Thread: What happened to Rec.Food.Reipes?

"GW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:4a0f8171$0$87074$[email protected]..
> Subject says it all. Where did it go?
>
>
Rec.food.recipes is a moderated newsgroup. The moderator retired. No one has
emerged who wants to take that role. As a moderated NG messages are subject
to a moderator's approval. There isn't a moderator and hence, there are no
posted messages. This newsgroup is non moderated, and anything goes, as we
all know. The fraction of good solid posts about cooking has become quite
small, and overwhelmed by spams and flames. I wish there is a way to balance
the extremes of moderated and non-moderated groups into something that would
work. Is there a way we can keep the flaming foodies and dump the watch
sellers?

Hugh

Hugh wrote:
> "GW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:4a0f8171$0$87074$[email protected]..
>> Subject says it all. Where did it go?
>>
>>
> Rec.food.recipes is a moderated newsgroup. The moderator retired. No one has
> emerged who wants to take that role. As a moderated NG messages are subject
> to a moderator's approval. There isn't a moderator and hence, there are no
> posted messages. This newsgroup is non moderated, and anything goes, as we
> all know. The fraction of good solid posts about cooking has become quite
> small, and overwhelmed by spams and flames. I wish there is a way to balance
> the extremes of moderated and non-moderated groups into something that would
> work. Is there a way we can keep the flaming foodies and dump the watch
> sellers?

Soc.singles.moderated managed to keep itself almost completely free of
spam by moderating not the individual messages, but the first message
from any new posting address. There is a codeword in the FAQ for that
group, and anyone wanting to post needed to include that codeword in
their first post's subject line. The robomoderator would, if my memory
is correct, then strip the codeword and post the message. This kept out
all drive-by posts.

Serene

--
42 Magazine, celebrating life with meaning. Inaugural issue is here!
http://42magazine.com

"But here's a handy hint: if your fabulous theory for ending war and
all other human conflict will not survive an online argument with
humourless feminists who are not afraid to throw rape around as an
example, your theory needs work." -- Aqua, alt.polyamory

"Hugh" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:guo15j$14a$[email protected]..
>
> "GW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:4a0f8171$0$87074$[email protected]..
>> Subject says it all. Where did it go?
>>
>>
> Rec.food.recipes is a moderated newsgroup. The moderator retired. No one
> has emerged who wants to take that role. As a moderated NG messages are
> subject to a moderator's approval. There isn't a moderator and hence,
> there are no posted messages. This newsgroup is non moderated, and
> anything goes, as we all know. The fraction of good solid posts about
> cooking has become quite small, and overwhelmed by spams and flames. I
> wish there is a way to balance the extremes of moderated and non-moderated
> groups into something that would work. Is there a way we can keep the
> flaming foodies and dump the watch sellers?
>
Killfile.

Serene Vannoy <[email protected]> wrote:

>Soc.singles.moderated managed to keep itself almost completely free of
>spam by moderating not the individual messages, but the first message
>from any new posting address. There is a codeword in the FAQ for that
>group, and anyone wanting to post needed to include that codeword in
>their first post's subject line. The robomoderator would, if my memory
>is correct, then strip the codeword and post the message. This kept out
>all drive-by posts.

Excellent idea, and one I've never myself heard of before.

Steve

"Steve Pope" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:guo5ve$uot$[email protected]..
> Serene Vannoy <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Soc.singles.moderated managed to keep itself almost completely free of
>>spam by moderating not the individual messages, but the first message
>>from any new posting address. There is a codeword in the FAQ for that
>>group, and anyone wanting to post needed to include that codeword in
>>their first post's subject line. The robomoderator would, if my memory
>>is correct, then strip the codeword and post the message. This kept out
>>all drive-by posts.
>
> Excellent idea, and one I've never myself heard of before.
>
> Steve
>
>
I'm guessing that is at the discretion of the moderator. As I understand
this once a group is either moderated or nonmoderated it can't turn the
other way. I think the moderator of the moderated group Serene is referring
to above did this on his/her own. I as well think it sounds like an
excellent idea. However it can't be applied to rec.food.cooking because
we're not a moderated group. At least that's my understanding. A new
moderator of rec.food.recipes could if such a person is found. It would be
nice of one could comment on recipes. Now that doesn't occur.

Hugh

"Hugh" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:guo15j$14a$[email protected]..
>
> "GW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:4a0f8171$0$87074$[email protected]..
>> Subject says it all. Where did it go?
>>
>>
> Rec.food.recipes is a moderated newsgroup. The moderator retired. No one
> has emerged who wants to take that role. As a moderated NG messages are
> subject to a moderator's approval. There isn't a moderator and hence,
> there are no posted messages. This newsgroup is non moderated, and
> anything goes, as we all know. The fraction of good solid posts about
> cooking has become quite small, and overwhelmed by spams and flames. I
> wish there is a way to balance the extremes of moderated and non-moderated
> groups into something that would work. Is there a way we can keep the
> flaming foodies and dump the watch sellers?
>
> Hugh
>
>
Killfile googlemail and gmail and you won't see the spammers.

Jill

In article <guo15j$14a$[email protected]>,
"Hugh" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Rec.food.recipes is a moderated newsgroup. The moderator retired. No one has
> emerged who wants to take that role.

I offered, but they rejected me because I drove a mac. :-(
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

In article <guo15j$14a$[email protected]>,
"Hugh" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Is there a way we can keep the flaming foodies and dump the watch
> sellers?
>
> Hugh

Learn how to tweak your kill filters, and learn to use your delete key?
I don't have any problems with it.

It appears that Giganews has good filters and I don't see many of the
spammers that people bitch about appear here, but when I check the list
at work using Googlegroups I can see them.

Google really needs to tighten things up a bit!
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

In article <[email protected]>,
"jmcquown" <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Hugh" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:guo15j$14a$[email protected]..
> >
> > "GW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:4a0f8171$0$87074$[email protected]..
> >> Subject says it all. Where did it go?
> >>
> >>
> > Rec.food.recipes is a moderated newsgroup. The moderator retired. No one
> > has emerged who wants to take that role. As a moderated NG messages are
> > subject to a moderator's approval. There isn't a moderator and hence,
> > there are no posted messages. This newsgroup is non moderated, and
> > anything goes, as we all know. The fraction of good solid posts about
> > cooking has become quite small, and overwhelmed by spams and flames. I
> > wish there is a way to balance the extremes of moderated and non-moderated
> > groups into something that would work. Is there a way we can keep the
> > flaming foodies and dump the watch sellers?
> >
> > Hugh
> >
> >
> Killfile googlemail and gmail and you won't see the spammers.
>
> Jill

If you killfile gmail, you will lose a lot of good posters too. Many of
us use gmail. :-(
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

GW said...

> Subject says it all. Where did it go?


Last recipes were posted on April 14th, 2009.

Rec.food.recipes is moderated by Tracy Karman at [email protected].
Only recipes and recipe requests are accepted for posting.
Please allow several days for your submission to appear.
Archives: http://www.cdkitchen.com/rfr/ http://recipes.alastra.com/

It's pretty much a lost cause newsgroup nowadays as there's no peer review
so recipes are a coin toss at best. Many were riddled with typos. One of my
recipes was actually edited which totally ruined it and they wouldn't
change it back!

Put your trust in peer review recipe websites. You'll be better "served,"
imho.

Best,

Andy
--
Eat first, talk later.

"Omelet" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]..
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "jmcquown" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> "Hugh" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:guo15j$14a$[email protected]..
>> >
>> > "GW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> > news:4a0f8171$0$87074$[email protected]..
>> >> Subject says it all. Where did it go?
>> >>
>> >>
>> > Rec.food.recipes is a moderated newsgroup. The moderator retired. No
>> > one
>> > has emerged who wants to take that role. As a moderated NG messages are
>> > subject to a moderator's approval. There isn't a moderator and hence,
>> > there are no posted messages. This newsgroup is non moderated, and
>> > anything goes, as we all know. The fraction of good solid posts about
>> > cooking has become quite small, and overwhelmed by spams and flames. I
>> > wish there is a way to balance the extremes of moderated and
>> > non-moderated
>> > groups into something that would work. Is there a way we can keep the
>> > flaming foodies and dump the watch sellers?
>> >
>> > Hugh
>> >
>> >
>> Killfile googlemail and gmail and you won't see the spammers.
>>
>> Jill
>
> If you killfile gmail, you will lose a lot of good posters too. Many of
> us use gmail. :-(
> --
> Peace! Om
>

Ah, the blessings of Vista I get to pick and choose, sweetie. I see
your posts. I don't see the ones I don't want to. Other "real" newsreaders
allow you to write strings to block things. Blinky was very good at
informing people about that but alas, we lost Blinky.

Jill

Hugh wrote:
> "Steve Pope" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:guo5ve$uot$[email protected]..
>> Serene Vannoy <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Soc.singles.moderated managed to keep itself almost completely free of
>>> spam by moderating not the individual messages, but the first message
>> >from any new posting address. There is a codeword in the FAQ for that
>>> group, and anyone wanting to post needed to include that codeword in
>>> their first post's subject line. The robomoderator would, if my memory
>>> is correct, then strip the codeword and post the message. This kept out
>>> all drive-by posts.
>> Excellent idea, and one I've never myself heard of before.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
> I'm guessing that is at the discretion of the moderator. As I understand
> this once a group is either moderated or nonmoderated it can't turn the
> other way. I think the moderator of the moderated group Serene is referring
> to above did this on his/her own.

No, I think ssm decided to do it as a group.

> I as well think it sounds like an
> excellent idea. However it can't be applied to rec.food.cooking because
> we're not a moderated group. At least that's my understanding.

Mine, too. It's my understanding we'd have to start a new, moderated group.

> A new
> moderator of rec.food.recipes could if such a person is found. It would be
> nice of one could comment on recipes. Now that doesn't occur.

*nod* If I had the time and energy, I'd be willing to do it, but I'd
take a different approach from the one the previous moderator took. (I
wouldn't edit people's posts. I would allow discussion of recipes. I
wouldn't reject recipes that weren't in a certain format. Etc.)

Serene

--
42 Magazine, celebrating life with meaning. Inaugural issue is here!
http://42magazine.com

"But here's a handy hint: if your fabulous theory for ending war and
all other human conflict will not survive an online argument with
humourless feminists who are not afraid to throw rape around as an
example, your theory needs work." -- Aqua, alt.polyamory

Omelet wrote:
> In article <guo15j$14a$[email protected]>,
> "Hugh" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Rec.food.recipes is a moderated newsgroup. The moderator retired. No one has
>> emerged who wants to take that role.
>
> I offered, but they rejected me because I drove a mac. :-(


Better to let the group die, I guess.

Bob

In article <[email protected]>,
"jmcquown" <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Omelet" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news[email protected]..
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "jmcquown" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> "Hugh" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:guo15j$14a$[email protected]..
> >> >
> >> > "GW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> > news:4a0f8171$0$87074$[email protected]..
> >> >> Subject says it all. Where did it go?
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> > Rec.food.recipes is a moderated newsgroup. The moderator retired. No
> >> > one
> >> > has emerged who wants to take that role. As a moderated NG messages are
> >> > subject to a moderator's approval. There isn't a moderator and hence,
> >> > there are no posted messages. This newsgroup is non moderated, and
> >> > anything goes, as we all know. The fraction of good solid posts about
> >> > cooking has become quite small, and overwhelmed by spams and flames. I
> >> > wish there is a way to balance the extremes of moderated and
> >> > non-moderated
> >> > groups into something that would work. Is there a way we can keep the
> >> > flaming foodies and dump the watch sellers?
> >> >
> >> > Hugh
> >> >
> >> >
> >> Killfile googlemail and gmail and you won't see the spammers.
> >>
> >> Jill
> >
> > If you killfile gmail, you will lose a lot of good posters too. Many of
> > us use gmail. :-(
> > --
> > Peace! Om
> >
>
> Ah, the blessings of Vista I get to pick and choose, sweetie. I see
> your posts. I don't see the ones I don't want to. Other "real" newsreaders
> allow you to write strings to block things. Blinky was very good at
> informing people about that but alas, we lost Blinky.
>
> Jill

I miss him. <sniffs>

Cheers Jill! (raising one for Blinky the Shark)
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

In article <[email protected]>,
zxcvbob <[email protected]> wrote:

> Omelet wrote:
> > In article <guo15j$14a$[email protected]>,
> > "Hugh" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Rec.food.recipes is a moderated newsgroup. The moderator retired. No one
> >> has
> >> emerged who wants to take that role.
> >
> > I offered, but they rejected me because I drove a mac. :-(
>
>
> Better to let the group die, I guess.
>
> Bob

If anyone is interested, we could try starting one up on Yahoogroups?
Several of us could run it as co-moderators?
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

"GW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:4a0f8171$0$87074$[email protected]..
> Subject says it all. Where did it go?
It's still there. There is a new moderator as Pat has given it up. But
it's been very quiet.


--
mompeagram
FERGUS/HARLINGEN
Owner
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Rec-Food-Baking-cooking/
http://mompeagram.homestead.com

Hugh wrote:
> "GW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:4a0f8171$0$87074$[email protected]..
>> Subject says it all. Where did it go?
>>
>>
> Rec.food.recipes is a moderated newsgroup. The moderator retired. No one has
> emerged who wants to take that role. As a moderated NG messages are subject
> to a moderator's approval. There isn't a moderator and hence, there are no
> posted messages. This newsgroup is non moderated, and anything goes, as we
> all know. The fraction of good solid posts about cooking has become quite
> small, and overwhelmed by spams and flames. I wish there is a way to balance
> the extremes of moderated and non-moderated groups into something that would
> work. Is there a way we can keep the flaming foodies and dump the watch
> sellers?
>
> Hugh
>
>
>
I thought there was a new moderator. Maybe we should try some
test posts.

--
Jean B.

Omelet wrote:
> In article <guo15j$14a$[email protected]>,
> "Hugh" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Rec.food.recipes is a moderated newsgroup. The moderator retired. No one has
>> emerged who wants to take that role.
>
> I offered, but they rejected me because I drove a mac. :-(

That was truly unfortunate. I'd have loved to see you as
moderator. The person who emerged as the new moderator was no one
I had ever heard of.

--
Jean B.

On Mon, 18 May 2009 08:22:42 -0500, Melba's Jammin'
<[email protected]> wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>,
> Mack A. Damia <[email protected]> wrote:
>(snip)
>> Mere lists of ingredients and steps to prepare a dish obviously cannot
>> be copyrighted. Don't copy the recipe word-for-word and you'll be
>> safe.
>>
>> Wordy recipes annoy me anyway!
>> --
>> mad
>
>If by "wordy" you mean explicitly worded, with all steps thoroughly
>described, IMNSHO that has to be because fewer and fewer young people
>are being taught basic cooking information and need detailed
>information. If that is not what you mean, what do you mean? :-)

Basically, poorly written explanations (anything, really,including
recipes and instructions).

For example, may websites are designed and written by "techies" and
not English majors; consequently, as you know - many of them can be
downright confusing and frustrating to navigate.

This has been a citicism for as long as I can remember. Same thing
with recipes. Mainly food people write them and not "writers".

Not all the time, of course, but I encounter confusing instructions,
etc. failry often. Part of the "dumbing" down of society.
--
mad