Michael "Dog3" wrote:

> "Ophelia" >
> : in rec.food.cooking
>
>>>
>>> LOL... Welcome back O. I stole the pointy stick from <insert CABAL
>>> (TINC) member's name>. Wanna borrow it ;-)
>>
>> Yayy, Michael) Or I could appoint you as the pointy stick wielder
>> on my behalf?
>
> <blush> Well... perhaps I *could* do it for a short time. I'm not very
> good at it though ;-)

Hmmm. Since when did wooden spoons come to be known as 'pointy sticks'?
Did I miss that memo too?

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

l, not -l wrote:

>
> On 30-Apr-2009, ChattyCathy > wrote:
>
>> Yabut - take today's date (i.e. the last day of April). It would be
>> formatted as 04/30/2009 in the US, right? Which does not support what
>> you say above. The way I see it (because I read stuff from left to
>> right) is: month/day/year, not year/month/day. Even if you read it
>> backwards it still gives you year/day/month. What you were talking
>> about would be the yyyy-mm-dd format i.e. 2009-04-30 which is what I
>> reckon is more 'logical'. <g>
>> --
>
> Sorry, I was unclear; I thought someone proposed formatting dates as
> year/month/day. My post was in support of that format; perhaps I
> misunderstood the format suggested.

<g>

I prefer the year/month/day format, because it's logical to me too. It
was Dan who said that he and/or one of his relatives preferred the
month/day/year format.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

ChattyCathy wrote:
> Michael "Dog3" wrote:
>
>> "Ophelia" >
>> : in rec.food.cooking
>>
>>>>
>>>> LOL... Welcome back O. I stole the pointy stick from <insert CABAL
>>>> (TINC) member's name>. Wanna borrow it ;-)
>>>
>>> Yayy, Michael) Or I could appoint you as the pointy stick wielder
>>> on my behalf?
>>
>> <blush> Well... perhaps I *could* do it for a short time. I'm not
>> very good at it though ;-)
>
> Hmmm. Since when did wooden spoons come to be known as 'pointy
> sticks'? Did I miss that memo too?

I don't know, but they were deadly when I was a kid. OUCH!

nancy

In article >,
ChattyCathy > wrote:

> l, not -l wrote:
>
> >
> > On 29-Apr-2009, Dan Abel > wrote:
> >
> >> So, the point is, the month goes first, because it's the most
> >> important.
> >>
> >> :-)

> > And, it follows a logical pattern too; moving from the general to the
> > specific - year, month, day, hour, minute, second
>
> Yabut - take today's date (i.e. the last day of April). It would be
> formatted as 04/30/2009 in the US, right? Which does not support what
> you say above. The way I see it (because I read stuff from left to
> right) is: month/day/year, not year/month/day. Even if you read it
> backwards it still gives you year/day/month. What you were talking
> about would be the yyyy-mm-dd format i.e. 2009-04-30 which is what I
> reckon is more 'logical'. <g>

Yeah, I was a little confused. I figure he meant to respond to you, but
cut your comment, and left mine in.

My comment above was a joke (note the smiley). I was a computer person
for 25 years, so I'm really more comfortable with YYYY-MM-DD:HH:MM:SS.
In fact, I dislike the confusion between the two date formats commonly
used so much, that I normally use the three character abbreviation for
the month. Nothing I hate worse than trying to figure out when
something is going to happen, when the date is 06-07-09.

So probably, I would write today's date as April 30, 2009.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Dan Abel wrote:

<snipped for space>

> So probably, I would write today's date as April 30, 2009.
>

Nah. In that instance, I'd go for 30th April, 2009.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

On Apr 30, 6:22*am, blake murphy > wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 16:24:25 -1000, dsi1 wrote:
> > Michael "Dog3" wrote:
>
> >> LOL... I think you're right and I also think Mark Thorson is right.
> >> Usenet will be on a memory stick stuck out of the way with a download
> >> link. *I'll be poking at my touch screen with the pointy end of my cane
> >>
>
> > Google will data mine the Usenet archives to be used as a model of all
> > aspects of human interaction and create the first true AI consciousness..
> > At this point, machines will take over the Earth with humans used mainly
> > as pets or as a source of high quality machine oil. Shortly thereafter,
> > the machines will destroy themselves. :-)
>
> nah. *the machines will begin to devote all their resources to arguing
> about abortion and gun control.
>
> your pal,
> blake

I hardly think robots would be concerned with abortion and gun control
- maybe the control of proton light-beam mini-blasters but definitely
not abortion. The important point was the Google will use the Usenet
archives to cause the demise of all human life on the planet. :-)

Michael "Dog3" wrote:

> From what I understand the man we fondly called "The Wallet" either
> originally financed or outright bought the spot for SL on FoodTV. They're
> divorced now. Big surprise.
>
> Michael
>
I have no idea about buying her a spot on FoodTV but to her credit she
used all her own savings to promote that "Kurtain Kraft" thing of hers
on QVC or one of those shopping channels. Apparently she was good enough
to get noticed by bigger wigs and it all sort of took off from there.
All long before "The Wallet" came on the scene.
I give her credit for that, even if her food and FoodTV show are a bit
of a laugh.

Michael "Dog3" wrote:
> Becca > : in
> rec.food.cooking
>
>>
>> Just yesterday, I read that Sandra Lee designed Kurtain Kraft, this
>> is where she found her claim to fame. Not sure how she got a
>> television show.
>
> From what I understand the man we fondly called "The Wallet" either
> originally financed or outright bought the spot for SL on FoodTV.
> They're divorced now. Big surprise.

She's with Andrew Cuomo (attorney general NY/kill usenet) now.

nancy

blake murphy wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 11:43:14 -0700, Dan Abel wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> ChattyCathy > wrote:
>>
>>> Sqwertz wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dan Abel > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The CABAL (TINC) for this group doesn't run things quite the way
>>>>> your council that runs the recreation area at the old folks home
>>>>> where you live does. Thanks for the offer, though.
>>>>
>>>> Did you not get recent memo #65536 dated 09/04/2009?
>>>>
>>>> Item 71: There Is No More, "TINC". Please reference new
>>>> rule TINMTINC (p. 64)
>>>
>>> Oh, *that* memo? I chose to ignore it; thought everybody would - as
>>> they do all other memos. Guess not.
>>
>> Steve and I are from the US. That means that 09/04/2009 translates
>> to the fourth day of September of the year 2009. In other words,
>> the memo hasn't taken effect yet.
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> Once we reach that date, of course, I will *then* proceed to ignore
>> it.
>>
>> :-)
>
> you can never get too early a start on ignoring things.

Heh!

ChattyCathy wrote:
> Michael "Dog3" wrote:
>
>> "Ophelia" >
>> : in rec.food.cooking
>>
>>>>
>>>> LOL... Welcome back O. I stole the pointy stick from <insert CABAL
>>>> (TINC) member's name>. Wanna borrow it ;-)
>>>
>>> Yayy, Michael) Or I could appoint you as the pointy stick wielder
>>> on my behalf?
>>
>> <blush> Well... perhaps I *could* do it for a short time. I'm not
>> very good at it though ;-)
>
> Hmmm. Since when did wooden spoons come to be known as 'pointy
> sticks'? Did I miss that memo too?

Hey, if Michael says he has a pointy stick, who cares You had better
watch your behind madam cos I see him creeping up with the aforementioned
pointy stick!

Nancy Young wrote:
> ChattyCathy wrote:
>> Michael "Dog3" wrote:
>>
>>> "Ophelia" >
>>> : in rec.food.cooking
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> LOL... Welcome back O. I stole the pointy stick from <insert
>>>>> CABAL (TINC) member's name>. Wanna borrow it ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Yayy, Michael) Or I could appoint you as the pointy stick
>>>> wielder on my behalf?
>>>
>>> <blush> Well... perhaps I *could* do it for a short time. I'm not
>>> very good at it though ;-)
>>
>> Hmmm. Since when did wooden spoons come to be known as 'pointy
>> sticks'? Did I miss that memo too?
>
> I don't know, but they were deadly when I was a kid. OUCH!

Nodnodnod

Ophelia wrote:

>
> Hey, if Michael says he has a pointy stick, who cares You had
> better watch your behind madam cos I see him creeping up with the
> aforementioned pointy stick!

Heh. He's welcome to try <g>
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy - who has eyes in the back of her head

ChattyCathy wrote:
> Ophelia wrote:
>
>>
>> Hey, if Michael says he has a pointy stick, who cares You had
>> better watch your behind madam cos I see him creeping up with the
>> aforementioned pointy stick!
>
> Heh. He's welcome to try <g>

Ooops!!!!

"Ophelia" > wrote:
>
> Hey, if Michael says he has a pointy stick, who cares You had better
> watch your behind madam cos I see him creeping up with the aforementioned
> pointy stick!
Yes, I can attest to the fact that Michael has a pointy stick. He pointed it
at me one time and next thing he knew it was protruding from his nether
regions.

On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:00:27 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:

> Michael "Dog3" wrote:
>
>> "Ophelia" >
>> : in rec.food.cooking
>>
>>>>
>>>> LOL... Welcome back O. I stole the pointy stick from <insert CABAL
>>>> (TINC) member's name>. Wanna borrow it ;-)
>>>
>>> Yayy, Michael) Or I could appoint you as the pointy stick wielder
>>> on my behalf?
>>
>> <blush> Well... perhaps I *could* do it for a short time. I'm not very
>> good at it though ;-)
>
> Hmmm. Since when did wooden spoons come to be known as 'pointy sticks'?
> Did I miss that memo too?

when they become very, very well-worn.

your pal,
blake

On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:37:21 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:

> l, not -l wrote:
>
>>
>> On 30-Apr-2009, ChattyCathy > wrote:
>>
>>> Yabut - take today's date (i.e. the last day of April). It would be
>>> formatted as 04/30/2009 in the US, right? Which does not support what
>>> you say above. The way I see it (because I read stuff from left to
>>> right) is: month/day/year, not year/month/day. Even if you read it
>>> backwards it still gives you year/day/month. What you were talking
>>> about would be the yyyy-mm-dd format i.e. 2009-04-30 which is what I
>>> reckon is more 'logical'. <g>
>>> --
>>
>> Sorry, I was unclear; I thought someone proposed formatting dates as
>> year/month/day. My post was in support of that format; perhaps I
>> misunderstood the format suggested.
>
> <g>
>
> I prefer the year/month/day format, because it's logical to me too. It
> was Dan who said that he and/or one of his relatives preferred the
> month/day/year format.

i miss the days of hysteria before the Great Millennium Computer Crisis
Meltdown.

your pal,
blake

On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 21:19:27 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:

> Dan Abel wrote:
>
> <snipped for space>
>
>> So probably, I would write today's date as April 30, 2009.
>>
>
> Nah. In that instance, I'd go for 30th April, 2009.

****ing europeans. or something.

your pal,
blake

On 30 Apr 2009 22:01:05 GMT, Michael "Dog3" wrote:

> Goomba > :
> in rec.food.cooking
>
>> I have no idea about buying her a spot on FoodTV but to her credit she
>> used all her own savings to promote that "Kurtain Kraft" thing of hers
>> on QVC or one of those shopping channels. Apparently she was good
>> enough to get noticed by bigger wigs and it all sort of took off from
>> there. All long before "The Wallet" came on the scene.
>> I give her credit for that, even if her food and FoodTV show are a bit
>> of a laugh.
>
> No doubt she was on her way when she met the Wallet. Her crafty industry
> would probably have blossomed anyway, well it did to a certain extent. She
> will never be able to compete the with Martha Stewart empire but I'm not
> sure she even wants to. It doesn't matter anyway. She has her own
> demographic audience. They are welcome to her AFAIC.
>
> Michael

i don't know much about sandra lee, but at least she seems to live on the
same planet as most of us. martha stewart, i'm not sure.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:

> i miss the days of hysteria before the Great Millennium Computer
> Crisis Meltdown.

Yep. I have to admit that the Great Millennium Computer Crisis Meltdown
was the most stressful 10 seconds of my life.

The good news is: I will probably be dead by 2038.

Cheers
Cathy Baden-Powell

On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:16:05 -0700, Mark Thorson >
wrote:

>Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>> Those pics and videos will go down as scrapbooks for generations to
>> see. But their kids won't care less as they head down their own
>> path of Idiocracy.
>
>Good point. Not only that, but the RFC archives are
>entirely in text, which will be as obsolete as Morse Code
>in their time. Not like youtube or Facebook which are
>graphic and therefore do not require cogitating, and
>therefore are much more dangerous with regard to your
>legacy.

Have you SEEN Facebook? Lots more writing than pictures.

Carol

--
Change "invalid" to James Bond's agent number to reply.

On 01 May 2009 19:28:22 GMT, Michael "Dog3" wrote:

> blake murphy >
> : in rec.food.cooking
>
>>
>> i don't know much about sandra lee, but at least she seems to live on
>> the same planet as most of us. martha stewart, i'm not sure.
>
> Martha Stewart appeals to the upper middle class. I don't even know what
> Sandra Lee's demographics are. Whatever planet Sandra Lee gets her
> inspiration from is not the same planet I live on.
>
> Michael

i got no class.

your pal,
blake

On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 11:32:29 -0700, Dan Abel > wrote:

>I was a computer person
>for 25 years, so I'm really more comfortable with YYYY-MM-DD:HH:MM:SS.
>In fact, I dislike the confusion between the two date formats commonly
>used so much, that I normally use the three character abbreviation for
>the month. Nothing I hate worse than trying to figure out when
>something is going to happen, when the date is 06-07-09.
>
>So probably, I would write today's date as April 30, 2009.

I agree with this post.

Carol

--
Change "invalid" to James Bond's agent number to reply.

On Sat, 02 May 2009 18:09:49 GMT, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On 01 May 2009 19:28:22 GMT, Michael "Dog3" wrote:
>
>> blake murphy >
>> : in rec.food.cooking
>>
>>>
>>> i don't know much about sandra lee, but at least she seems to live on
>>> the same planet as most of us. martha stewart, i'm not sure.
>>
>> Martha Stewart appeals to the upper middle class. I don't even know what
>> Sandra Lee's demographics are. Whatever planet Sandra Lee gets her
>> inspiration from is not the same planet I live on.
>>
>> Michael
>
>i got no class.
>
I guess I don't either. Although I probably spend more time doing
real scratch cooking than most people here, I'm not against shortcut
cooking and Sandra Lee doesn't gross me out the way she does certain
people. IMO those tablescapes have got to go, but there are a lot of
people who love that sort of stuff.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On 03 May 2009 12:57:14 GMT, Michael "Dog3" wrote:

> sf > :
> in rec.food.cooking
>
>> I guess I don't either. Although I probably spend more time doing
>> real scratch cooking than most people here, I'm not against shortcut
>> cooking and Sandra Lee doesn't gross me out the way she does certain
>> people. IMO those tablescapes have got to go, but there are a lot of
>> people who love that sort of stuff.
>
> I have no qualms about short cut cooking but Sandra Lee is over the top and
> her cooking disgusts me. At least Stewart cooks real food.
>
> Michael

i'm sure her food is god, but some of the craft projects seem designed for
someone on a crystal meth jag.

your pal,
blake

On 03 May 2009 12:53:20 GMT, Michael "Dog3" wrote:

> blake murphy >
> : in rec.food.cooking
>
>>> Martha Stewart appeals to the upper middle class. I don't even know
>>> what Sandra Lee's demographics are. Whatever planet Sandra Lee gets
>>> her inspiration from is not the same planet I live on.
>>>
>>> Michael
>>
>> i got no class.
>
> I don't have any class either. Neither Martha nor Sandra, or their
> products, food etc. appeal to me very much. I'm more into the likes of
> southern belle, drunken Nathalie Dupree
>
> Michael

micheal, have you ever read any of florence king's stuff?

<http://www.amazon.com/s/qid=1241366360/ref=a9_sc_1?ie=UTF8&search-alias=aps&field-keywords=florence%20king>

'Confessions of a Failed Southern Lady,' and 'Southern Ladies & Gentlemen'
are both great. there's also an omnibus, 'the florence king reader.'

i deplore her politics, but jesus, is she funny.

your pal,
blake

Dan Abel > wrote:

> In article >,
> ChattyCathy > wrote:
>
>> Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>>> Dan Abel > wrote:
>>>
>>>> The CABAL (TINC) for this group doesn't run things quite the way your
>>>> council that runs the recreation area at the old folks home where you
>>>> live does. Thanks for the offer, though.
>>>
>>> Did you not get recent memo #65536 dated 09/04/2009?
>>>
>>> Item 71: There Is No More, "TINC". Please reference new
>>> rule TINMTINC (p. 64)
>>
>> Oh, *that* memo? I chose to ignore it; thought everybody would - as they
>> do all other memos. Guess not.
>
> Steve and I are from the US. That means that 09/04/2009 translates to
> the fourth day of September of the year 2009. In other words, the memo
> hasn't taken effect yet.

The Cabal is a massive, worldwide organization. It has always
written dates in the format that the majority will understand.

Mentioning this fact is not in violation of the TOM. I checked with
the local Cabal rep beforehand.

-sw

ChattyCathy > wrote:

> <g> Shoulda spotted that... I keep forgetting that the US has it's
> day/month format front-to-back, um, I mean back-to-front. That's why we
> should all stick to the yyyy-mm-dd like most well behaved mainframes and
> computers do...

I totally agree. The US date format has never made any sense. It
goes from significant number, to least significant, then back to
most significant number. At least the European method uses LSN, SN,
MSN, which is at least in order from least to most - but still is
the opposite of how everyone expresses base-10 numbers.

The U.S. method would imply that the number 294 would actually be
four hundred and twenty-nine.

Of course the 20090409 (April 9th 2009) is the ultimate method and
should have been adopted as the universal format when Rome (and
their numerals) fell. Along with the metric system.

-sw

ChattyCathy > wrote:

> What you were talking
> about would be the yyyy-mm-dd format i.e. 2009-04-30 which is what I
> reckon is more 'logical'. <g>

Anybody who was a computer programmer in 70's and early 80's will
agree with this. That date format sorts naturally using any
numerical sorting method without having to write any date conversion
routines.

It also follows the common base-10 logic used by everyone: Most
significant number first.

-sw

ChattyCathy > wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>
>> i miss the days of hysteria before the Great Millennium Computer
>> Crisis Meltdown.
>
> Yep. I have to admit that the Great Millennium Computer Crisis Meltdown
> was the most stressful 10 seconds of my life.
>
> The good news is: I will probably be dead by 2038.

2047 is probably more important. Dates + DST were often encoded
encoded in 3 bytes. In 2048, it will take more than the allotted 12
bits to represent anything larger than 2048.

-sw

blake murphy > wrote:

> you can never get too early a start on ignoring things.

Why procrastinate?

-sw

Michael "Dog3" wrote:
> blake murphy >
> : in rec.food.cooking
>
>
>> i got no class.
>>
>
> I don't have any class either. Neither Martha nor Sandra, or their
> products, food etc. appeal to me very much. I'm more into the likes of
> southern belle, drunken Nathalie Dupree
>
> Michael

You are not alone in the way you feel about Nathalie Dupree. She makes
us feel OK, about this daily train wreck that is our life. ;-) I read
that somewhere.


Becca

Sqwertz wrote:
> ChattyCathy > wrote:
>
>> What you were talking
>> about would be the yyyy-mm-dd format i.e. 2009-04-30 which is what I
>> reckon is more 'logical'. <g>
>
> Anybody who was a computer programmer in 70's and early 80's will
> agree with this. That date format sorts naturally using any
> numerical sorting method without having to write any date conversion
> routines.
>
> It also follows the common base-10 logic used by everyone: Most
> significant number first.

This is probably true in any base number system.

>
> -sw

It's doubtful that logic can be employed in conventions of language.
Logically, we should all be speaking one language. :-)

dsi1 said...


> It's doubtful that logic can be employed in conventions of language.
> Logically, we should all be speaking one language. :-)


Yep. Music!

I got first dibs on guitar.

Andy
--
Eat first, talk later.

Andy wrote:
> dsi1 said...
>
>
>> It's doubtful that logic can be employed in conventions of language.
>> Logically, we should all be speaking one language. :-)
>
>
> Yep. Music!
>
> I got first dibs on guitar.
>
> Andy

I approach most things in a logical manner but logic has no place in
music - even I know that! :-)

Oddly, enough I have to cool it with the guitar for a few days. I was
making some curry and needed some butter in a hurry so I grabbed a
frozen block out of the freezer and while holding it over the pan,
attempted to cut off a chunk with a fork. This was a very dangerous
thing to do. The fork went through the butter and into my left index
finger tip. When I play, blood squishes out of the wound. Not fun!

dsi1 said...

> Andy wrote:
>> dsi1 said...
>>
>>
>>> It's doubtful that logic can be employed in conventions of language.
>>> Logically, we should all be speaking one language. :-)
>>
>>
>> Yep. Music!
>>
>> I got first dibs on guitar.
>>
>> Andy
>
> I approach most things in a logical manner but logic has no place in
> music - even I know that! :-)
>
> Oddly, enough I have to cool it with the guitar for a few days. I was
> making some curry and needed some butter in a hurry so I grabbed a
> frozen block out of the freezer and while holding it over the pan,
> attempted to cut off a chunk with a fork. This was a very dangerous
> thing to do. The fork went through the butter and into my left index
> finger tip. When I play, blood squishes out of the wound. Not fun!


dsi1,

Trying to hear "Curry in a Hurry" by dsi1

Try the ukulele for awhile?

Best,

Andy
--
HONK if I'm paying YOUR mortgage!

dsi1 > wrote:

> Sqwertz wrote:
>
>> It also follows the common base-10 logic used by everyone: Most
>> significant number first.
>
> This is probably true in any base number system.

The second most import number system in use today? Binary.
LSB first.

-sw

Andy wrote:

>
> Trying to hear "Curry in a Hurry" by dsi1
>

I'd be more likely to write a tune called "Pork Butt." Funnier.

> Try the ukulele for awhile?

I got a nice koa uke, the fretboard sez "Ha Waii." Made in Vietnam. :-)

>
> Best,
>
> Andy

Sqwertz wrote:
> dsi1 > wrote:
>
>> Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>>> It also follows the common base-10 logic used by everyone: Most
>>> significant number first.
>> This is probably true in any base number system.
>
> The second most import number system in use today? Binary.
> LSB first.
>
> -sw

It could be that binary is the most important number system since it
makes computers possible. Humans can work with all types of numbering
systems - microprocessors cannot. Base 10 is mostly something we choose
arbitrarily.

dsi1 said...

> Andy wrote:
>
>>
>> Trying to hear "Curry in a Hurry" by dsi1
>>
>
> I'd be more likely to write a tune called "Pork Butt." Funnier.
>
>> Try the ukulele for awhile?
>
> I got a nice koa uke, the fretboard sez "Ha Waii." Made in Vietnam. :-)


dsi1,

Cool!!!

Wish I had one!

I can picture Pennsylvania girls in Hula skirts!

Andy
--
With an overactive imagination!

dsi1 wrote:
> Sqwertz wrote:
>> dsi1 > wrote:
>>
>>> Sqwertz wrote:
>>>
>>>> It also follows the common base-10 logic used by everyone: Most
>>>> significant number first.
>>> This is probably true in any base number system.
>>
>> The second most import number system in use today? Binary.
>> LSB first.

> It could be that binary is the most important number system since it
> makes computers possible. Humans can work with all types of numbering
> systems - microprocessors cannot. Base 10 is mostly something we
> choose arbitrarily.

Well, it's such a nice round number!

nancy