Felice wrote:
>> On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 17:14:54 -0600, Christine Dabney wrote:
>>> I suggest we raise money for the RFC Old Folks Home....
>
> What makes you think we have old folks around here? TANOF.
>
> Felice
> who would be one if there were any
>
>


You mean I have to stop asking for the "senior discount" when I go to
Denny's? ;-)

Bob

On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 21:24:25 +0200, ChattyCathy
> wrote:

>brooklyn1 wrote:
>
>> Sure I get your drift... so haw much money do you think you can skim
>> from illegal copies?
>
>Sheldon - you really need to get separate newsreader/email software. So
>much for 'our little secret'... Dufus.

Well done, Cathy! <high-five>

Carol

--
Change "invalid" to JamesBond's agent number to reply.

On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 15:32:22 -0400, "Felice" >
wrote:

>> On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 17:14:54 -0600, Christine Dabney wrote:
>>>
>>> I suggest we raise money for the RFC Old Folks Home....
>
>What makes you think we have old folks around here? TANOF.

ROFLMAO!

>Felice
>who would be one if there were any

But, but, but .... you're only 27, aren't you??

Carol

--
Change "invalid" to JamesBond's agent number to reply.

Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>
> OCR software has come a long way from those days. I remember OmniPage
> Pro
> and is was a really good product in its day. Another improvement is
> the recognition of many different standard fonts.
>
Did the version of OmniPage Pro you had come with a dongle that had to
be plugged into the parallel port in order to get it do anything at
all? Mine first version did (we had IBM boxes way back then). What a
PITA.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

blake murphy wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 19:45:27 -0700, sf wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 12:23:22 -0700, Dan Abel > wrote:
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> sf > wrote:
>>>
>>>> It seemed to be a lot of effort and I'm not interested anyway. Take
>>>> what's been posted lately and store in a file on your completer. I'm
>>>> sure if there are missing pages, the OP will post those. In fact, if
>>>> we ask her real nice, maybe Chatty Cathy will archive it on the web
>>>> site.
>>> Various suggestions have been made over the years. Believe it or not,
>>> there has been much anguish about it posted here. I don't believe that
>>> legal action was threatened, but it was pretty much that level of anger.
>>> I suspect that most submissions were electronic, and that when all of
>>> those people all over the world worked on standardizing the recipes,
>>> that they didn't mail pieces of paper back and forth.
>> I didn't have a dog in the fight. I was glad that I stayed out of it
>> back then (due to time constraints) and I'm glad I did now (because it
>> got so ugly). I wasn't privy to inner squabbles and that's a good
>> thing. What over flowed into public was an embarrassment to those
>> involved. Because I was not involved, I quickly forgot about the
>> squabbles.
>>
>> Now, fill me in on Grandma - since you remember so much.
>
> grandma's up on the roof and we can't get her down.
>
> your pal,
> blake

Wow! I have been going back to read some of those old posts, and
things got pretty acrimonious. Funny that I have put that aspect
out of mind since then!

It is interesting to see the folks who are still here, and the
many posters who have been gone for quite a while now.

--
Jean B.

On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 17:20:52 GMT, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 19:45:27 -0700, sf wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 12:23:22 -0700, Dan Abel > wrote:
>>
>>>In article >,
>>> sf > wrote:
>>>
>>>> It seemed to be a lot of effort and I'm not interested anyway. Take
>>>> what's been posted lately and store in a file on your completer. I'm
>>>> sure if there are missing pages, the OP will post those. In fact, if
>>>> we ask her real nice, maybe Chatty Cathy will archive it on the web
>>>> site.
>>>
>>>Various suggestions have been made over the years. Believe it or not,
>>>there has been much anguish about it posted here. I don't believe that
>>>legal action was threatened, but it was pretty much that level of anger.
>>>I suspect that most submissions were electronic, and that when all of
>>>those people all over the world worked on standardizing the recipes,
>>>that they didn't mail pieces of paper back and forth.
>>
>> I didn't have a dog in the fight. I was glad that I stayed out of it
>> back then (due to time constraints) and I'm glad I did now (because it
>> got so ugly). I wasn't privy to inner squabbles and that's a good
>> thing. What over flowed into public was an embarrassment to those
>> involved. Because I was not involved, I quickly forgot about the
>> squabbles.
>>
>> Now, fill me in on Grandma - since you remember so much.
>
>grandma's up on the roof and we can't get her down.
>
>your pal,
>blake

OMG blake. I haven't heard that joke in years. You can't be_that_old.

koko
--

There is no love more sincere than the love of food
George Bernard Shaw
www.kokoscorner.typepad.com
updated 03/07

Damsel in dis Dress wrote:

> On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 21:24:25 +0200, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:
>
>>brooklyn1 wrote:
>>
>>> Sure I get your drift... so haw much money do you think you can skim
>>> from illegal copies?
>>
>>Sheldon - you really need to get separate newsreader/email software.
>>So much for 'our little secret'... Dufus.
>
> Well done, Cathy! <high-five>
>
> Carol
>
<high-five backatcha>

;-)
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

ChattyCathy wrote:
> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>> OCR software has come a long way from those days. I remember OmniPage
>> Pro
>> and is was a really good product in its day. Another improvement is
>> the recognition of many different standard fonts.
>>
> Did the version of OmniPage Pro you had come with a dongle that had to
> be plugged into the parallel port in order to get it do anything at
> all? Mine first version did (we had IBM boxes way back then). What a
> PITA.
I don't know about Wayne but the first version of OmniPage Pro that I
had came with a dongle. Looking back I thought it was good, and for its
time it was, but nothing to compare with the OCR software out today.

IIRC I was using it on an IBM 486, may have been the 386. Know it wasn't
the XT or the Osborne One. LOL

On Mon 09 Mar 2009 01:40:07p, George Shirley told us...

> ChattyCathy wrote:
>> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>> OCR software has come a long way from those days. I remember OmniPage
>>> Pro
>>> and is was a really good product in its day. Another improvement is
>>> the recognition of many different standard fonts.
>>>
>> Did the version of OmniPage Pro you had come with a dongle that had to
>> be plugged into the parallel port in order to get it do anything at
>> all? Mine first version did (we had IBM boxes way back then). What a
>> PITA.
> I don't know about Wayne but the first version of OmniPage Pro that I
> had came with a dongle. Looking back I thought it was good, and for its
> time it was, but nothing to compare with the OCR software out today.
>
> IIRC I was using it on an IBM 486, may have been the 386. Know it wasn't
> the XT or the Osborne One. LOL

I used OmniPage Pro at work connected to an IBM PC, but I didn't connect
it, so don't remember about the dongle.

--
Wayne Boatwright

"One man's meat is another man's poison"
- Oswald Dykes, English writer, 1709.

On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 09:50:03 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:

> Sqwertz wrote:
>
>> ChattyCathy > wrote:
>>
>>> IMHO, there must have been
>>> something like that in order to have the cookbook printed in the
>>> first place. If we could find those, it would save a lot of
>>> typing/scanning...
>>
>> It was done in troff using MS's notepad.exe
>>
>> -sw
>
> Ah, how splendidly 80s...

hey! i like notepad. DOS is boss!

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 16:34:57 -0500, Damsel in dis Dress wrote:

> On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 16:30:06 -0500, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
>>Rusty. I remember him, and his intentions to do this a few years
>>ago. I remember contributing .... something towards that effort. I
>>I may have even started the collection by rounding up the recipes
>>that had already been published on Usenet, and Rusty was going to
>>finish it. Or something like that.
>>
>>IIRC, The idea met with a fair amount of resistance even back then.
>>Which is probably whey I felt the need to compile the list int he
>>first place ;-)
>
> My passive-aggressive little buddy!
>
> Carol

sometimes passive aggression is better than aggressive aggression.
especially if you're on the receiving end.

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 23:39:18 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:
>
> Well, in the last four years I've been subscribed to r.f.c., I've seen
> quite a bit of enthusiasm for doing another RFC cookbook, but nothing
> much has actually *happened*. IMHO, it's one of those "As long as I
> don't have to do anything except buy it, I'm for it" things. Surprise,
> surprise. So... I'm not holding my breath for 'The RFC Cookbook, Vol
> II' to be published (on paper?) anytime soon.
>

i was thinking along those cynical lines as well. in fact, i was a little
surprised that 'sure, if i don't have to do anything' wasn't included in
your survey.

your lazy pal,
blake

On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 21:04:18 -0600, Omelet wrote:

> In article >,
> ChattyCathy > wrote:
>
>> Have to say this... in view of the above: how do we know that somebody
>> (or more than one somebody) hasn't already saved most of the recipes
>> posted here to some recipe software/master file of their own?
>> --
>> Cheers
>> Chatty Cathy
>
> While I've certainly not saved ALL of the recipes, I've certainly
> collected a number of recipes over the years that I found interesting or
> useful. :-)
>
> That file is getting rather large...

yeah, i know what you're talking about. but at least the computer is
(sorta) keeping track of them and you know where they are...

your paql,
blake

ChattyCathy wrote on Mon, 09 Mar 2009 21:56:50 +0200:

> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>
>> OCR software has come a long way from those days. I remember
>> OmniPage Pro and is was a really good product in its day.
>> Another improvement is the recognition of many different
>> standard fonts.
>>
> Did the version of OmniPage Pro you had come with a dongle
> that had to be plugged into the parallel port in order to get
> it do anything at all? Mine first version did (we had IBM
> boxes way back then). What a PITA.

No dongle! I utterly refused to buy anything that needed a dongle unless
I found that someone had cracked it.
--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 15:33:15 -0500, zxcvbob wrote:

> Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
>> On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 09:09:16 -0700, sf > wrote:
>>
>
>>> Please remind us what happened as far as recipes and grandma.
>
> Just the name is enough for those that remember; no need to dredge it
> all up again for those that don't. The cookbook project sort of took on
> a life of its own, and it wasn't necessarily a happy life, I'll just
> leave it at that.
>

some say it was pushed.

your pal,
blake

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 21:04:18 -0600, Omelet wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > ChattyCathy > wrote:
> >
> >> Have to say this... in view of the above: how do we know that somebody
> >> (or more than one somebody) hasn't already saved most of the recipes
> >> posted here to some recipe software/master file of their own?
> >> --
> >> Cheers
> >> Chatty Cathy
> >
> > While I've certainly not saved ALL of the recipes, I've certainly
> > collected a number of recipes over the years that I found interesting or
> > useful. :-)
> >
> > That file is getting rather large...
>
> yeah, i know what you're talking about. but at least the computer is
> (sorta) keeping track of them and you know where they are...
>
> your paql,
> blake

Yes, and I do have them filed in one folder, but it's not categorized!
Just alphanumerical. <g>

They are also backed up on the desktop hard drive.

I really should burn a CD one of these days tho'.
--
Peace! Om

I find hope in the darkest of days, and focus in the brightest. I do not judge the universe. -- Dalai Lama

"Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
>
> I used OmniPage Pro at work connected to an IBM PC, but I didn't connect
> it, so don't remember about the dongle.

I have version 8. No dongle.

I did not even bother installing it on this computer since the Epson OCR
works so much better that what I had. Maybe new versions are better. . They
are up to ver. 16 now.

At work we use PDF895 instead of Adobe. Does what we need for $8.95 instead
of $300

On Mon 09 Mar 2009 07:39:56p, Ed Pawlowski told us...

>
> "Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
>>
>> I used OmniPage Pro at work connected to an IBM PC, but I didn't
>> connect it, so don't remember about the dongle.
>
> I have version 8. No dongle.
>
> I did not even bother installing it on this computer since the Epson OCR
> works so much better that what I had. Maybe new versions are better. .
> They are up to ver. 16 now.
>
> At work we use PDF895 instead of Adobe. Does what we need for $8.95
> instead of $300

I wasn't able to find that product using Google for "PDF895" or "PDF 895".
Does it have another name?

--
Wayne Boatwright

"One man's meat is another man's poison"
- Oswald Dykes, English writer, 1709.

ChattyCathy > wrote:

> Sqwertz wrote:
>
>> ChattyCathy > wrote:
>>
>>> IMHO, there must have been
>>> something like that in order to have the cookbook printed in the
>>> first place. If we could find those, it would save a lot of
>>> typing/scanning...
>>
>> It was done in troff using MS's notepad.exe
>
> Ah, how splendidly 80s...

troff was 70's. And yes, I was kidding. It was written
using edlin (wow, now there's a blast from the past - the very
first editor for DOS. I'm surprised I even remembered that one).

-sw

-sw

"Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
5.247...
> On Mon 09 Mar 2009 07:39:56p, Ed Pawlowski told us...
>
>>
>> "Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
>>>
>>> I used OmniPage Pro at work connected to an IBM PC, but I didn't
>>> connect it, so don't remember about the dongle.
>>
>> I have version 8. No dongle.
>>
>> I did not even bother installing it on this computer since the Epson OCR
>> works so much better that what I had. Maybe new versions are better. .
>> They are up to ver. 16 now.
>>
>> At work we use PDF895 instead of Adobe. Does what we need for $8.95
>> instead of $300
>
> I wasn't able to find that product using Google for "PDF895" or "PDF 895".
> Does it have another name?
>
> --
> Wayne Boatwright

I was off a buck. www.pdf995.com

Wayne Boatwright wrote:
> On Mon 09 Mar 2009 07:39:56p, Ed Pawlowski told us...
>
>> "Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
>>> I used OmniPage Pro at work connected to an IBM PC, but I didn't
>>> connect it, so don't remember about the dongle.
>> I have version 8. No dongle.
>>
>> I did not even bother installing it on this computer since the Epson OCR
>> works so much better that what I had. Maybe new versions are better. .
>> They are up to ver. 16 now.
>>
>> At work we use PDF895 instead of Adobe. Does what we need for $8.95
>> instead of $300
>
> I wasn't able to find that product using Google for "PDF895" or "PDF 895".
> Does it have another name?
>
Wayne are you a windows or Linux user ?
Linux Ubuntu for example has heaps of open source PDF add ons
as does Firefox for most OSÅ›

I think open office in Ver 3 has also a new nifty PDF function but have
not used OO3 as happy with 2.4

Phil open source lover

On Mon 09 Mar 2009 07:55:53p, Ed Pawlowski told us...

>
> "Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
> 5.247...
>> On Mon 09 Mar 2009 07:39:56p, Ed Pawlowski told us...
>>
>>>
>>> "Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> I used OmniPage Pro at work connected to an IBM PC, but I didn't
>>>> connect it, so don't remember about the dongle.
>>>
>>> I have version 8. No dongle.
>>>
>>> I did not even bother installing it on this computer since the Epson
>>> OCR works so much better that what I had. Maybe new versions are
>>> better. . They are up to ver. 16 now.
>>>
>>> At work we use PDF895 instead of Adobe. Does what we need for $8.95
>>> instead of $300
>>
>> I wasn't able to find that product using Google for "PDF895" or "PDF
>> 895". Does it have another name?
>>
>> --
>> Wayne Boatwright
>
> I was off a buck. www.pdf995.com
>
>
>

Thanks, Ed!

--
Wayne Boatwright

"One man's meat is another man's poison"
- Oswald Dykes, English writer, 1709.

"Damsel in dis Dress" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 15:32:22 -0400, "Felice" >
> wrote:
>
>>> On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 17:14:54 -0600, Christine Dabney wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I suggest we raise money for the RFC Old Folks Home....
>>
>>What makes you think we have old folks around here? TANOF.
>
> ROFLMAO!
>
>>Felice
>>who would be one if there were any
>
> But, but, but .... you're only 27, aren't you??
>
> Carol

Well, no, but it was a good year to be born in!.

Felice

On Mon 09 Mar 2009 07:57:05p, phil..c told us...

> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>> On Mon 09 Mar 2009 07:39:56p, Ed Pawlowski told us...
>>
>>> "Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
>>>> I used OmniPage Pro at work connected to an IBM PC, but I didn't
>>>> connect it, so don't remember about the dongle.
>>> I have version 8. No dongle.
>>>
>>> I did not even bother installing it on this computer since the Epson
>>> OCR works so much better that what I had. Maybe new versions are
>>> better. . They are up to ver. 16 now.
>>>
>>> At work we use PDF895 instead of Adobe. Does what we need for $8.95
>>> instead of $300
>>
>> I wasn't able to find that product using Google for "PDF895" or "PDF
>> 895". Does it have another name?
>>
> Wayne are you a windows or Linux user ?
> Linux Ubuntu for example has heaps of open source PDF add ons
> as does Firefox for most OSÅ›

I had Linux installed at one time and liked it. However, since I do
roughly 50% of my work from home, I need to replicate my office environment
on my home PC for everything to work correctly. We have a lot of
proprietary software.

> I think open office in Ver 3 has also a new nifty PDF function but have
> not used OO3 as happy with 2.4

I used to use Open Office and liked it a lot. It was an early version, and
I can't recall if it had PDF capability at the time, however.

At present I have licenses from my company for all the software they need
for me to use, so I don't have a cost involved. I have Adobe PDF, but I
was interested in this version for a friend of mine.

>
> Phil open source lover

If I get to retire before I'm senile, I'll probably return to all open
source. :-)



--
Wayne Boatwright

"One man's meat is another man's poison"
- Oswald Dykes, English writer, 1709.

On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 23:43:20 -0400, "Felice" >
wrote:

>"Damsel in dis Dress" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 15:32:22 -0400, "Felice" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 17:14:54 -0600, Christine Dabney wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I suggest we raise money for the RFC Old Folks Home....
>>>
>>>What makes you think we have old folks around here? TANOF.
>>
>> ROFLMAO!
>>
>>>Felice
>>>who would be one if there were any
>>
>> But, but, but .... you're only 27, aren't you??
>
>Well, no, but it was a good year to be born in!.

You go, girl!

Carol

--
Change "invalid" to JamesBond's agent number to reply.

Sqwertz wrote:
>
> ChattyCathy > wrote:
>
> > IMHO, there must have been
> > something like that in order to have the cookbook printed in the first
> > place. If we could find those, it would save a lot of
> > typing/scanning...
>
> It was done in troff using MS's notepad.exe

Sure it wasn't vi? I used vi and trn daily until
late in 2000.

Damsel in dis Dress wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 23:43:20 -0400, "Felice" >
> wrote:
>
>
>>"Damsel in dis Dress" > wrote in message
. ..
>>
>>>On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 15:32:22 -0400, "Felice" >
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 17:14:54 -0600, Christine Dabney wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>I suggest we raise money for the RFC Old Folks Home....
>>>>
>>>>What makes you think we have old folks around here? TANOF.
>>>
>>>ROFLMAO!
>>>
>>>
>>>>Felice
>>>>who would be one if there were any
>>>
>>>But, but, but .... you're only 27, aren't you??
>>
>>Well, no, but it was a good year to be born in!.
>
>
> You go, girl!


I don't understand the skittishness about age. Me, I'm 46, born in
1962, and don't mind saying so.

Language crystalizes memory and I spoke early and often, as did both of
my own kids. I remember the sonic booms of McDonnell Douglas fighter
jets being tested above St. Louis, the way my great grandmother felt and
smelled when she hugged me, and the advice of my great, great Aunt
Mamie, her sister... "Drink hot water with lemon juice in the morning -
it keeps you regular."

I remember the death of Kennedys and the irises, roses and honeysuckle
that Lotte, the lady next door grew.

I remember Vietnam, being told by a pale teacher that perhaps we should
pray for the crew of the Apollo 13, WIN gardens, Three Mile Island, the
fall of the Berlin Wall, the loss of space shuttles, the rise and fall
of dot.coms, the birth, conception and death of family.

It irritates me when people are nosy but try to edge up to the matter
sideways. Just ask, okay? I don't mind.

zxcvbob wrote:
>
> Nope, I've looked at a few, haven't saved any of them. Pretty much been
> trying to ignore them. When the cookbook originally came out, I didn't
> want to support it because it was so divisive hurt too many people's
> feeling. Don't see any reason to start now. (Remember "Grandma"?)
>
> I will give you credit for spelling "loser" correctly, loser.
>
> Cheapskate Bob

If you had formed sentences correctly I would have given you some
extremely minor credit. But since you didn't no such credit is due. Let
me guess you barely graduated from elementary school after being held
back at least once or more.

me

sf wrote:
>
> On Sat, 07 Mar 2009 20:02:59 -0600, Sky >
> wrote:
>
> >Would a new edition be worthwhile?
>
> I seemed to be a lot of effort and I'm not interested anyway. Take
> what's been posted lately and store in a file on your completer. I'm
> sure if there are missing pages, the OP will post those. In fact, if
> we ask her real nice, maybe Chatty Cathy will archive it on the web
> site.

Buh......buh....buhhhhhh....But!!!!!! There's a difference between a
hard copy in hand versus an ephemeral post on usenet! I like to have
the "book" (hard copy) so I can get it somewhat sloppy with (food)
splatter! <G> Yes, I could print the individual recipe on a piece of
paper, but that defeats the purpose of the book, doesn't it (?).

Sky, who shouldn't be awake so early

--
Ultra Ultimate Kitchen Rule - Use the Timer!
Ultimate Kitchen Rule -- Cook's Choice

Sky wrote:

> Buh......buh....buhhhhhh....But!!!!!! There's a difference between a
> hard copy in hand versus an ephemeral post on usenet! I like to have
> the "book" (hard copy) so I can get it somewhat sloppy with (food)
> splatter! <G> Yes, I could print the individual recipe on a piece of
> paper, but that defeats the purpose of the book, doesn't it (?).

I *prefer* printing recipes to use that day; I can use it and then throw it
away after it's all grease-spattered and covered with fish guts. I sometimes
even type up recipes from cookbooks so that I can print them out and thereby
spare my cookbook the dangers of (for example) errant droplets of Bufalo
chipotle sauce getting onto their pages.

Bob

"****-me" > wrote:
> zxcvbob wrote:
>>
>> Nope, I've looked at a few, haven't saved any of them. Pretty much been
>> trying to ignore them. When the cookbook originally came out, I didn't
>> want to support it because it was so divisive hurt too many people's
>> feeling. Don't see any reason to start now. (Remember "Grandma"?)
>>
>> I will give you credit for spelling "loser" correctly, loser.
>>
>> Cheapskate Bob
>
> If you had formed sentences correctly I would have given you some
> extremely minor credit. But since you didn't no such credit is due. Let me
> guess you barely graduated from elementary school after being held back at
> least once or more.
>
> me

You heard of pot-kettle-black... that's no longer PC... so mick-dago-dumb.
None of your sentences are properly constructed.

brooklyn1 wrote:
> "****-me" > wrote:
>> zxcvbob wrote:
>>>
>>> Nope, I've looked at a few, haven't saved any of them. Pretty much
>>> been trying to ignore them. When the cookbook originally came out,
>>> I didn't want to support it because it was so divisive hurt too
>>> many people's feeling. Don't see any reason to start now. (Remember
>>> "Grandma"?) I will give you credit for spelling "loser" correctly,
>>> loser.
>>>
>>> Cheapskate Bob
>>
>> If you had formed sentences correctly I would have given you some
>> extremely minor credit. But since you didn't no such credit is due.
>> Let me guess you barely graduated from elementary school after being
>> held back at least once or more.
>>
>> me
>
> You heard of pot-kettle-black... that's no longer PC... so
> mick-dago-dumb. None of your sentences are properly constructed.

errrr 'none' (ie not one) of your sentences 'is'.......................

"Ophailia" > wrote in message
...
> brooklyn1 wrote:
>> "****-me" > wrote:
>>> zxcvbob wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Nope, I've looked at a few, haven't saved any of them. Pretty much
>>>> been trying to ignore them. When the cookbook originally came out,
>>>> I didn't want to support it because it was so divisive hurt too
>>>> many people's feeling. Don't see any reason to start now. (Remember
>>>> "Grandma"?) I will give you credit for spelling "loser" correctly,
>>>> loser.
>>>>
>>>> Cheapskate Bob
>>>
>>> If you had formed sentences correctly I would have given you some
>>> extremely minor credit. But since you didn't no such credit is due.
>>> Let me guess you barely graduated from elementary school after being
>>> held back at least once or more.
>>>
>>> me
>>
>> You heard of pot-kettle-black... that's no longer PC... so
>> mick-dago-dumb. None of your sentences are properly constructed.
>
> errrr 'none' (ie not one) of your sentences 'is'.......................
>
>
Um, 'none' and 'not one' are not synonymous.... "not one is" requires
identifying which. "None of your sentences are properly constructed" is
synonymous with All of your sentences are improperly constructed. Both are
equally correct but it's writers choice.

Btw, failure to capitalize makes your sentence improperly constructed,
Ophailia.

brooklyn1 wrote:
> "Ophailia" > wrote in message
> ...
>> brooklyn1 wrote:
>>> "****-me" > wrote:
>>>> zxcvbob wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope, I've looked at a few, haven't saved any of them. Pretty
>>>>> much been trying to ignore them. When the cookbook originally
>>>>> came out, I didn't want to support it because it was so divisive
>>>>> hurt too many people's feeling. Don't see any reason to start
>>>>> now. (Remember "Grandma"?) I will give you credit for spelling
>>>>> "loser" correctly, loser.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheapskate Bob
>>>>
>>>> If you had formed sentences correctly I would have given you some
>>>> extremely minor credit. But since you didn't no such credit is due.
>>>> Let me guess you barely graduated from elementary school after
>>>> being held back at least once or more.
>>>>
>>>> me
>>>
>>> You heard of pot-kettle-black... that's no longer PC... so
>>> mick-dago-dumb. None of your sentences are properly constructed.
>>
>> errrr 'none' (ie not one) of your sentences
>> 'is'.......................
> Um, 'none' and 'not one' are not synonymous.... "not one is" requires
> identifying which. "None of your sentences are properly constructed"
> is synonymous with All of your sentences are improperly constructed. Both
> are equally correct but it's writers choice.
>
> Btw, failure to capitalize makes your sentence improperly constructed,
> Ophailia.

<wink> Your failure to spell my nickname correctly is noted

Bob Terwilliger wrote:

> Sky wrote:
>
>> Buh......buh....buhhhhhh....But!!!!!! There's a difference between a
>> hard copy in hand versus an ephemeral post on usenet! I like to have
>> the "book" (hard copy) so I can get it somewhat sloppy with (food)
>> splatter! <G> Yes, I could print the individual recipe on a piece
>> of paper, but that defeats the purpose of the book, doesn't it (?).
>
> I *prefer* printing recipes to use that day; I can use it and then
> throw it away after it's all grease-spattered and covered with fish
> guts. I sometimes even type up recipes from cookbooks so that I can
> print them out and thereby spare my cookbook the dangers of (for
> example) errant droplets of Bufalo chipotle sauce getting onto their
> pages.
>
Gotta agree with you here Bob. I do the same sorta thing these days.
Ruined a good cookbook once by spilling something all over it...
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

"Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
...

> I *prefer* printing recipes to use that day; I can use it and then throw
> it away after it's all grease-spattered and covered with fish guts. I
> sometimes even type up recipes from cookbooks so that I can print them out
> and thereby spare my cookbook the dangers of (for example) errant droplets
> of Bufalo chipotle sauce getting onto their pages.
>
> Bob

Clean cookbooks? Jeez, Bob, my best-loved cookbooks are the splattered ones.
They bring back memories!

Felice

In article >,
"Ophelia" > wrote:

> brooklyn1 wrote:
> > "Ophailia" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> brooklyn1 wrote:

> >>> You heard of pot-kettle-black... that's no longer PC... so
> >>> mick-dago-dumb. None of your sentences are properly constructed.
> >>
> >> errrr 'none' (ie not one) of your sentences
> >> 'is'.......................
> > Um, 'none' and 'not one' are not synonymous.... "not one is" requires
> > identifying which. "None of your sentences are properly constructed"
> > is synonymous with All of your sentences are improperly constructed. Both
> > are equally correct but it's writers choice.
> >
> > Btw, failure to capitalize makes your sentence improperly constructed,
> > Ophailia.
>
> <wink> Your failure to spell my nickname correctly is noted

Interesting. From my dictionary:

USAGE It is sometimes held that none can take only a singular verb,
never a plural verb:: none of them is coming tonight, rather than | none
of them are coming tonight. There is little justification, historical or
grammatical, for this view. None is descended from Old English n?n,
meaning Œnot one,¹ and has been used for around a thousand years with
both a singular and a plural verb, depending on the context and the
emphasis needed.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:07:49 -0400, Jean B. wrote:
>
> Wow! I have been going back to read some of those old posts, and
> things got pretty acrimonious. Funny that I have put that aspect
> out of mind since then!
>
> It is interesting to see the folks who are still here, and the
> many posters who have been gone for quite a while now.

it was interesting leafing through the book and seeing some of the old
names.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 13:20:40 -0700, koko wrote:

> On Mon, 09 Mar 2009 17:20:52 GMT, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>> I didn't have a dog in the fight. I was glad that I stayed out of it
>>> back then (due to time constraints) and I'm glad I did now (because it
>>> got so ugly). I wasn't privy to inner squabbles and that's a good
>>> thing. What over flowed into public was an embarrassment to those
>>> involved. Because I was not involved, I quickly forgot about the
>>> squabbles.
>>>
>>> Now, fill me in on Grandma - since you remember so much.
>>
>>grandma's up on the roof and we can't get her down.
>>
>>your pal,
>>blake
>
> OMG blake. I haven't heard that joke in years. You can't be_that_old.
>
> koko

fifty-six for another month.

some jokes are like fine wine - i particularly like that one.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 15:32:22 -0400, Felice wrote:

>> On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 17:14:54 -0600, Christine Dabney wrote:
>>>
>>> I suggest we raise money for the RFC Old Folks Home....
>
> What makes you think we have old folks around here? TANOF.
>
> Felice
> who would be one if there were any

keep it down or someone will thrash you with their cane.

your pal,
blake