"sf" wrote

I was wondering if it was O.K. to use teabags more than once.

It's not a health hazard.

I have a vision...a sign by the highway...with two
giant H's.

And maybe a lobster underlining them.

--oTTo-

Emil Harrison wrote in news:Xns981F1A638325Bdlay@
217.22.228.20:

I was wondering if it was O.K. to use teabags more than once.


I don't know but sometimes I will spoon in a couple spoons of fress coffee
on top of the used coffee grounds and I can't tell a difference. I only do
this if I make more coffee real soon after the first.

-phy

AssWilson wrote:
Emil Harrison typed:
I was wondering if it was O.K. to use teabags more than once.
....
/ O O\__ | PLEASE DO NOT |
/ \ | FEED THE TROLLS |

O.K., but does this mean that I can use them again only if my second or
subsequent use for them is not feeding trolls, or that I should *always*
use them several times until there's nothing left in them for trolls to
eat before I throw them out? Also and, does it make a difference whether
my garbage dump is near a bridge or not?

¬R

lab~rat :-) wrote:
On 14 Aug 2006 05:54:55 -0700, "Alan Truism"
puked:

Mark Edwards wrote:
No cluons were harmed when Emil Harrison wrote:
I was wondering if it was O.K. to use teabags more than once.


Forget teabags. Use loose leaf and a decent infuser. I prefer the
basket style infusers to the crappy teaballs that hang on a chain.

Lipton's cold brew iced tea is much better than any of that clumsy
crap. Good god, it's the 21st century! Why anyone wants to fiddle
**** with packing tea in devices and all that is beyond me.

The Lipton you write of is lower quality and far more expensive than
loose tea.
I get this for $7.99 a kilo at the local global grocer:
http://www.coffeeam.com/royceygun12l.html

If you have more money than time, and care more about ease of
preparation than taste, go ahead and stick with the Lipton.

I use this old fashioned tool called a tea strainer:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...views&n=284507

Does your woman roll her own tampons, too?

By that kind of logic, instant mashed potatoes would be a good choice
over freshly made mashed potatoes.

--Bryan

Food Snob wrote:
Does your woman roll her own tampons, too?

By that kind of logic, instant mashed potatoes would be a good choice
over freshly made mashed potatoes.

Depending on who made them and how, that could very well be smart. I've had
freshly made mashed potatoes that were pretty much inedible. Potato-flake
reconstitutions _rarely_ achieve that degree of solid lumpiness.

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeableBLINK
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

"David DeLaney" wrote in message
...
Food Snob wrote:
Does your woman roll her own tampons, too?

By that kind of logic, instant mashed potatoes would be a good choice
over freshly made mashed potatoes.

Depending on who made them and how, that could very well be smart. I've
had
freshly made mashed potatoes that were pretty much inedible. Potato-flake
reconstitutions _rarely_ achieve that degree of solid lumpiness.


You need to be more specific of what you speak on this thread. drmrboy read
the word "tea-bag" and got all excited for a moment.

Mark Edwards wrote:
[ snip-a-roonie ]

Man, every time I see this name, I have an extremely temporary freakout
thinking that it's the dude from My Dad is Dead.

--
Milhouse Guidry of the mWo

"If it takes you more than two, *MAYBE* three posts
to say what you think needs to be said,
you don't know what you're talking about and should shut up."
--The Bede

mWo. It's not just the coolest, it's fa lyfe, so survey says
whether you like it or don't like it, never E-e-e-ver tell
me he did *not* just SMELL what mWo 3:16 reeks of.

"Mark Edwards" wrote in message
...

"Emil Harrison" wrote:
I was wondering if it was O.K. to use teabags more than once.


No cluons were harmed when "Mordechai Housman"
wrote:
It depends. What religion are you?

Oh man, you are a sick puppy!

Depends should not be used as teabags, regardless of your religion.
And if they've been used once, they should be thrown away!

LOL!

I was wondering if it was O.K. to use teabags more than once.

They put strings on tea bags so you can rinse them and hang them to dry.
(Just like tampons....)

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 02:44:06 GMT, "Mordechai Housman"
wrote:

"Mark Edwards" wrote in message
...

"Emil Harrison" wrote:
I was wondering if it was O.K. to use teabags more than once.


No cluons were harmed when "Mordechai Housman"
wrote:
It depends. What religion are you?

Oh man, you are a sick puppy!

Depends should not be used as teabags, regardless of your religion.
And if they've been used once, they should be thrown away!

LOL!

WHY THE HELL CAN'T YOU FREAKS SPEAK ENGLISH INSTEAD OF THIS CRAZY
MADE-UP LANGUAGE THAT NO ONE UNDERSTANDS?!

"LOL" "HTH" "HAND" "WTF"

ARE YOU ALL RETARTED OR SOMETHING?!

--
"Danked," the past participle of "dank", is used to refer to someone
who replies to his own post on an online forum posing as another person
(see "Internet sock puppet") but forgetting to change his username . . . .
This was an act of stupidity meriting a name of its own, and because the hapless
contributor's username was Danks, the term "dank" or "danked" emerged.
-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danked

In article eSvEg.414231$IK3.98128@pd7tw1no,
"~-x-y-~" wrote:

I was wondering if it was O.K. to use teabags more than once.

They put strings on tea bags so you can rinse them and hang them to dry.
(Just like tampons....)

ROFL!!! cough
--
Peace!
Om

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch"
-- Jack Nicholson

"Kevin S. Wilson" wrote in message
...
WHY THE HELL CAN'T YOU FREAKS SPEAK ENGLISH INSTEAD OF THIS CRAZY
MADE-UP LANGUAGE THAT NO ONE UNDERSTANDS?!

Obviously SOMEONE understands it, or it wouldn't
be used, now would it? And here's a hint: ALL languages
are "made-up" - they're artificial constructs, with no real
inherent meaning.

Do you often visit foreign countries and insult the people
there, because they're using a language that YOU don't
understand (which seems to be your real problem here)?

Bob M.

"Bob Myers" wrote

WHY THE HELL CAN'T YOU FREAKS SPEAK ENGLISH INSTEAD OF THIS CRAZY
MADE-UP LANGUAGE THAT NO ONE UNDERSTANDS?!

Obviously SOMEONE understands it, or it wouldn't
be used, now would it?

Not necessarily, but one would *like* to think that.

And here's a hint: ALL languages
are "made-up" - they're artificial constructs, with no real
inherent meaning.

They do a good job of conveying it though.

Do you often visit foreign countries and insult the people
there, because they're using a language that YOU don't
understand (which seems to be your real problem here)?

Well, by default, usenet chatrooms are in English. My
newsfeed gets a bunch *.de groups where I suspect they
write in Scandinavian or something.

--oTTo--

Bob Myers wrote:
"Kevin S. Wilson" wrote in message
...

WHY THE HELL CAN'T YOU FREAKS SPEAK ENGLISH INSTEAD OF THIS CRAZY
MADE-UP LANGUAGE THAT NO ONE UNDERSTANDS?!


Obviously SOMEONE understands it, or it wouldn't
be used, now would it? And here's a hint: ALL languages
are "made-up" - they're artificial constructs, with no real
inherent meaning.

100% wrong. Asieoniezi, for example, shown the inherent
oneness of all things by its very construction. YOU BOZO.

Do you often visit foreign countries and insult the people
there, because they're using a language that YOU don't
understand (which seems to be your real problem here)?

What's the point of insulting them if they don't understand
English? YOU BOZO.

Marc Goodman writes:

What's the point of insulting them if they don't understand
English? YOU BOZO.

I think the orignal poster was complaining about the acrostics people
like to use on this BBS, like "LOL" (Laughing Out Loudly), "ROTFL"
(Rolling On The Floor Laughing), and "WTF" (Waves To Friends). But
these are pretty well known and you should be able to figur them out.

--
- Doctroid Doctroid Holmes http://www.richholmes.net/doctroid/
Ancient use of incendiary pigs as an anti-elephant measure is
disqualified on grounds of pigs not being cows, even when on fire.
-- John D Salt