Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: OT: r.f.r.

  1. #1
    Nancy2 Guest

    Default OT: r.f.r.

    Rec.food.recipes apparently has a new moderator, so let's all say
    "welcome aboard," and try to keep the group cooking. (Remember, only
    recipes and requests for recipes are allowed.)

    N.

  2. #2
    mom peagram Guest

    Default Re: r.f.r.


    "Nancy2" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Rec.food.recipes apparently has a new moderator, so let's all say
    > "welcome aboard," and try to keep the group cooking. (Remember, only
    > recipes and requests for recipes are allowed.)
    >
    > N.


    So who's the new moderator? Welcome whoever you are.


    --
    mompeagram
    FERGUS/HARLINGEN


  3. #3
    Victor Sack Guest

    Default Re: OT: r.f.r.

    Nancy2 <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Rec.food.recipes apparently has a new moderator


    It looks like it is still Patricia.

    Victor

  4. #4
    Janet Wilder Guest

    Default Re: OT: r.f.r.

    Victor Sack wrote:
    > Nancy2 <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> Rec.food.recipes apparently has a new moderator

    >
    > It looks like it is still Patricia.
    >
    > Victor


    Victor,

    Don't you still do the FAQ for rfr?

  5. #5
    Jean B. Guest

    Default Re: OT: r.f.r.

    Victor Sack wrote:
    > Nancy2 <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> Rec.food.recipes apparently has a new moderator

    >
    > It looks like it is still Patricia.
    >
    > Victor


    The second message from today had another name at the bottom. (I
    already lost the "new" marks here when I immediately had to go
    look, so I am not going to go there in the midst of reading here
    again. Tracy Carman/Carmen, IIRC....

    --
    Jean B.

  6. #6
    Chris Marksberry Guest

    Default Re: OT: r.f.r.


    "Jean B." <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]..
    > Victor Sack wrote:
    >> Nancy2 <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Rec.food.recipes apparently has a new moderator

    >>
    >> It looks like it is still Patricia.
    >>
    >> Victor

    >
    > The second message from today had another name at the bottom. (I already
    > lost the "new" marks here when I immediately had to go look, so I am not
    > going to go there in the midst of reading here again. Tracy
    > Carman/Carmen, IIRC....
    >
    > --
    > Jean B.


    Rec.food.recipes is moderated by Tracy E. Carman at [email protected]



  7. #7
    bulka Guest

    Default Re: OT: r.f.r.

    Good lulck Tracy, but I can't imagine it matters. The problem is
    policy and style.

    Here, we are cooks who understand terms like "a little bit", "sort
    of", "as much as you like", "or use something else". Or "What the
    hell is this?".

    They are control freaks or novices who feel the need to tell or be
    told everything down to the eighth of a teaspoon. And like AA, no
    "crosstalk".

    For those that want or like or need that, fine. I don't know why they
    just don't go to epicurious or buy a cookbook.

    I don't think I've ever learned anything, here or in the rest of my
    life, EXCEPT through crosstalk. While our threads sometimes degrade
    into namecalling, more often they drift into something more
    interesting and informative than we thought we were thinking about in
    the original post.

    So, good luck Tracy and r.f.r, and thank you r.f.c

    B


  8. #8
    Victor Sack Guest

    Default Re: OT: r.f.r.

    Janet Wilder wrote:

    > Victor,
    >
    > Don't you still do the FAQ for rfr?


    It is the rfc FAQ. It is also posted to rfr, news.answers and
    rec.answers. It was first crossposted to rfr by Amy Gale in December
    1993. Maybe she was asked to do that by Stephanie da Silva. When I
    took over the FAQ, I asked Patricia if it was still welcome in rfr and
    she said yes.

    Victor

  9. #9
    Nancy2 Guest

    Default Re: OT: r.f.r.

    On Mar 4, 7:21*pm, bulka <working.artists.work...@gmail.com> wrote:
    > Good lulck Tracy, but I can't imagine it matters. *The problem is
    > policy and style.
    >
    > Here, we are cooks who understand terms like "a little bit", "sort
    > of", "as much as you like", "or use something else". * Or "What the
    > hell is this?".
    >
    > They are control freaks or novices who feel the need to tell or be
    > told everything down to the eighth of a teaspoon. *And like AA, no
    > "crosstalk".
    >
    > For those that want or like or need that, fine. *I don't know why they
    > just don't go to epicurious or buy a cookbook.
    >
    > I don't think I've ever learned anything, here or in the rest of my
    > life, EXCEPT through crosstalk. *While our threads sometimes degrade
    > into namecalling, more often they drift into something more
    > interesting and informative than we thought we were thinking about in
    > the original post.
    >
    > So, good luck Tracy and r.f.r, and thank you r.f.c
    >
    > B


    Who are "they" that you speak of? There isn't any editing done with
    the recipes sent to r.f.r. (that I can see - many of them have big
    typos that cause me to ask the poster privately) - nor to requests for
    recipes.

    It may not be the group that suits you, but it does have a legitimate
    purpose.

    Not everyone reading recipes in r.f.r. (or asking for something
    someone else has made and recommends) needs to feel in total control
    (and, actually, if it's a baking recipe, precise measurements are
    usually required).

    How's the weather up on that high horse?

    N.

  10. #10
    Janet Wilder Guest

    Default Re: OT: r.f.r.

    Victor Sack wrote:
    > Janet Wilder wrote:
    >
    >> Victor,
    >>
    >> Don't you still do the FAQ for rfr?

    >
    > It is the rfc FAQ. It is also posted to rfr, news.answers and
    > rec.answers. It was first crossposted to rfr by Amy Gale in December
    > 1993. Maybe she was asked to do that by Stephanie da Silva. When I
    > took over the FAQ, I asked Patricia if it was still welcome in rfr and
    > she said yes.
    >
    > Victor


    Thanks for making that clear. I tend to get confused.

  11. #11
    Janet Wilder Guest

    Default Re: OT: r.f.r.

    Nancy2 wrote:
    > On Mar 4, 7:21 pm, bulka <working.artists.work...@gmail.com> wrote:
    >> Good lulck Tracy, but I can't imagine it matters. The problem is
    >> policy and style.
    >>
    >> Here, we are cooks who understand terms like "a little bit", "sort
    >> of", "as much as you like", "or use something else". Or "What the
    >> hell is this?".
    >>
    >> They are control freaks or novices who feel the need to tell or be
    >> told everything down to the eighth of a teaspoon. And like AA, no
    >> "crosstalk".
    >>
    >> For those that want or like or need that, fine. I don't know why they
    >> just don't go to epicurious or buy a cookbook.
    >>
    >> I don't think I've ever learned anything, here or in the rest of my
    >> life, EXCEPT through crosstalk. While our threads sometimes degrade
    >> into namecalling, more often they drift into something more
    >> interesting and informative than we thought we were thinking about in
    >> the original post.
    >>
    >> So, good luck Tracy and r.f.r, and thank you r.f.c
    >>
    >> B

    >
    > Who are "they" that you speak of? There isn't any editing done with
    > the recipes sent to r.f.r. (that I can see - many of them have big
    > typos that cause me to ask the poster privately) - nor to requests for
    > recipes.
    >
    > It may not be the group that suits you, but it does have a legitimate
    > purpose.
    >
    > Not everyone reading recipes in r.f.r. (or asking for something
    > someone else has made and recommends) needs to feel in total control
    > (and, actually, if it's a baking recipe, precise measurements are
    > usually required).
    >
    > How's the weather up on that high horse?
    >
    > N.


    Not being a perfectionist myself, I'm glad to see r.f.r. back.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32