Bruce) wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On Mon, 25 Apr 2016 18:01:00 -0500, "cshenk" > wrote:
>
> > Bruce) wrote in rec.food.cooking:
> >
> >> On Mon, 25 Apr 2016 02:38:20 -0500, jinx the minx
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> > It's also not an All About Julie group. Or a Shopping For Food
> >> > group. Or an I Need To Eat This Way Because I Have Gastroparesis
> >> > group. Or an I Can't Eat That group. Or any other excuse you
> use >> > when you justify tearing down what other people post about
> cooking. >> > How is that different or even okay to do? Can you say
> double >> > standard? You posted the original recipe, and we as your
> audience >> > are entitled to comment on it, plain and simple. If
> you didn't >> > want the feedback, you should have kept your carb
> concoction to >> > yourself. And really, my comment was in agreement
> with and >> > directed to Barbie, not you, until you shouted that you
> needed more >> > attention which I am now giving you, so be happy.
> I'll repeat my >> > agreement: it's far too carb laden, and I am
> entitled to say that >> > regardless that this isn't a diabetic
> newsgroup. >>
> >> Is the entire US diabetic? I don't know anyone who's diabetic, but
> in >> this newsgroup it seems to be the standard. What have you all
> been >> eating the past 50 years?
> >
> > Naw, there's 2, maybe 3 here best I know. Most don;t obsess about
> > it, they just portion control what they need to portion control.
>
> Are you sure it's not more than 50% here? Of course, young people
> don't use Usenet anymore, so that increases the number too. Just like
> there will be a larger than average number of bald men in rfc

LOL, no, it really isn't. Might be more than 2 or 3, but only 2 or 3
mention it often enough to notice.

--