review that I remember about the place we
> >> stayed in Vegas was that the place had bedbugs.
> >
> > I was looking at both Yelp and Trip Advisor reviews for one restaurant
> > I want to try just a couple of hours ago and reviews from just the
> > last two months are all over the board. I saw the inside, I walked
> > inside... some of those reviews made it sound like a completely
> > different place (physically) and food/drink reviews were just as
> > vastly different too. My favorite review was the one who gave it
> > three stars, but said they'd been there 4 times (during a vacation)
> > and would return. HUH? You ate there 4 times on your vacation and
> > would eat there again if you come back to town, but it rated only 3
> > stars? I hope that person doesn't write performance reviews in an
> > official capacity.
>
> Seems feasible. People have very personal views of ratings limited to
> five stars. 5 is the best ever, 1 is a nightmare, leaving only 3 stars
> to cover 90% of restaurants. I might well go to a restaurant that is
> pleasant enough, functional enough, with a limited menu, because it is
> near my hotel and convenient. I might return a number of times; all
> this and still not be willing to give it a 4th star, because I reserve
> that for places that are more pleasant, more functional, etc.
>
> As for me, I find Yelp and related review sites thoroughly usable. I
> can throw out the reviews that claw their eyes over speed of service--I
> don't go to a restaurant with 20 minutes before going to a bus station
> or movie. I skim the 5-star ratings and can usually tell, from writing
> style and from the things people find important, whether they would
> likely be useful dinner companions.
>
> I've been to joints that are rated sub-par and found them excellent,
> and those rated excellent and found them sub-par. But I never seem to
> have a nervous breakdown as a result. All-in-all when I find myself at
> a crummy restaurant I usually get more laughs out of it than trauma. It
> might just be a personality thing, or maybe it's that "bad" restaurants
> in my neck of the woods aren't the same kind of "bad" you find in that
> vast swath between the coasts.
>
> Right now I'm taking a class, History of California Cuisine. I was damn
> well surprised that most modern ideas, attitudes, menu styles, approach
> to ingredients and all the rest not only originated either in
> Berkeley/San Fran (Chez Pannis/French Laundry) or in Los Angeles
> (Spago/Michaels), and then bloomed outwardly from there to encompass a
> 50-mile radius. Then took a plane to New York.
>
> That was easy. But it undoubtedly warps my ideas of what restaurants
> are and could be elsewhere.

Our California cuisine was supposedly based on Europe's approach to
food (fresh, seasonal, ingredients that are prepared simply) and as
far as I'm concerned, Alice Waters spearheaded that approach. Those
were the days when everyone learned how to steam their vegetables
instead of boiling them to death.

Wolfgang's pizzas broke the old fashioned pizza mold, but if he hadn't
done it someone else would have. It was just a matter of time.

--

sf

On Sunday, October 4, 2015 at 7:47:28 AM UTC-10, sf wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:13:35 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> wrote:
>
> > Everybody looks at things differently. Some people just see everything in a negative light. It is the negative reviews, however, that most people remember. The only review that I remember about the place we stayed in Vegas was that the place had bedbugs.
>
> I was looking at both Yelp and Trip Advisor reviews for one restaurant
> I want to try just a couple of hours ago and reviews from just the
> last two months are all over the board. I saw the inside, I walked
> inside... some of those reviews made it sound like a completely
> different place (physically) and food/drink reviews were just as
> vastly different too. My favorite review was the one who gave it
> three stars, but said they'd been there 4 times (during a vacation)
> and would return. HUH? You ate there 4 times on your vacation and
> would eat there again if you come back to town, but it rated only 3
> stars? I hope that person doesn't write performance reviews in an
> official capacity.
>
> --
>
> sf

I don't like it myself. I had a woman write a Yelp review on my business while she was in my office. She took pictures of my humble office and the door sign. It's kind of a strange thing to do. That's young folks for you.

On 2015-10-05 16:59:38 +0000, sf said:

> Our California cuisine was supposedly based on Europe's approach to
> food (fresh, seasonal, ingredients that are prepared simply) and as
> far as I'm concerned, Alice Waters spearheaded that approach. Those
> were the days when everyone learned how to steam their vegetables
> instead of boiling them to death.
>
> Wolfgang's pizzas broke the old fashioned pizza mold, but if he hadn't
> done it someone else would have. It was just a matter of time.

There's a lot more to it than pizza; I'm hoping our instructor, Cathy
Pavlos, is prepping a book. In the case of LA, breaking a pizza mold
was just the beginning of breaking a lot of eurocentric molds. The
European approach that Waters and others reinvented here included
something not available in all parts of the US; direct access to nearby
farmers that were on really on-board with their philosophies, which
they also pursued in the LA area. And of course our climates provide
an overwhelming abundance in this regard.

These people, among their other changes, abandoned the continental
"heavy sauce" approach, and flavors-as-masks. Cathy Pavlos knows/knew
many of these people and has interesting ideas regarding the northern
California concentration on ingredients as primary with technique
getting disrespect. I suppose in may arts there is see-saw effect
where it becomes necessary to dis those who pursue technique to get
called "mechanics" and such. The Angelinos then tended to stress
technique and so lead the way with more "gee whiz" in their results;
both manifestations of regional culture and style.

Cathy says the Bay Area wants to know where the food on the plate came
from, and the SoCal diners want to know who's sitting next to them.
Cute, but the significant cultural shifts of the time and its
ramifications, actually did make the approach to building a new cuisine
quite different.

On Monday, October 5, 2015 at 7:00:28 AM UTC-10, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 09:30:39 -0700, gtr > wrote:
>
> > On 2015-10-04 17:47:23 +0000, sf said:
> >
> > > On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:13:35 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Everybody looks at things differently. Some people just see everything
> > >> in a negative light. It is the negative reviews, however, that most
> > >> people remember. The only review that I remember about the place we
> > >> stayed in Vegas was that the place had bedbugs.
> > >
> > > I was looking at both Yelp and Trip Advisor reviews for one restaurant
> > > I want to try just a couple of hours ago and reviews from just the
> > > last two months are all over the board. I saw the inside, I walked
> > > inside... some of those reviews made it sound like a completely
> > > different place (physically) and food/drink reviews were just as
> > > vastly different too. My favorite review was the one who gave it
> > > three stars, but said they'd been there 4 times (during a vacation)
> > > and would return. HUH? You ate there 4 times on your vacation and
> > > would eat there again if you come back to town, but it rated only 3
> > > stars? I hope that person doesn't write performance reviews in an
> > > official capacity.
> >
> > Seems feasible. People have very personal views of ratings limited to
> > five stars. 5 is the best ever, 1 is a nightmare, leaving only 3 stars
> > to cover 90% of restaurants. I might well go to a restaurant that is
> > pleasant enough, functional enough, with a limited menu, because it is
> > near my hotel and convenient. I might return a number of times; all
> > this and still not be willing to give it a 4th star, because I reserve
> > that for places that are more pleasant, more functional, etc.
> >
> > As for me, I find Yelp and related review sites thoroughly usable. I
> > can throw out the reviews that claw their eyes over speed of service--I
> > don't go to a restaurant with 20 minutes before going to a bus station
> > or movie. I skim the 5-star ratings and can usually tell, from writing
> > style and from the things people find important, whether they would
> > likely be useful dinner companions.
> >
> > I've been to joints that are rated sub-par and found them excellent,
> > and those rated excellent and found them sub-par. But I never seem to
> > have a nervous breakdown as a result. All-in-all when I find myself at
> > a crummy restaurant I usually get more laughs out of it than trauma. It
> > might just be a personality thing, or maybe it's that "bad" restaurants
> > in my neck of the woods aren't the same kind of "bad" you find in that
> > vast swath between the coasts.
> >
> > Right now I'm taking a class, History of California Cuisine. I was damn
> > well surprised that most modern ideas, attitudes, menu styles, approach
> > to ingredients and all the rest not only originated either in
> > Berkeley/San Fran (Chez Pannis/French Laundry) or in Los Angeles
> > (Spago/Michaels), and then bloomed outwardly from there to encompass a
> > 50-mile radius. Then took a plane to New York.
> >
> > That was easy. But it undoubtedly warps my ideas of what restaurants
> > are and could be elsewhere.
>
> Our California cuisine was supposedly based on Europe's approach to
> food (fresh, seasonal, ingredients that are prepared simply) and as
> far as I'm concerned, Alice Waters spearheaded that approach. Those
> were the days when everyone learned how to steam their vegetables
> instead of boiling them to death.

I bought some choy sum at the L&L down the street. It was tasty so I asked the guy how he prepared the dish. I assumed that he steamed it but he boiled it in some salted water. That's it. Dead simple. It was served with a sauce of shoyu, and a little bit of oyster sauce and vinegar. It's sublime stuff but quite simple.

>
> Wolfgang's pizzas broke the old fashioned pizza mold, but if he hadn't
> done it someone else would have. It was just a matter of time.
>
> --
>
> sf

On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 10:21:46 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
wrote:


>I don't like it myself. I had a woman write a Yelp review on my business while she was in my office.
>She took pictures of my humble office and the door sign. It's kind of a strange thing to do. That's
>young folks for you.

My guess is she thought even janitors need reviewing.

On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 10:28:36 -0700, gtr > wrote:

> These people, among their other changes, abandoned the continental
> "heavy sauce" approach, and flavors-as-masks.

Thank god for that! I'm ready to resume the California cuisine
approach pronto.

--

sf

On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 10:30:56 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
wrote:

>
> I bought some choy sum at the L&L down the street. It was tasty so I asked the guy how he prepared the dish. I assumed that he steamed it but he boiled it in some salted water. That's it. Dead simple. It was served with a sauce of shoyu, and a little bit of oyster sauce and vinegar. It's sublime stuff but quite simple.

I bet it barely hit the water before he took it out.

--

sf

On Monday, October 5, 2015 at 1:28:39 PM UTC-4, gtr wrote:
>
> These people, among their other changes, abandoned the continental
> "heavy sauce" approach, and flavors-as-masks.

You've never had good continental food if you think the continental sauces are used to mask flavor (or lack thereof). A good sauce is a supplement, often originating from the item being cooked.

http://www.richardfisher.com

On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 11:49:43 AM UTC-5, gtr wrote:
> On 2015-09-20 16:28:18 +0000, William said:
>
> > Is this just typical end of summer traffic on RFC? Seems slow with few
> > postings. I guess things will pick up near Thanksgiving.
>
> I have not yet found anything of value in FaceBook. I don't doubt that
> there are brief twitter-like exchanges there, and lots of them. But I
> have not yet found substantive discussion of anything, cooking included.

I enjoy FB, I can catch up with my extended family , including the antics of my identical red head twin Great nephews ! Old school friends, Friends who live in other places, Cat Groups ! And of course RFC.

On 10/6/2015 3:42 AM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 10:28:36 -0700, gtr > wrote:
>
>> These people, among their other changes, abandoned the continental
>> "heavy sauce" approach, and flavors-as-masks.
>
> Thank god for that! I'm ready to resume the California cuisine
> approach pronto.
>

Right on.

On 10/5/2015 10:59 AM, sf wrote:
> Our California cuisine was supposedly based on Europe's approach to
> food (fresh, seasonal, ingredients that are prepared simply) and as
> far as I'm concerned, Alice Waters spearheaded that approach. Those
> were the days when everyone learned how to steam their vegetables
> instead of boiling them to death.

Thank goodness.

I have become a major proponent of blanching , then broiling or stir
frying quickly.

> Wolfgang's pizzas broke the old fashioned pizza mold, but if he hadn't
> done it someone else would have. It was just a matter of time.
>
> -- sf

Well thankfully he did it, and we're all the better for it.

On 10/4/2015 11:47 AM, sf wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:13:35 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
> wrote:
>
>> Everybody looks at things differently. Some people just see everything in a negative light. It is the negative reviews, however, that most people remember. The only review that I remember about the place we stayed in Vegas was that the place had bedbugs.
>
> I was looking at both Yelp and Trip Advisor reviews for one restaurant
> I want to try just a couple of hours ago and reviews from just the
> last two months are all over the board. I saw the inside, I walked
> inside... some of those reviews made it sound like a completely
> different place (physically) and food/drink reviews were just as
> vastly different too. My favorite review was the one who gave it
> three stars, but said they'd been there 4 times (during a vacation)
> and would return. HUH? You ate there 4 times on your vacation and
> would eat there again if you come back to town, but it rated only 3
> stars? I hope that person doesn't write performance reviews in an
> official capacity.
>

The reviews can be very capricious, even unfriendly.

That said, the pictures don't lei and there is value there.

Urbanspoon (now Zomato) is similar in their trustworthiness.

On 10/5/2015 11:43 PM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 10:30:56 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 >
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I bought some choy sum at the L&L down the street. It was tasty so I asked the guy how he prepared the dish. I assumed that he steamed it but he boiled it in some salted water. That's it. Dead simple. It was served with a sauce of shoyu, and a little bit of oyster sauce and vinegar. It's sublime stuff but quite simple.
>
> I bet it barely hit the water before he took it out.
>

I was surprised he didn't steam the choy sum. Chinese people love to
steam everything. He told me that you lose lots of vitamins in the steam
so he boils it. He told me to boil it until it's done. I boiled mine for
about 5 minutes. It comes out fine.