wrote:


And add whatever else you *thought* would be left after you ~somehow
magically~ got rid of all the sulfides, ions, yada yada yada...

Wine contains lots of organic [compounds containing carbon and
hydrogen] substances that are non-acidic.

wrote:

How on earth can you say electrolytes and minerals don't contribute to
the flavor of wine? Is one water just as good as any other then?

Electrolytes and minerals have no smell nor do they affect the smells
of other substances in the wine.

Radium wrote:
wrote:


And add whatever else you *thought* would be left after you ~somehow
magically~ got rid of all the sulfides, ions, yada yada yada...

Wine contains lots of organic [compounds containing carbon and
hydrogen] substances that are non-acidic.

GC/Mass Spec, anyone?

It is obvious that Radium is not serious about his posts and while he seems to
possess a little (dangerous) scientific knowledge about what he writes about,
he is only out to push everyone's buttons rather than engage in serious
discussion. In previous postings he was known to constantly shift his position
whenever he felt his "food fantasy" was too reasonable.

Those subscribers to sci.bio.food-science who feel his intent to be serious
(that won't be too many people) should be the only people answering the post.
The rest of us -- rather than indulge in name-calling should just ignore
Radium. I figure that the threads won't nearly be as long if this rule is
followed. Raising the pH of wine above 7, for that reason alone, would
disqualify him from reasoned discourse about foods in general let alone wine.
But if anyone wants to indulge him, please do so without the name-calling.

Radium appears to be fishing for aggravated responses, and this is called
"Trolling". Trolls tend to be attention-seekers (including negative
attention), and the only reasonable way to handle them is not to give them
that attention. I have observed that Radium has broadcasted his posting to 5
newsgroups - this is typical of trolling behaviour.

In short: "Don't feed the trolls". People responding to Radium should kindly
remove all newsgroups from the "Newsgroups:" line except the one to which you
are subscribing so that the rest of us don't have to wade through this stuff.

Thanks for everyone's co-operation.

Paul King

Paul wrote on Fri, 05 May 2006 07:02:45 -0400:

PK Those subscribers to sci.bio.food-science who feel his
PK intent to be serious (that won't be too many people) should
PK be the only people answering the post. The rest of us --
PK rather than indulge in name-calling should just ignore
PK Radium. I figure that the threads won't nearly be as long
PK if this rule is followed. Raising the pH of wine above 7,
PK for that reason alone, would disqualify him from reasoned
PK discourse about foods in general let alone wine. But if
PK anyone wants to indulge him, please do so without the
PK name-calling.

PK Radium appears to be fishing for aggravated responses, and
PK this is called "Trolling". Trolls tend to be
PK attention-seekers (including negative attention), and the
PK only reasonable way to handle them is not to give them that
PK attention. I have observed that Radium has broadcasted his
PK posting to 5 newsgroups - this is typical of trolling
PK behaviour.

PK In short: "Don't feed the trolls". People responding to
Radium
PK should kindly remove all newsgroups from the "Newsgroups:"
PK line except the one to which you are subscribing so that
PK the rest of us don't have to wade through this stuff.

All the above is good advice and there is confirmation that
"Radium" has achieved the attention that he or she desires in
that a new nonsense thread has appeared on another cross-posting
to groups including uk.food+drink.indian: "My ultimate exotic
butter fantasy".

Again, don't feed the trolls!

James Silverton.

["Followup-To:" header set to sci.bio.food-science *not* sci.chem.]
On 2006-05-05, Paul King wrote:
It is obvious that Radium is not serious about his posts and while he seems to
possess a little (dangerous) scientific knowledge about what he writes about,
he is only out to push everyone's buttons rather than engage in serious
discussion. In previous postings he was known to constantly shift his position
whenever he felt his "food fantasy" was too reasonable.

A lot of this trolling is a disturbance but when one does a cross-posting it
is good to set a "Followup-To:" to header so that subsequent replies go to a
specific group.

Apparently, one troll tactic that was successful was to have you initiate
cross-posting on a troll related topic with no "Followup-To:" to disparate
groups (rec.crafts.winemaking, sci.chem). Killfile the the troll and be done
with it and just snicker about s/h/it (not to it) if it morphs, etc.

In the meantime, if you have a post that doesn't have to do with chemistry
then please leave sci.chem off your cross-posting agenda.

--
Louis Pasteur is rolling in his grave because I wrote "disparate
groups (rec.crafts.winemaking, sci.chem)".

With the greatest respect Paul, Radium's cross-posted rubbish was posted
weeks ago, and the thread had effectively died - until *you* resurrected
it (albeit under a new guise).

Rule #2 in dealing with trolls.

If it is topical *and recent* - sure! respond in any way you deem fit.

If it is dead - then please R.I.P.

On my server, the last posting in the thread was dated May 2, only 4 days ago.
It is likely that not everyone gets all postings.

Paul King

On Sat, 6 May 2006 07:45:51 +1200, "st.helier" wrote:

With the greatest respect Paul, Radium's cross-posted rubbish was posted
weeks ago, and the thread had effectively died - until *you* resurrected
it (albeit under a new guise).

Rule #2 in dealing with trolls.

If it is topical *and recent* - sure! respond in any way you deem fit.

If it is dead - then please R.I.P.

Radium wrote:
wrote:

How on earth can you say electrolytes and minerals don't contribute to
the flavor of wine? Is one water just as good as any other then?

Electrolytes and minerals have no smell nor do they affect the smells
of other substances in the wine.

Note that you didn't answer my question.

Chris

When it becomes obvious that a post is commercial or it becomes obvious that
a poster is a troll, I block it so they do not bother me again. I blocked
his as either a troll or an i***t a few days ago. Of couse if someone does
not like my posts, they can certainly block them as well.

Ray

"Paul King" wrote in message
...
It is obvious that Radium is not serious about his posts and while he
seems to
possess a little (dangerous) scientific knowledge about what he writes
about,
he is only out to push everyone's buttons rather than engage in serious
discussion. In previous postings he was known to constantly shift his
position
whenever he felt his "food fantasy" was too reasonable.

Those subscribers to sci.bio.food-science who feel his intent to be
serious
(that won't be too many people) should be the only people answering the
post.
The rest of us -- rather than indulge in name-calling should just ignore
Radium. I figure that the threads won't nearly be as long if this rule is
followed. Raising the pH of wine above 7, for that reason alone, would
disqualify him from reasoned discourse about foods in general let alone
wine.
But if anyone wants to indulge him, please do so without the name-calling.

Radium appears to be fishing for aggravated responses, and this is called
"Trolling". Trolls tend to be attention-seekers (including negative
attention), and the only reasonable way to handle them is not to give them
that attention. I have observed that Radium has broadcasted his posting to
5
newsgroups - this is typical of trolling behaviour.

In short: "Don't feed the trolls". People responding to Radium should
kindly
remove all newsgroups from the "Newsgroups:" line except the one to which
you
are subscribing so that the rest of us don't have to wade through this
stuff.

Thanks for everyone's co-operation.

Paul King