"Nancy Young" > wrote in
:

>
> "Ophelia" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > O handing tarts out to Damsel, Lucy and anyone else who wants one
>
> Damsel and I *are* tarts.
>
> nancy
>
>
>

And I for one am glad of that.

--
No Bread Crumbs were hurt in the making of this Meal.
Type 2 Diabetic 1AC 5.6mmol or 101mg/dl

On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 04:09:49 GMT, Hahabogus > wrote:

>"Nancy Young" > wrote in
:
>
>> "Ophelia" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>> > O handing tarts out to Damsel, Lucy and anyone else who wants one
>>
>> Damsel and I *are* tarts.
>
>And I for one am glad of that.

*blush*
Damsel
--
"Years ago my mother used to say to me... She'd say,
'In this world Elwood, you must be oh-so smart or oh-so pleasant.'
Well, for years I was smart.... I recommend pleasant. You may quote me."

*James Stewart* in the 1950 movie, _Harvey_

Bob

"Bob Myers" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Lucy" > wrote in message
> om...
>> Netiquette also dictates one doesn't resort to calling a fellow poster a
>> bitch.
>> lucy
>
> Actually, that would be just common etiquette, or what
> used to be known, before its unfortunate demise, as
> courteous and civil behavior. It's too bad that so many
> consider electronic communications to be somehow not
> subject to those norms.
>
> Bob M.
>
>

"Bob Myers" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Terry Pulliam Burd" > wrote in message
> ...
>>> above. I'd much rather read a top-posted post than one which
>> >> has been bottom-posted by some moron who can't be bothered
>> >> to trim the hundreds of lines that have been written previously.
>> >
>> >
>> >I've seen this argument too often. Two wrongs don't make a right.
>> >Netiquette says to bottom post *and* trim your posts.
>>
>> <clap! clap! clap!>
>
> Oh, Jayzus H. Christ on a pogo stick....
>
> OF COURSE "netiquette" says that; no one is disagreeing with that.
> In ANY form of written communications, it should be the aim of the
> writer to produce output in such a way that it is most readable by
> the most number of people - at least, assuming that actually
> communicating information was in fact their aim in the first place.
> The supposed "rules of netiquette" all derive from that simple goal,
> and I for one am certainly no disagreeing with them.
>
> My problem, instead, is just with those who get so wrapped around
> the axle regarding these "rules" that we can only conclude that
> they consider them matters of life and death. It is to those people
> that I am saying: chill out, folks- there are most definitely more
> important
> things in life to worry about, and for that matter there is almost always
> a more pleasant and courteous way for you to state your objections
> to these minor faux pas. In other words, if this is how you deal with
> what you consider to be objectionable formatting of a written
> statement, I would really, truly hate to be around you when something
> important goes wrong. For one thing, I don't like getting blood
> spatter on my clothes...
>
> Bob M.
>
Bob..
Well said. The thing is, I have rarely top posted, although I'm now noticing
several here do.
So basically, a few ppl got really enraged, and seem to still be talking
about, one post that was an attempt at humor. I suppose they are
embarrassed? Dunno. Oddly, those who say they killfiled me seem to enjoy
talking about me the most.
You never did tell me what part of Texas you're in..
lucy

"Bob Myers" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Lucy" > wrote in message
> om...
>> p.s. where in tejas you from, feller?
>
> I'm not; my in-laws are in Texas, though (Dallas/Ft. Worth
> area), so I get repeated exposure to all things Texan. I'm
> familiar enough with Texas to know that "King of the Hill,"
> which most OUTSIDE of Texas consider to be a comedy, is
> actually an animated documentary...
>
> Me, personally...I was born and raised in Indiana - which is a
> great place to be FROM - and have just gone over the
> quarter-century mark in Colorado.
>
> Bob "Texan by marriage, but rarely admit it" M.
Bob,
Well... I read the posts tonight in order, so I asked you again where from,
before I found this post. Ignore it.
I've been to Colorado, and absolutely love the chocolate soup at the Brown
Palace hotel (I think that's the name? It was called brown something..
haven't been there since '96) in Denver. That stuff.. I would never want the
recipe to.. because I'd end up gaining a ton of weight! lol!
lucy

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 21:34:35 -0800, "Sam D."
> > wrote:
>
>> until it was explained WHY doing so makes it
>> unreasonably awkward and more difficult for others to follow the
>> discussion, especially if there are one or more other posters that
>> successively respond to your comment and to those that follow.
>
> This is Usenet, not a list serve. We don't need or want
> everybody's contribution in a single post.
>
>> This is
>> just a matter of etiquette and consideration for everyone else.
>
> It's a matter of laziness! Bottom posting complainers are
> too lazy or too egotistical to snip judiciously.
>
>> And
>> maybe I missed something but I have no idea what you mean by
>> "downloading anything to move the cursor."
>
> According to some bottom posting whiners - way back in the
> dark ages of Usenet, the cursor defaulted to the bottom.
> The way to do it these days is via a software program.
>
>
> sf
sf.. I'm still cracking up over this, and the humorless folks who took
offense. It was a joke.. I haven't top posted more than one line or so, and
several others here do...so now I think they're embarrassed They'll
either get over it or under it.. as grandma used to say.
lucy

"jacqui{JB}" > wrote in message
...
> "Michel Boucher" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> Be aware however that killfiles are not foolproof.
>> Individuals are not killfiled.
>
> That's true, especially with OE. Other programs, such as Agent, have
> better killfile capabilities.
>
>> Also, killfiling does not mean you can't read
>> someone's posting. For example, unless they
>> use X-No Archive, you can read their pathetic
>> mewlings on Google groups (where you can't
>> killfile),
>
> And if I understand correctly, even x-no-archive is under some debate
> with the new version of Google.
>
>> and of course if anyone quotes their ill-conceived
>> "bon mots", you can read them as quoted text (or
>> as unedited bottom posted text in some cases) in
>> others' postings.
>
> Editing and snipping is good. Exercising self-control is better.
>
> And there are always other groups, if rfc isn't to one's liking. In
> addition to rec.food.recipes and alt.cooking.chat, there are a number
> of ethnic/specialty food groups; and I'm sure Yahoo! and MSN host
> cooking groups, too.
>
> As a regular in another group I read regularly says: If you don't like
> what's being posted in the group, either leave the group or post
> something you *would* like to read. Complaining about content without
> actively contributing to the group is unhelpful.

jacqui.. logic? here?! lol!

>
> Which is why I rarely complain about content here, since I'm mostly a
> lurker. I browse, comment when the spirit moves me, keep my killfiles
> active (occasionally reading unsnipped comments is enough to remind me
> that my killfiles are warranted -- and I don't have many) and am
> generally quite content.
>
> -j
Well said, Jacqui..
lucy

"jacqui{JB}" > wrote in message
...
> [piggybacking due to poor propagation]
> "Scott" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> Mary Belle:
>> > I tried that and found I had killfiled most of
>> > the Americans. Americans are just a hateful,
>> > hating people and unless you bow to their
>> > superiority in your posts they will come at you
>> > with their hate. So I just tread lightly, seldom
>> > post, and stay away from the worse ones like that
>> > penmark person. My posts have always been trumped
>> > by a hateful American, which this one is sure to be.
>
> I'm curious, then, if you're so unhappy with content and the regular
> posters, why you choose to stay? As I've replied elsewhere, there are
> myriad other choices; why not find a better fit?
> -j
>
rofl..
ya know.. I was soooo tempted to mention I had sex with a Catholic guy at
the democratic convention. (I didn't.. but sex, religion and politics would
insure I'd make the killfile cut, and that would be that.)
LOL!
lucy

"Peter Aitken" > wrote in message
. com...
> "Lucy" > wrote in message
> om...
>>
>> "Peter Aitken" > wrote in message
>> . com...
>>> "Lucy" > wrote in message
>>> . com...
>>>> I've decided, after a few minutes of thought, to post however I see
>>>> fit. So, if you hate top posted remarks, don't read them! I'm not
>>>> downloading anything to move the cursor (although that was a kind
>>>> suggestion),
>>>
>>> You do not need to download anything to move the cursor. You can use
>>> your fingers, although there is a requirement that a brain be attached.
>>>
>>> Your attitude is all too common today. You are going to do what you want
>>> and the hell with everyone else. You must be proud.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Peter Aitken
>>>
>> Wow.. there are some REALLY angry people here.
>> I was laughing my ass off as I typed that. It was me joking. Go count how
>> many time I've top posted. Rarely.. unless it's a simple lol or some
>> such.
>> It really is true what they say about net users. heh
>>
>>
>
> Very common - someone posts something stupid (that's you). Then someone
> calls them on it (that's me). Then the first person (you again) claims
> they were joking. No one buys it.
>
>
> --
> Peter Aitken
>
> Remove the crap from my email address before using.

Then, petey.. find where I've top posted more than an "lol" or some such.
Get OVER me, dear. :-)
lucy

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> That's a pompous AND stupid reply. You aren't new to this
> thread, so you know who posted and what they said. You
> certainly didn't need the context of previous post quotes to
> reply to me.
>
> IF you were new to the thread, you would be very welcome to
> scroll down and read the past quotes OR research the thread
> via Google.... so IF you care THAT much about context (which
> is something most people don't need to reply to most threads
> in a ng like rfc), you can read the text quoted below or
> Google the thread.
>
> ````````````````````````````````
>
> On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 23:53:50 GMT, "Peter Aitken"
> > wrote:
>
>> "sf" > wrote in message
>> >
>> > I prefer to read top posters unless everything is on screen.
>> > Then I don't care if it's top or bottom posting.
>> >
>> > Unlike the complainers, I can tell who posted what according
>> > to the >s on the side (if the snippers have snipped
>> > carefully). I HATE rereading previous posts just to get to
>> > the new stuff and that's what bottom posting makes us do.
>> >
>> > sf
>>
>> Well, (duh), if you are clever enough to identify previous posts by the
>> >s,
>> you do not have to read them. Sheesh!
>>
>> A: Because it puts the answer before the question.
>> Q. Why shouldn't I reply at the top?
>
>
> sf
sf is takin names and kickin ass!
lol
lucy

"Damsel" > wrote in message
news
> I hope you can see this. *smile* You are so
> outstandingly SANE! I can't lay claim to that
> title, and I'm really impressed when I see it in
> someone else.

Thank you. I was really happy to see you start posting here
again -- YOU WERE MISSED!

> Most of my filters are to stop anything sexist,
> racist, religious, or political.

I just delete those, myself -- sometimes I need the political stuff to
get me going in the morning (better than coffee for raising the blood
pressure, don'cha know. I suppose I could set up a filter on Agent
(the reader I use for ... err ... reading [I still post with OE; I'm
waiting for the next update of Agent before I start using it for
posting -- don't ask, I have a whole lot of convoluted "logic"]) for
cross-posted stuff, which would take most of the trollish crap away,
but I'm frankly too lazy.

> Also, a wide variety of foods I'll never make,
> so there's no point in reading about them. Hence,
> I filtered my own thread about mussels. <G>

Bwahahahahahaha! You're killing me.

Come to the dark side, Carol: moules frites, moules frites ...
-j

On 2005-01-30, Lucy > wrote:

> jacqui.. logic? here?! lol!

etiquette.. you? where?

Please trim your posts. Thank you.

nb

On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 07:36:36 +0100, "jacqui{JB}"
> wrote:

>"Damsel" > wrote in message
>news >
>> You are so outstandingly SANE! I can't lay claim to that
>> title, and I'm really impressed when I see it in someone else.
>
>Thank you. I was really happy to see you start posting here
>again -- YOU WERE MISSED!

Wow! Thanks! It's always good to know that, in addition to not being in
someone's killfile, they actively like you! Thanks for the booster!

>> Also, a wide variety of foods I'll never make,
>> so there's no point in reading about them. Hence,
>> I filtered my own thread about mussels. <G>
>
>Bwahahahahahaha! You're killing me.

I once KFed myself for about three months. There were a lot of discussions
regarding spam, and I killed that word. Unfortunately, I had "no-spam" in
my e-mail address. Took way too long to figure that one out. DUH!

>Come to the dark side, Carol: moules frites, moules frites ...
>-j

Something tells me I'd be getting a good giggle out of that if I knew any
French. Please enlighten me! And thanks for the kind words.

Carol
--
"Years ago my mother used to say to me... She'd say,
'In this world Elwood, you must be oh-so smart or oh-so pleasant.'
Well, for years I was smart.... I recommend pleasant. You may quote me."

*James Stewart* in the 1950 movie, _Harvey_

On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 10:09:17 GMT, Don Gray > wrote:

>Hey! I bet you look a lot prettier than I do, sitting there with the same hat
>on. I have also worn it often enough ;-) It's a delayed reply but we've just
>had to put to slep an old well loved family pet and it sort of shook us up a
>bit. I'm OK now for taking over a spell with that old pointy hat! I'm not
>changing my viewpoint though.

I'm so sorry to hear of your loss. Animals are like kids, only better.

I found out that we don't have to wear pointy hats after all. Ophelia will
give you tarts and tea.

Carol
--
"Years ago my mother used to say to me... She'd say,
'In this world Elwood, you must be oh-so smart or oh-so pleasant.'
Well, for years I was smart.... I recommend pleasant. You may quote me."

*James Stewart* in the 1950 movie, _Harvey_

"Damsel" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 10:09:17 GMT, Don Gray > wrote:
>
>>Hey! I bet you look a lot prettier than I do, sitting there with the same
>>hat
>>on. I have also worn it often enough ;-) It's a delayed reply but we've
>>just
>>had to put to slep an old well loved family pet and it sort of shook us up
>>a
>>bit. I'm OK now for taking over a spell with that old pointy hat! I'm not
>>changing my viewpoint though.
>
> I'm so sorry to hear of your loss. Animals are like kids, only
> better.
>
> I found out that we don't have to wear pointy hats after all. Ophelia
> will
> give you tarts and tea.

yep

"Damsel" > wrote in message
...

> Wow! Thanks! It's always good to know that,
> in addition to not being in someone's killfile, they
> actively like you! Thanks for the booster!

You're welcome. I'm feeling pretty well stroked these days, m'self.


> >Come to the dark side, Carol: moules frites,
> >moules frites ...

> Something tells me I'd be getting a good giggle out
> of that if I knew any French. Please enlighten me!

It's mussels cooked with white wine (and a bit of mire poix for
additional flavor -- celery, onions, etc.) served with french fries.
The mussels are cooked in the shell and served in a deep dish with the
strained cooking liquid (sometimes enriched with cream or butter); the
proper way to eat them is with your hands, using an empty mussel shell
to pluck the meat from mussels. *drool* I feel a craving coming on.

Anyway, moules frites is practically the Belgian national dish, and
the first real food I had the first time I came to Europe (along with
a glorious salad with a beautiful piece of a creamy blue cheese the
name of which currently escapes me, and a bottle of beautiful white
wine, the name of which also escapes me -- well, it was a while ago
). Excellent for jetlag.

One of my favorite things ... and now I think I'm going to have use my
most feminine wiles to talk the spousal unit into taking me out for
moules frites for dinner (there are a couple of places that do it well
here in town). Woe be to him if he refuses me!
-j

In article >, Don Gray
> wrote:

> In message "Nancy Young" wrote:
>
> >
> > I think we've got our answer.
> >
> > nancy
> >
> I guess so - but the truth will always out!
>
> I do have a 'foody query' though, as an aside. I have to say here and
> now I am not one for visiting 'burger bars'. It's not the sort of
> meal that turns me on - maybe they're better quality in the US. Over
> here good quality meat costs an arm and a leg, but my wife loves
> them. So I bought 1¾lb prime beef, which cost me 15euros, about £10
> or about 20$ US (that's guessing). Anyhow, I'll grind it up myself. I
> have a 'burger book' but just wondered if anyone had any favourite
> ideas. I will also be doing plain ones.

> Thanks
>
> Don

Whatever floats your boat, Don, but for grinding my own meat for a
burger, I'd be buying a cut of meat that was less tender and more
flavorful. Cheaper, too. :-) I like my burgers relatively plain --
maybe with some finely chopped onion mixed into the meat with some s&p.
Grilled and accompanied by ketchup and mustard and maybe a pickle.
--
-Barb, <www.jamlady.eboard.com> Winter Carnival ice sculpture pics
added 1-30-05.
"I read recipes the way I read science fiction: I get to the end and
say,'Well, that's not going to happen.'" - Comedian Rita Rudner,
performance at New York, New York, January 10, 2005.

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> That's a pompous AND stupid reply.

Translation: you do not understand what I said so you call names.

>You aren't new to this
> thread, so you know who posted and what they said. You
> certainly didn't need the context of previous post quotes to
> reply to me.

But if I had been new I would have wanted the posts to be in order, not
reversed.

>
> IF you were new to the thread, you would be very welcome to
> scroll down and read the past quotes OR research the thread
> via Google.... so IF you care THAT much about context (which
> is something most people don't need to reply to most threads
> in a ng like rfc), you can read the text quoted below or
> Google the thread.
>

See http://www.pgacon.com/toporbottom.htm

Peter Aitken

"Don Gray" > wrote in message
...
> In message "Ophelia" > wrote:
>>
>> "Damsel" wrote in message
>>
>> > On Sun, Don Gray wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hey! I bet you look a lot prettier than I do, sitting there with the
>> > > same hat on. I have also worn it often enough ;-) It's a delayed
>> > > reply
>> > > but we've just had to put to slep an old well loved family pet and
>> > > it
>> > > sort of shook us up a bit. I'm OK now for taking over a spell with
>> > > that old pointy hat! I'm not changing my viewpoint though.
>> >
>> > I'm so sorry to hear of your loss. Animals are like kids, only
>> > better.
>> >
>> > I found out that we don't have to wear pointy hats after all. Ophelia
>> > will give you tarts and tea.
>>
>> yep
>>
> Why thanks, Ophelia. You just can't beat a good old 'British Tart' before
> tea! Thanks a million. Oops - better get back in the corner ;-)

Oi!

On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 18:14:51 GMT, "Peter Aitken"
> wrote:

>"sf" > wrote in message
.. .
>> That's a pompous AND stupid reply.
>
>Translation: you do not understand what I said so you call names.
>
>>You aren't new to this
>> thread, so you know who posted and what they said. You
>> certainly didn't need the context of previous post quotes to
>> reply to me.
>
>But if I had been new I would have wanted the posts to be in order, not
>reversed.
>
>>
>> IF you were new to the thread, you would be very welcome to
>> scroll down and read the past quotes OR research the thread
>> via Google.... so IF you care THAT much about context (which
>> is something most people don't need to reply to most threads
>> in a ng like rfc), you can read the text quoted below or
>> Google the thread.
>>
>
>See http://www.pgacon.com/toporbottom.htm
>
>Peter Aitken
>

Hi Peter,

I hadn't thought about it until recently, but have you
noticed that folks who top-post occasionally comment
"inline" as you have done above...

When they do, they always post their comments after those to
which they are responding.

All the best,

--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

On Sun 30 Jan 2005 11:03:14a, Don Gray wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> In message Melba's Jammin' wrote:
>
>> In article Don Gray wrote:
>>
>> > In message "Nancy Young" wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > > I think we've got our answer.
>> > >
>> > > nancy
>> > >
>> > I guess so - but the truth will always out!
>> >
>> > I do have a 'foody query' though, as an aside. I have to say here and
>> > now I am not one for visiting 'burger bars'. It's not the sort of
>> > meal that turns me on - maybe they're better quality in the US. Over
>> > here good quality meat costs an arm and a leg, but my wife loves
>> > them. So I bought 1¾lb prime beef, which cost me 15euros, about £10
>> > or about 20$ US (that's guessing). Anyhow, I'll grind it up myself. I
>> > have a 'burger book' but just wondered if anyone had any favourite
>> > ideas. I will also be doing plain ones.
>>
>> > Thanks
>> >
>> > Don
>>
>> Whatever floats your boat, Don, but for grinding my own meat for a
>> burger, I'd be buying a cut of meat that was less tender and more
>> flavorful. Cheaper, too. :-) I like my burgers relatively plain --
>> maybe with some finely chopped onion mixed into the meat with some s&p.
>> Grilled and accompanied by ketchup and mustard and maybe a pickle.
>
> Thanks for the advice M J - it's taken on board. I did consider a
> cheaper cut, for I'm used to making do and adapting what I've got to
> produce diffeent dishes eg casseroles - but I just thought 'treat' and
> it just stuck in the old brain cells ;-)
>
> Don

IMHO, if you're going to cook the burger on the grill, a far better choice
is chuck or round with 20% fat. Those cuts of beef have more flavor. Most
of the fat cooks out when grilling, but also imparts a flavor that leaner
meat doesn't have. Juicier and more flavorful burgers will result.

Wayne

On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 13:26:25 +0100, "jacqui{JB}"
> wrote:

>"Damsel" > wrote in message
.. .
>
Jacqui:
>> >Come to the dark side, Carol: moules frites,
>> >moules frites ...
>
>> Something tells me I'd be getting a good giggle out
>> of that if I knew any French. Please enlighten me!
>
>It's mussels cooked with white wine (and a bit of mire poix for
>additional flavor -- celery, onions, etc.) served with french fries.
>The mussels are cooked in the shell and served in a deep dish with the
>strained cooking liquid (sometimes enriched with cream or butter); the
>proper way to eat them is with your hands, using an empty mussel shell
>to pluck the meat from mussels. *drool* I feel a craving coming on.

That sounds pretty good, but it seems a little odd to have something like
that with fries. I'll try to find a place that serves them. Seafood seems
to be in short supply out here in the boonies.

Carol
--
"Years ago my mother used to say to me... She'd say,
'In this world Elwood, you must be oh-so smart or oh-so pleasant.'
Well, for years I was smart.... I recommend pleasant. You may quote me."

*James Stewart* in the 1950 movie, _Harvey_

In article >,
wrote:

> On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 07:36:36 +0100, "jacqui{JB}"
> > wrote:
(snipped)
> >Come to the dark side, Carol: moules frites, moules frites ...
> >-j
>
> Something tells me I'd be getting a good giggle out of that if I knew any
> French. Please enlighten me! And thanks for the kind words.
>
> Carol


Subliminal suggestion, Dams: "Fried mussels, fried mussels."
--
-Barb, <www.jamlady.eboard.com> Winter Carnival ice sculpture pics
added 1-30-05.
"I read recipes the way I read science fiction: I get to the end and
say,'Well, that's not going to happen.'" - Comedian Rita Rudner,
performance at New York, New York, January 10, 2005.

On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 15:02:39 -0600, Damsel
> wrote:

>On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 13:26:25 +0100, "jacqui{JB}"
> wrote:
>
>>"Damsel" > wrote in message
. ..
>>
>Jacqui:
>>> >Come to the dark side, Carol: moules frites,
>>> >moules frites ...
>>
>>> Something tells me I'd be getting a good giggle out
>>> of that if I knew any French. Please enlighten me!
>>
>>It's mussels cooked with white wine (and a bit of mire poix for
>>additional flavor -- celery, onions, etc.) served with french fries.
>>The mussels are cooked in the shell and served in a deep dish with the
>>strained cooking liquid (sometimes enriched with cream or butter); the
>>proper way to eat them is with your hands, using an empty mussel shell
>>to pluck the meat from mussels. *drool* I feel a craving coming on.
>
>That sounds pretty good, but it seems a little odd to have something like
>that with fries. I'll try to find a place that serves them. Seafood seems
>to be in short supply out here in the boonies.
>
>Carol

Hi Carol,

The way it's being described the dish may sound elegant,
but...

In Belgium (its home) this is way down the elegance scale:
Not quite seen as "junk food" but pretty close.

My comment has nothing to do with its quality, but only with
the "formality" with which such a dish is consumed.

Fries, paper plates, etc. fit just fine.

All the best,
--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

In article >,
wrote:

> On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 13:26:25 +0100, "jacqui{JB}"
> > wrote:
>
> >"Damsel" > wrote in message
> .. .
> >
> Jacqui:
> >> >Come to the dark side, Carol: moules frites,
> >> >moules frites ...
> >
> >> Something tells me I'd be getting a good giggle out
> >> of that if I knew any French. Please enlighten me!
> >
> >It's mussels cooked with white wine (and a bit of mire poix for
> >additional flavor -- celery, onions, etc.) served with french fries.

> That sounds pretty good, but it seems a little odd to have something
> like that with fries. I'll try to find a place that serves them.
> Seafood seems to be in short supply out here in the boonies.
>

> Carol

It's almost street food. I've had good and I've had not so good. The
fries (pommes frites) come in paper cones for walkaway.
--
-Barb, <www.jamlady.eboard.com> Winter Carnival ice sculpture pics
added 1-30-05.
"I read recipes the way I read science fiction: I get to the end and
say,'Well, that's not going to happen.'" - Comedian Rita Rudner,
performance at New York, New York, January 10, 2005.

On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 09:12:49 -0500, Scott >
wrote:

>In article >,
> Mary Belle > wrote:
>
>> I tried that and found I had killfiled most of the Americans.
>> Americans are just a hateful, hating people and unless you bow to
>> their superiority in your posts they will come at you with their hate.
>> So I just tread lightly, seldom post, and stay away from the worse
>> ones like that penmark person. My posts have always been trumped by a
>> hateful American, which this one is sure to be.
>
>
>That's odd. Your posting IP,
>12.74.182.94
>resolves to Tallahassee, Florida. Did you killfile yourself?

Tallahassee is correct. I am a sophomore at Florida State University.
I am from Speightstown, Barbados.

On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 17:52:51 -0600, Damsel >
wrote:

>On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 14:42:21 -0800, Terry Pulliam Burd
> wrote:

>>Just out of curiosity, has she posted anything remotely resembling,
>>say, a recipe? Cooking technique? Baking advice?
>
>Read the first post in "my lasagna recipe."

<snip>

>Carol

Now, what did I ever do to *you* that sent me to look at that
"recipe"? Are we sure "Lucy" isn't Tommy Tango in drag?

Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd
AAC(F)BV66.0748.CA


"If the soup had been as hot as the claret, if the claret had been as
old as the bird, and if the bird's breasts had been as full as the
waitress's, it would have been a very good dinner."

-- Duncan Hines

To reply, replace "spaminator" with "cox"

On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 18:39:13 -0500, Steve Calvin
> wrote:

>Now... I think that you ladies using the term "bitch" should be
>ashamed of yourselves. I propose that you use the term "-itch" and
>let people substitute the B or W at their discretion.

Now, Steve, do I *look* like Barbara Bush the Elder? <veg>

Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd
AAC(F)BV66.0748.CA


"If the soup had been as hot as the claret, if the claret had been as
old as the bird, and if the bird's breasts had been as full as the
waitress's, it would have been a very good dinner."

-- Duncan Hines

To reply, replace "spaminator" with "cox"

On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 16:42:13 -0500, Kenneth
> wrote:

>The way it's being described the dish may sound elegant,
>but...
>
>In Belgium (its home) this is way down the elegance scale:
>Not quite seen as "junk food" but pretty close.

Okay, that makes more sense. Thanks, Kenneth!

Carol
--
"Years ago my mother used to say to me... She'd say,
'In this world Elwood, you must be oh-so smart or oh-so pleasant.'
Well, for years I was smart.... I recommend pleasant. You may quote me."

*James Stewart* in the 1950 movie, _Harvey_

On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 05:32:12 GMT, "Lucy"
> wrote:

> sf.. I'm still cracking up over this, and the humorless folks who took
> offense. It was a joke.. I haven't top posted more than one line or so, and
> several others here do...so now I think they're embarrassed They'll
> either get over it or under it.. as grandma used to say.
> lucy
>

When it comes to top posting, there are a lot of militant
people here and it's a sure file attention getter.

sf

On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 17:08:23 -0800, Terry Pulliam Burd
> wrote:

>On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 17:52:51 -0600, Damsel >
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 14:42:21 -0800, Terry Pulliam Burd
> wrote:
>
>>>Just out of curiosity, has she posted anything remotely resembling,
>>>say, a recipe? Cooking technique? Baking advice?
>>
>>Read the first post in "my lasagna recipe."
>
>Now, what did I ever do to *you* that sent me to look at that
>"recipe"?

Sorry. I must have been having a bad day. <G>

>Are we sure "Lucy" isn't Tommy Tango in drag?

I must have missed Tommy Tango during my sabbatical. Tell me more.

Carol
--
"Years ago my mother used to say to me... She'd say,
'In this world Elwood, you must be oh-so smart or oh-so pleasant.'
Well, for years I was smart.... I recommend pleasant. You may quote me."

*James Stewart* in the 1950 movie, _Harvey_

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 00:39:11 -0600, Damsel in dis Dress
> wrote:

>I must have missed Tommy Tango during my sabbatical. Tell me more.

Jimmy Tango, actually, IIRC. He posted a number of recipes that
appeared to have originated in some ladies' magazine, circa 1960ish.
Mostly they involved ingredients such as Spam, Velveeta, canned
soups, and flavored gelatin. You can imagine the havoc that resulted.
:P

Regards,
Tracy R.

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 06:39:28 -0600, ravinwulf >
wrote:

>On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 00:39:11 -0600, Damsel in dis Dress
> wrote:
>
>>I must have missed Tommy Tango during my sabbatical. Tell me more.
>
>Jimmy Tango, actually, IIRC. He posted a number of recipes that
>appeared to have originated in some ladies' magazine, circa 1960ish.
>Mostly they involved ingredients such as Spam, Velveeta, canned
>soups, and flavored gelatin. You can imagine the havoc that resulted.
>:P

LOL! Yeah, I imagine they would. Especially if the dishes were smothered
in a good jarred Alfredo Sauce. <EG>

Thanks!
Carol
--
"Years ago my mother used to say to me... She'd say,
'In this world Elwood, you must be oh-so smart or oh-so pleasant.'
Well, for years I was smart.... I recommend pleasant. You may quote me."

*James Stewart* in the 1950 movie, _Harvey_

ravinwulf wrote:

> On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 00:39:11 -0600, Damsel in dis Dress
> > wrote:
>
> >I must have missed Tommy Tango during my sabbatical. Tell me more.
>
> Jimmy Tango, actually, IIRC. He posted a number of recipes that
> appeared to have originated in some ladies' magazine, circa 1960ish.
> Mostly they involved ingredients such as Spam, Velveeta, canned
> soups, and flavored gelatin. You can imagine the havoc that resulted.
> :P


I liked his posts because they made me laugh...anyone on Usenet that makes
me grin is A - OK in my book.

--
Best
Greg

Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 06:39:28 -0600, ravinwulf >
> wrote:
>
>
>>On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 00:39:11 -0600, Damsel in dis Dress
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I must have missed Tommy Tango during my sabbatical. Tell me more.
>>
>>Jimmy Tango, actually, IIRC. He posted a number of recipes that
>>appeared to have originated in some ladies' magazine, circa 1960ish.
>>Mostly they involved ingredients such as Spam, Velveeta, canned
>>soups, and flavored gelatin. You can imagine the havoc that resulted.
>>:P
>
>
> LOL! Yeah, I imagine they would. Especially if the dishes were smothered
> in a good jarred Alfredo Sauce. <EG>
>
> Thanks!
> Carol

I suspect that he had stock holding in Cambells Cream of Mushroom soup.

--
Steve

Every job is a self-portrait of the person who did it.
Autograph your work with excellence.

One time on Usenet, Steve Calvin > said:
> Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
> > On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 06:39:28 -0600, ravinwulf >
> > wrote:
> >>On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 00:39:11 -0600, Damsel in dis Dress
> > wrote:

> >>>I must have missed Tommy Tango during my sabbatical. Tell me more.

> >>Jimmy Tango, actually, IIRC. He posted a number of recipes that
> >>appeared to have originated in some ladies' magazine, circa 1960ish.
> >>Mostly they involved ingredients such as Spam, Velveeta, canned
> >>soups, and flavored gelatin. You can imagine the havoc that resulted.
> >>:P

> > LOL! Yeah, I imagine they would. Especially if the dishes were smothered
> > in a good jarred Alfredo Sauce. <EG>

> I suspect that he had stock holding in Cambells Cream of Mushroom soup.

I dunno, I still think he was just trying to be funny. At least, I
hope that's the case...

--
J.J. in WA ~ mom, vid gamer, novice cook ~
"You still haven't explained why the pool is
filled with elf blood." - Frylock, ATHF

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 06:58:06 -0600, Damsel in dis Dress
> wrote:

>On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 06:39:28 -0600, ravinwulf >
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 00:39:11 -0600, Damsel in dis Dress
> wrote:
>>
>>>I must have missed Tommy Tango during my sabbatical. Tell me more.
>>
>>Jimmy Tango, actually, IIRC. He posted a number of recipes that
>>appeared to have originated in some ladies' magazine, circa 1960ish.
>>Mostly they involved ingredients such as Spam, Velveeta, canned
>>soups, and flavored gelatin. You can imagine the havoc that resulted.
>>:P
>
>LOL! Yeah, I imagine they would. Especially if the dishes were smothered
>in a good jarred Alfredo Sauce. <EG>

Actually, I thought Tommy Tango was funny and felt his posts were very
tongue-in-cheek. We foodies sometimes (sometimes?) get full of
ourselves and look down our foodie noses at folks who aren't as into
cooking as we are. Heck, we even eat our own: when Foodie A decides
Foodie B has commited a heinous cooking/baking/barbecuing error, it's
virtual dueling toques at 20 bandwidth paces. I always figured he/she
was just poking gentle fun at the rest of us. <shrug> YMMV, but I miss
Tommy. Heck, I *really* miss Buffy Lyer. Hey, Buffy! If you're reading
this: come baaaackkk!

Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd...who thinks Certain People need to
lighten up.

AAC(F)BV66.0748.CA


"If the soup had been as hot as the claret, if the claret had been as
old as the bird, and if the bird's breasts had been as full as the
waitress's, it would have been a very good dinner."

-- Duncan Hines

To reply, replace "spaminator" with "cox"

"Terry Pulliam Burd" > wrote in message
...

>
I *really* miss Buffy Lyer. Hey, Buffy! If you're reading
> this: come baaaackkk!

I wish all the Buffys would come back!!! Screaming riot.

nancy

On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 05:37:32 GMT, "Lucy" > wrote:

>
>"Peter Aitken" > wrote in message
.com...

>>> Wow.. there are some REALLY angry people here.
>>> I was laughing my ass off as I typed that. It was me joking. Go count how
>>> many time I've top posted. Rarely.. unless it's a simple lol or some
>>> such.
>>> It really is true what they say about net users. heh
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Very common - someone posts something stupid (that's you). Then someone
>> calls them on it (that's me). Then the first person (you again) claims
>> they were joking. No one buys it.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Peter Aitken
>>
>> Remove the crap from my email address before using.
>
>Then, petey.. find where I've top posted more than an "lol" or some such.
>Get OVER me, dear. :-)
>lucy
>
most of your posts, whether top or bottom, are about you. sorry,
they're boring as hell.

your pal,
blake

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 05:37:32 GMT, "Lucy" > wrote:
>
>>
>>"Peter Aitken" > wrote in message
r.com...
>
>>>> Wow.. there are some REALLY angry people here.
>>>> I was laughing my ass off as I typed that. It was me joking. Go count
>>>> how
>>>> many time I've top posted. Rarely.. unless it's a simple lol or some
>>>> such.
>>>> It really is true what they say about net users. heh
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Very common - someone posts something stupid (that's you). Then someone
>>> calls them on it (that's me). Then the first person (you again) claims
>>> they were joking. No one buys it.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Peter Aitken
>>>
>>> Remove the crap from my email address before using.
>>
>>Then, petey.. find where I've top posted more than an "lol" or some such.
>>Get OVER me, dear. :-)
>>lucy
>>
> most of your posts, whether top or bottom, are about you. sorry,
> they're boring as hell.
>
> your pal,
> blake

Well, I'll tell you what ...

Suppose someone just responded to your post with a "LOL", or worse, a
"ROFLMAO"; What you said wasn't meant to be particularly funny. My point is
that I think "LOL" is becoming WAY overused. When I see people "LOL"ing at
*everything*, I have to ask myself - "Are you *really* laughing out loud at
every post that comes you way?" I think it's just become a catch-all
silliness for those who can't think of anything clever to say.

Gee - where'd *that* come from? Maybe I'm just cranky. I haven't been
sleeping right lately, and it's really getting on my nerves. (NLOL).

Happy Mardi Gras : )

- Tess, who's fixing red beans, rice, andouille sausage, beignets, and
hurricanes for supper, and who probably overuses her " : ) "