Omelet wrote:
> In article >,
> "Jean B." > wrote:
>
>> Omelet wrote:
>>> In article >,
>>> "Jean B." > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jean B. wrote:
>>>>> Omelet wrote:
>>>>>> In article >,
>>>>>> zxcvbob > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Omelet wrote:
>>>>>>>> In article >,
>>>>>>>> "Hugh" > wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Rec.food.recipes is a moderated newsgroup. The moderator retired.
>>>>>>>>> No one has emerged who wants to take that role.
>>>>>>>> I offered, but they rejected me because I drove a mac. :-(
>>>>>>> Better to let the group die, I guess.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bob
>>>>>> If anyone is interested, we could try starting one up on Yahoogroups?
>>>>>> Several of us could run it as co-moderators?
>>>>> Think about the rules. If any. Also, what would the ramifications be
>>>>> for rfc? How would the group differ from what we have here? How would
>>>>> it differ from rfr (as it was, of course)?
>>>>>
>>>>> Might be interesting, but I wouldn't want to see it supplant rfc.
>>>>>
>>>>> My immediate thoughts would be:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Recipe-oriented
>>>>> 2. Discussion of recipes and prose related to the recipes allowed (but
>>>>> then where do you draw the line, so you don't slip into banter?)
>>>>> 3. Tried and true recipes only (made clear in some way with the
>>>>> submission) UNLESS someone asks for a specific recipe--and then the fact
>>>>> that is has not been tried should be made clear.
>>>>>
>>>> Adding on...
>>>>
>>>> No flaming.
>>>>
>>>> No spamming.
>>> That is one good point of Yahoogroups.com.
>>>
>>> Moderated lists can totally filter out Spams!
>>>
>>> I co-moderate a couple of lists. One that is dedicated to local
>>> freecycling (I save egg cartons and cat litter buckets and give them
>>> away on a regular basis, along with other "stuff" I want to get rid of)
>>> and an RKBA 2nd amendment list.
>>>
>>> If anyone is truly interested, let me know and I'll be happy to start
>>> one up for recipes :-).
>> Well, I am debating whether I want to offer my services as a
>> co-moderator.
>>
>> I haven't done that. What does it involve?
>
> It just involves letting posts thru based on your personal views. They'd
> come to your mailbox. If you are not sure about one, just leave it in
> the queue for me or another moderator.
>
> That's what I do for Melissa on her RKBA list.
>
> It is not terribly involved.

Let's see where this goes first--if anywhere.

--
Jean B.

Omelet wrote:
> In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
>>> Sounds to me like the new moderator is not doing his/her job.
>>> I'm still up for it if they are interested.
>> Maybe you should contact the new moderator about it. Does the
>> moderator own rfr? It seems to me that rfr should be resurrected
>> rather than create yet another Yahoo group.
>
> I set up a Yahoo group.
> Jean joined, so that's a start. :-)

I'll think of something to post....

--
Jean B.

On Sun, 17 May 2009 17:19:24 -0400, "Rooney" >
wrote:

>What? You'd change it to
>rec.food.recipes.guns.bitch.about.anything.om.fee ls.like.today.babe

My, my, my.... aren't you all sunshine and roses? Shove off Space
Cadet.

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

On Sun, 17 May 2009 15:51:22 -0500, Omelet >
wrote:

>I set up a Yahoo group.
>Jean joined, so that's a start. :-)

I went to the sign in... it's asking for a LOT of information I'd
rather not give. What is necessary and what isn't. I don't want ANY
email from Yahoo.

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

Omelet wrote:
> In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
>>> Sounds to me like the new moderator is not doing his/her job.
>>> I'm still up for it if they are interested.
>> Maybe you should contact the new moderator about it. Does the
>> moderator own rfr? It seems to me that rfr should be resurrected
>> rather than create yet another Yahoo group.
>
> I set up a Yahoo group.
> Jean joined, so that's a start. :-)

Hmmm. I am not seeing this on my list of groups. Odd.

--
Jean B.

zxcvbob > wrote:

> Victor is probably able to self-approve the FAQ posts.

Rem acu tetigisti.

Victor

Jean B. wrote:
> Janet Wilder wrote:
>> Jean B. wrote:
>>> Omelet wrote:
>>>> In article >,
>>>> zxcvbob > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Omelet wrote:
>>>>>> In article >,
>>>>>> "Hugh" > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rec.food.recipes is a moderated newsgroup. The moderator retired.
>>>>>>> No one has emerged who wants to take that role.
>>>>>> I offered, but they rejected me because I drove a mac. :-(
>>>>>
>>>>> Better to let the group die, I guess.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bob
>>>>
>>>> If anyone is interested, we could try starting one up on Yahoogroups?
>>>> Several of us could run it as co-moderators?
>>>
>>> Think about the rules. If any. Also, what would the ramifications
>>> be for rfc? How would the group differ from what we have here? How
>>> would it differ from rfr (as it was, of course)?
>>>
>>> Might be interesting, but I wouldn't want to see it supplant rfc.
>>>
>>> My immediate thoughts would be:
>>>
>>> 1. Recipe-oriented
>>> 2. Discussion of recipes and prose related to the recipes allowed
>>> (but then where do you draw the line, so you don't slip into banter?)
>>> 3. Tried and true recipes only (made clear in some way with the
>>> submission) UNLESS someone asks for a specific recipe--and then the
>>> fact that is has not been tried should be made clear.
>>>
>>
>> I think it should be recipes and requests for recipes only. Just like
>> r.f.r used to be, but it won't be linked to that stupid web site so
>> there won't be all of those dumb requests from illiterates.
>>
> What web site is that, Janet?
>
CD Kitchen, IIRC

--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.

Omelet wrote:
> In article >,
> "Nancy Young" > wrote:
>
>> Omelet wrote:
>>
>>> "Nancy Young" > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Janet Wilder wrote:
>>>>> Jean B. wrote:
>>>>> Me either. It appears no one was comfortable with the new moderator
>>>>> because the group is pretty dead.
>>>> Do you really think that no one has tried to post a recipe in what,
>>>> a month? I'm only asking, I don't normally subscribe to that group,
>>>> I was curious when I took a look yesterday. Either everyone stopped
>>>> trying to post or this new moderator is not letting anything through.
>>> Sounds to me like the new moderator is not doing his/her job.
>> (laugh) I started to put it that way, but I figured it would sound
>> insulting.
>> But it seems to me that the moderator is not doing the job of going
>> through the postings and letting some through.
>>
>> Apparently if you want to kill a moderated group for some reason,
>> get yourself appointed to the job.
>>
>>> I'm still up for it if they are interested.
>> I think you'd do a good job, though some changes would have to be
>> made for me to be interested in the group.
>>
>> nancy
>
> <shrugs> It's up to the current list owner at this point.
> I just set up one on Yahoo groups if anyone else other than Jean is
> interested.

I joined!

--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.

Hugh wrote:
> "GW" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Subject says it all. Where did it go?
>>
>>
> Rec.food.recipes is a moderated newsgroup. The moderator retired. No one has
> emerged who wants to take that role. As a moderated NG messages are subject
> to a moderator's approval. There isn't a moderator and hence, there are no
> posted messages. This newsgroup is non moderated, and anything goes, as we
> all know. The fraction of good solid posts about cooking has become quite
> small, and overwhelmed by spams and flames. I wish there is a way to balance
> the extremes of moderated and non-moderated groups into something that would
> work. Is there a way we can keep the flaming foodies and dump the watch
> sellers?
>
> Hugh
>
>
>

There are quite a few here. Most of them from Kili!

http://foodandcooking.proboards.com/

-dk

Janet Wilder wrote:
Janet Wilder wrote:

--
Jean B.> Omelet wrote:
>> In article >,
>> "Nancy Young" > wrote:
>>
>>> Omelet wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Nancy Young" > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Janet Wilder wrote:
>>>>>> Jean B. wrote:
>>>>>> Me either. It appears no one was comfortable with the new moderator
>>>>>> because the group is pretty dead.
>>>>> Do you really think that no one has tried to post a recipe in what,
>>>>> a month? I'm only asking, I don't normally subscribe to that group,
>>>>> I was curious when I took a look yesterday. Either everyone stopped
>>>>> trying to post or this new moderator is not letting anything through.
>>>> Sounds to me like the new moderator is not doing his/her job.
>>> (laugh) I started to put it that way, but I figured it would sound
>>> insulting.
>>> But it seems to me that the moderator is not doing the job of going
>>> through the postings and letting some through.
>>>
>>> Apparently if you want to kill a moderated group for some reason,
>>> get yourself appointed to the job.
>>>
>>>> I'm still up for it if they are interested.
>>> I think you'd do a good job, though some changes would have to be
>>> made for me to be interested in the group.
>>>
>>> nancy
>>
>> <shrugs> It's up to the current list owner at this point.
>> I just set up one on Yahoo groups if anyone else other than Jean is
>> interested.
>
> I joined!
>

It still isn't in my list of yahoo groups, nor is it coming up in
a search of new recipe-related groups. Odd.

--
Jean B.

Christine Dabney wrote:
> On Sun, 17 May 2009 11:45:44 -0700, Mack A. Damia
> > wrote:
>
>
>> Funny about recipes. Stricly speaking, they cannot be copyrighted.
>>
>> Copied from U.S. Gov't Copyright Site........
>>
>> "Mere listings of ingredients as in recipes, formulas, compounds, or
>> prescriptions are not subject to copyright protection. However, when a
>> recipe or formula is accompanied by substantial literary expression in
>> the form of an explanation or directions, or when there is a
>> combination of recipes, as in a cookbook, there may be a basis for
>> copyright protection."
>>
>> http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl122.html
>
> More on this:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
>
> And from an article written by David Lebovitz:
> http://foodblogalliance.com/2009/04/...ttribution.php
>
> This is coming up a lot in the food blogging world lately.
>
> Christine

Thanks, Christine. Those are certainly food for thought.

It would seem that the way I use recipes would be fair use--but it
also seems that changing wording and using the "adapted from" or
"inspired by" would be wise.

One kind-of humorous thought I have about the recipes I copied a
LONG time ago (maybe 40-ish years--I started young).... I have no
idea how they might have been initially worded, so if I change the
wording, I might inadvertently be closer to the original!!!!

--
Jean B.

Christine Dabney said...

> On Sun, 17 May 2009 15:43:56 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>
>
>>Victor's FAQ is there. But you would think we'd still be seeing
>>recipes from the frequent posters.
>
> I wonder if the new moderator is just overwhelmed?
>
> It's a harder job than many people realize. Patricia, who lives here
> in my town, said it took her about 2 hours a day to moderate..and she
> was very experienced at it. That adds up to a big chunk of
> time...over time.
>
> Christine


Christine,

I'm in complete agreement! It takes real dedication to do it.

A negative effect of moderated groups is they add a delay to posts which in
turn eliminate a more fluid mechanism that we have here at rfc.

I'm not in favor of moderated ngs as I'm not fond of censorship and
favoritism which I know can creep into the equation.

I won't contribute to a moderated ng or web forum/group ever again. The
method that I've seen work best on web forums is anything goes UNTIL the mods
declare a post plain wrong and can then temporarily or permanently suspend
members. A "housekeeping" thing. That way the forums roll along in almost
real time like here.

Again, it's definitely a tremendous undertaking. The web forums divide the
mod jobs among many people, usually by section expertise.

Best,

Andy
--
Eat first, talk later.

Christine Dabney wrote:
> On Sun, 17 May 2009 15:43:56 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>
>
>> Victor's FAQ is there. But you would think we'd still be seeing
>> recipes from the frequent posters.
>
> I wonder if the new moderator is just overwhelmed?
>
> It's a harder job than many people realize. Patricia, who lives here
> in my town, said it took her about 2 hours a day to moderate..and she
> was very experienced at it. That adds up to a big chunk of
> time...over time.
>
> Christine

You might be right. I would thing Pat Hill would have told the
applicant that, but still... Or maybe it is just moribund.

--
Jean B.

On Sun, 17 May 2009 17:28:07 -0600, Christine Dabney
> wrote:

>On Sun, 17 May 2009 11:45:44 -0700, Mack A. Damia
> wrote:
>
>
>>Funny about recipes. Stricly speaking, they cannot be copyrighted.
>>
>>Copied from U.S. Gov't Copyright Site........
>>
>>"Mere listings of ingredients as in recipes, formulas, compounds, or
>>prescriptions are not subject to copyright protection. However, when a
>>recipe or formula is accompanied by substantial literary expression in
>>the form of an explanation or directions, or when there is a
>>combination of recipes, as in a cookbook, there may be a basis for
>>copyright protection."
>>
>>http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl122.html
>
>More on this:
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
>
>And from an article written by David Lebovitz:
>http://foodblogalliance.com/2009/04/...ttribution.php
>
>This is coming up a lot in the food blogging world lately.

I went through this with a fellow about ten years ago in a newsgroup;
it was more of a ****ing contest, though.

After everything is said and done, it's up to a lawyer, a judge and a
jury whether or not something is "intellectual property", and that's
basically what we're talking about.

That is to say, a person would probably need a lawyer to represent
himself - a judge to interpret the law and a jury to decide if there
were damages, etc.

I don't think you find too many legal cases based on recipe-theft.

Here's another one - the entire copyright office........

http://www.copyright.gov/

This urban myth went round the world............

(There are genuine legal opinions at the end from several law
professors)

My daughter & I had just finished a salad at Neiman-Marcus
Cafe in Dallas & decided to have a small dessert.
Because both of us are such cookie lovers, we decided to
try the "Neiman-Marcus Cookie". It was so excellent that I
asked if they would give me the recipe and the waitress said
with a small frown, "I’m afraid not." Well, I said, would you
let me buy the recipe?
With a cute smile, she said, "Yes." I asked how much, and she
responded, "two fifty, it’s a great deal!" I said with approval,
just add it to my tab.

Thirty days later, I received my VISA statement from Neiman-Marcus
and it was $285.00. I looked again and I remembered I had only
spent $9.95 for two salads and about $20.00 for a scarf.
As I glanced at the bottom of the statement, it said, "Cookie Recipe
-$250.00." That’s outrageous!! I called Neiman’s Accounting Dept.
and told them the waitress said it was "two-fifty," which clearly
does not mean "two hundred and fifty dollars" by any *POSSIBLE*
interpretation of the phrase.

Nieman-Marcus refused to budge.
They would not refund my money, because according
to them, "What the waitress told you is not our problem.
You have already seen the recipe - we absolutely will not refund
your money at this point." I explained to her the criminal statutes
which govern fraud in Texas, I threatened to refer them to the
Better Business Bureau and the State’s Attorney General for
engaging in fraud.

I was basically told, "Do what you want, we don’t give a crap,
and we’re not refunding your money."
I waited, thinking of how I could get even, or even try and get any
of my money back. I just said, "Okay, you folks got my $250, and now
I’m going to have $250.00 worth of fun." I told her that I was going
to see to it that every cookie lover in the United States with an
e-mail account has a $250.00 cookie recipe from Neiman-Marcus
....for free. She replied, "I wish you wouldn’t do this."
I said, "Well, you should have thought of that before you ripped me
off, and slammed down the phone on her.

So, here it is!!! Please, please, please pass it on to everyone you
can possibly think of. I paid $250 dollars for this... I don’t want
Nieman-Marcus to *ever* get another penny off of this recipe....

Recipe may be halved:
4 cups (9 dl) flour
2 tsp. soda
2 cups (4 ¼ dl) sugar
5 cups (12 dl) blended oatmeal**
2 cups (500 gram) butter
24 oz. chocolate chips
2 cups (4 ¼ dl) brown sugar
1 tsp. salt
1 8 oz. Hershey Bar (grated)
4 eggs
2 tsp. baking powder
3 cups (7 dl) chopped nuts (your choice)
2 tsp. vanilla

** Measure oatmeal and blend in a blender to a fine powder.

Cream the butter and both sugars. Add eggs and vanilla; mix
together with flour, oatmeal, salt, baking powder, and soda.
Add chocolate chips, Hershey Bar and nuts. Roll into balls and
place two inches apart on a cookie sheet.
Bake for 10 minutes at 375 degrees. Makes 112 cookies.
Enjoy!
************************************************** ****

Here are some related letters from Usenet that I found:
(Many of them from law professors)

The Neiman Marcus recipe story is Internet folklore. It is not a true
story. As for the principle involved--divulging a recipe that one has
paid for--people do that all the time when they swap recipe that have
come from cookbooks. As far as copyright is concerned, it's not
infringement.

J. Wesley Cochran
Law Library Director &
Professor of Law
Texas Tech University
Lubbock, TX 79409

***********************************************

Are recipes covered by copyright?

My understanding was that they are too "useful" to meet the test, and
are viewed and mere encapsulation of ideas, and hence not protected.
This is a propos of whether or not it is an infringement to post
recipes
on an electronic bulletin board.

Thanks
Alan Divack
>

*************************************************

Date: Fri, 01 Apr 1994 08:09:39 -0500 (EST)
From:
Subject: copyright in recipes
To:
Message-Id: >

Even Mel Nimmer who wasn't very taken with broad readings of Baker v.
Selden and section 102(b) was of the opinion that recipes were not
copyrightable because of the standardized format they use and the
narrow range of expressive possibilities of them in prose.

Pam Samuelson
University of Pittsburgh Law School
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------------*-----
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 1994 18:11:20 EST
From: "Sheldon W. Halpern" >
Message-Id: >
To:
Subject: copyright in recipes

In Message Thu, 31 Mar 1994 19:39:34 -0500,
"Micah D. Stolowitz Esq." > writes:

> Making the cookies of course would not infringe, in view of 102, but
>copying an original work (the recipe)? Would that not infringe? Is it too
>"factual" ?

The originality in the recipe is in the idea (the determination of
ingredients and proportions) and not (generally) in its expression. At
best, for most recipes (Lambs essay on roast pig a glaring exception)
the expression would be considered merged into the idea and thus not
copyrightable.

Sheldon W. Halpern
Professor of Law
The Ohio State University College of Law

--
mad

Kajikit wrote:
> On Sun, 17 May 2009 15:38:47 -0500, Omelet >
> wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> "Jean B." > wrote:
>>
>>>>> My immediate thoughts would be:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Recipe-oriented
>>>>> 2. Discussion of recipes and prose related to the recipes allowed
>>>>> (but then where do you draw the line, so you don't slip into banter?)
>>>>> 3. Tried and true recipes only (made clear in some way with the
>>>>> submission) UNLESS someone asks for a specific recipe--and then
>>>>> the fact that is has not been tried should be made clear.
>>>> Sounds like it'd be naught but an allegory. <g>
>>>> Or a synonym...
>>> What are your thoughts on this, Om?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jean B.
>> Being more liberal.
>>
>> Tastes are very much an individual thing, and I personally go by
>> instinct when I'm cooking. I only follow recipes if I'm baking or
>> making sausage so I'd let most recipes thru IF they sounded like they
>> were not a troll.
>>
>> Some things are obvious, like chocolate and fish do NOT go together. <g>
>
> In other words, you'd have rec.food.cooking only without the spam.
>
> I used to run a yahoo group for special needs recipes but it never had
> much traffic and I let it die for lack of input. The group's still
> there, just unused for about six years.

If you were the owner, you could shut it down.

--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.

sf wrote:
> On Sun, 17 May 2009 15:51:22 -0500, Omelet >
> wrote:
>
>> I set up a Yahoo group.
>> Jean joined, so that's a start. :-)
>
> I went to the sign in... it's asking for a LOT of information I'd
> rather not give. What is necessary and what isn't. I don't want ANY
> email from Yahoo.
>

You don't have to fill in the profile. All it wants is an email address
to make it work. You can check the "web only" box and you won't get any
email. There are 3 mail options: each posting as a separate email, a
daily digest (I usually do that) and "web only" which means that you go
to the group site and read the posts there.

--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.

Jean B. wrote:
> Omelet wrote:
>> In article >,
>> sf > wrote:
>>
>>>> Sounds to me like the new moderator is not doing his/her job.
>>>> I'm still up for it if they are interested.
>>> Maybe you should contact the new moderator about it. Does the
>>> moderator own rfr? It seems to me that rfr should be resurrected
>>> rather than create yet another Yahoo group.
>>
>> I set up a Yahoo group.
>> Jean joined, so that's a start. :-)
>
> Hmmm. I am not seeing this on my list of groups. Odd.
>

It is showing up on mine.

--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.

In article >,
zxcvbob > wrote:

> Jean B. wrote:
> > Victor's FAQ is there. But you would think we'd still be seeing recipes
> > from the frequent posters.
>
> Victor is probably able to self-approve the FAQ posts.
>
> Bob

Mother of Alex, I hope so! Hell's bells, without his stewardship it'd
probably have all manner of other crap that has nothing to do with food.


I don't think it's "Victor's FAQ," though. He maintains it well and
posts regularly links to it; others had a had in its composition long
ago.
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://web.me.com/barbschaller - good news 4-6-2009
"Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a great battle."
-Philo of Alexandria

In article >,
(Victor Sack) wrote:

> zxcvbob > wrote:
>
> > Victor is probably able to self-approve the FAQ posts.
>
> Rem acu tetigisti.
>
> Victor

Sweetums, you have such a way with words!
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://web.me.com/barbschaller - good news 4-6-2009
"Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a great battle."
-Philo of Alexandria

Janet Wilder wrote:
> Jean B. wrote:
>> Omelet wrote:
>>> In article >,
>>> sf > wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Sounds to me like the new moderator is not doing his/her job.
>>>>> I'm still up for it if they are interested.
>>>> Maybe you should contact the new moderator about it. Does the
>>>> moderator own rfr? It seems to me that rfr should be resurrected
>>>> rather than create yet another Yahoo group.
>>>
>>> I set up a Yahoo group.
>>> Jean joined, so that's a start. :-)
>>
>> Hmmm. I am not seeing this on my list of groups. Odd.
>>
>
> It is showing up on mine.
>
Still not in my list of groups and not showing up on a search.
The newest groups showing up for me are 6 days old. Odd.

--
Jean B.

"Mack A. Damia" > wrote in message
...
>
> Recipe may be halved:
> 4 cups (9 dl) flour
> 2 tsp. soda
> 2 cups (4 ¼ dl) sugar
> 5 cups (12 dl) blended oatmeal**
> 2 cups (500 gram) butter
> 24 oz. chocolate chips
> 2 cups (4 ¼ dl) brown sugar
> 1 tsp. salt
> 1 8 oz. Hershey Bar (grated)
> 4 eggs
> 2 tsp. baking powder
> 3 cups (7 dl) chopped nuts (your choice)
> 2 tsp. vanilla
>
> ** Measure oatmeal and blend in a blender to a fine powder.
>
> Cream the butter and both sugars. Add eggs and vanilla; mix
> together with flour, oatmeal, salt, baking powder, and soda.
> Add chocolate chips, Hershey Bar and nuts. Roll into balls and
> place two inches apart on a cookie sheet.
> Bake for 10 minutes at 375 degrees. Makes 112 cookies.
> Enjoy!
> ************************************************** ****

I made these several years ago after seeing an article that quoted just what
you quoted. They are very good.

In article >,
"Jean B." > wrote:

> Omelet wrote:
> > In article >,
> > "Jean B." > wrote:
> >
> >> Omelet wrote:
> >>> In article >,
> >>> Janet Wilder > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Omelet wrote:
> >>>>> In article >,
> >>>>> zxcvbob > wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Omelet wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article >,
> >>>>>>> "Hugh" > wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Rec.food.recipes is a moderated newsgroup. The moderator retired. No
> >>>>>>>> one
> >>>>>>>> has
> >>>>>>>> emerged who wants to take that role.
> >>>>>>> I offered, but they rejected me because I drove a mac. :-(
> >>>>>> Better to let the group die, I guess.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Bob
> >>>>> If anyone is interested, we could try starting one up on Yahoogroups?
> >>>>> Several of us could run it as co-moderators?
> >>>> I'd participate. I once owned a private Yahoo! Group and co-moderated
> >>>> another semi-private group. The private group was by invite only. It did
> >>>> not appear in the listings. The semi-private group was in the listing,
> >>>> but you had to be accepted by the moderator after sending a brief email
> >>>> why you want to join. It's not very difficult to moderate a Yahoo! Group.
> >>> Ok, the group has been created if y'all are interested. :-) I'm the
> >>> current group owner and will be happy to add co-moderators. We can
> >>> discuss the "rules" about unmoderating memberships to speed the list up.
> >>>
> >>> Go to:
> >>>
> >>> to sign on.
> >> That doesn't work. Nor does a search on the yahoo page. Please
> >> post a usable link.
> >
> > I see you managed to join. :-) Let me go see:
> >
> > Ok, lets try this one:
> >
> >
>
> Re the first: oh! Must have been with some help.
>
> I guess, then, I can't check out this addy.

I've changed your settings to moderator. :-)
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

In article >,
zxcvbob > wrote:

> Omelet wrote:
> > In article >,
> > zxcvbob > wrote:
> >
> >> Omelet wrote:
> >>
> >>> Some things are obvious, like chocolate and fish do NOT go together. <g>
> >> You've obviously never tried it...
> >>
> >> Bob
> >
> > EWWWWWW!!! ;-D
>
>
> I haven't tried it, but I have seen several salmon recipes floating
> about the 'Net that called for cocoa. Or a Mexican fish stew might have
> chocolate in it.
>
> Bob

Ok, that's not the same. <g>

I DO add a little cocoa powder any more to almost all Mexican recipes.
It's excellent in Chili and taco meat.

I also add a pinch of cinnamon to those, and to Italian recipes, but
today I used a little Allspice instead to the current sausage recipe.
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

In article >,
Kajikit > wrote:

> On Sun, 17 May 2009 15:38:47 -0500, Omelet >
> wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > "Jean B." > wrote:
> >
> >> >> My immediate thoughts would be:
> >> >>
> >> >> 1. Recipe-oriented
> >> >> 2. Discussion of recipes and prose related to the recipes allowed
> >> >> (but then where do you draw the line, so you don't slip into banter?)
> >> >> 3. Tried and true recipes only (made clear in some way with the
> >> >> submission) UNLESS someone asks for a specific recipe--and then
> >> >> the fact that is has not been tried should be made clear.
> >> >
> >> > Sounds like it'd be naught but an allegory. <g>
> >> > Or a synonym...
> >>
> >> What are your thoughts on this, Om?
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jean B.
> >
> >Being more liberal.
> >
> >Tastes are very much an individual thing, and I personally go by
> >instinct when I'm cooking. I only follow recipes if I'm baking or
> >making sausage so I'd let most recipes thru IF they sounded like they
> >were not a troll.
> >
> >Some things are obvious, like chocolate and fish do NOT go together. <g>
>
> In other words, you'd have rec.food.cooking only without the spam.

Pretty much. ;-)

>
> I used to run a yahoo group for special needs recipes but it never had
> much traffic and I let it die for lack of input. The group's still
> there, just unused for about six years.

The group is up, we'll see if it flies...
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

In article >,
"Jean B." > wrote:

> Omelet wrote:
> > In article >,
> > "Jean B." > wrote:
> >
> >> Omelet wrote:
> >>> In article >,
> >>> "Jean B." > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Jean B. wrote:
> >>>>> Omelet wrote:
> >>>>>> In article >,
> >>>>>> zxcvbob > wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Omelet wrote:
> >>>>>>>> In article >,
> >>>>>>>> "Hugh" > wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Rec.food.recipes is a moderated newsgroup. The moderator retired.
> >>>>>>>>> No one has emerged who wants to take that role.
> >>>>>>>> I offered, but they rejected me because I drove a mac. :-(
> >>>>>>> Better to let the group die, I guess.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Bob
> >>>>>> If anyone is interested, we could try starting one up on Yahoogroups?
> >>>>>> Several of us could run it as co-moderators?
> >>>>> Think about the rules. If any. Also, what would the ramifications be
> >>>>> for rfc? How would the group differ from what we have here? How would
> >>>>> it differ from rfr (as it was, of course)?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Might be interesting, but I wouldn't want to see it supplant rfc.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> My immediate thoughts would be:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1. Recipe-oriented
> >>>>> 2. Discussion of recipes and prose related to the recipes allowed (but
> >>>>> then where do you draw the line, so you don't slip into banter?)
> >>>>> 3. Tried and true recipes only (made clear in some way with the
> >>>>> submission) UNLESS someone asks for a specific recipe--and then the
> >>>>> fact
> >>>>> that is has not been tried should be made clear.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Adding on...
> >>>>
> >>>> No flaming.
> >>>>
> >>>> No spamming.
> >>> That is one good point of Yahoogroups.com.
> >>>
> >>> Moderated lists can totally filter out Spams!
> >>>
> >>> I co-moderate a couple of lists. One that is dedicated to local
> >>> freecycling (I save egg cartons and cat litter buckets and give them
> >>> away on a regular basis, along with other "stuff" I want to get rid of)
> >>> and an RKBA 2nd amendment list.
> >>>
> >>> If anyone is truly interested, let me know and I'll be happy to start
> >>> one up for recipes :-).
> >> Well, I am debating whether I want to offer my services as a
> >> co-moderator.
> >>
> >> I haven't done that. What does it involve?
> >
> > It just involves letting posts thru based on your personal views. They'd
> > come to your mailbox. If you are not sure about one, just leave it in
> > the queue for me or another moderator.
> >
> > That's what I do for Melissa on her RKBA list.
> >
> > It is not terribly involved.
>
> Let's see where this goes first--if anywhere.

<laughs> I totally know what you mean!
Many Yahoo groups never go anywhere.
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

In article >,
"Jean B." > wrote:

> Omelet wrote:
> > In article >,
> > sf > wrote:
> >
> >>> Sounds to me like the new moderator is not doing his/her job.
> >>> I'm still up for it if they are interested.
> >> Maybe you should contact the new moderator about it. Does the
> >> moderator own rfr? It seems to me that rfr should be resurrected
> >> rather than create yet another Yahoo group.
> >
> > I set up a Yahoo group.
> > Jean joined, so that's a start. :-)
>
> I'll think of something to post....

I started with that sausage recipe...
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Sun, 17 May 2009 15:51:22 -0500, Omelet >
> wrote:
>
> >I set up a Yahoo group.
> >Jean joined, so that's a start. :-)
>
> I went to the sign in... it's asking for a LOT of information I'd
> rather not give. What is necessary and what isn't. I don't want ANY
> email from Yahoo.

Ok. I've been a member of Yahoo now for a few years and NEVER get any
e-mail from them and it did not appear to increase my spam load.

Many of those fields they ask for are optional. :-)

I'm on a few groups there.
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

In article >,
"Jean B." > wrote:

> Omelet wrote:
> > In article >,
> > sf > wrote:
> >
> >>> Sounds to me like the new moderator is not doing his/her job.
> >>> I'm still up for it if they are interested.
> >> Maybe you should contact the new moderator about it. Does the
> >> moderator own rfr? It seems to me that rfr should be resurrected
> >> rather than create yet another Yahoo group.
> >
> > I set up a Yahoo group.
> > Jean joined, so that's a start. :-)
>
> Hmmm. I am not seeing this on my list of groups. Odd.

Sometimes it takes awhile to update. It's been a few hours and is
showing up on mine. I did not check right away.
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

In article >,
Janet Wilder > wrote:

> Omelet wrote:
> > In article >,
> > "Nancy Young" > wrote:
> >
> >> Omelet wrote:
> >>
> >>> "Nancy Young" > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Janet Wilder wrote:
> >>>>> Jean B. wrote:
> >>>>> Me either. It appears no one was comfortable with the new moderator
> >>>>> because the group is pretty dead.
> >>>> Do you really think that no one has tried to post a recipe in what,
> >>>> a month? I'm only asking, I don't normally subscribe to that group,
> >>>> I was curious when I took a look yesterday. Either everyone stopped
> >>>> trying to post or this new moderator is not letting anything through.
> >>> Sounds to me like the new moderator is not doing his/her job.
> >> (laugh) I started to put it that way, but I figured it would sound
> >> insulting.
> >> But it seems to me that the moderator is not doing the job of going
> >> through the postings and letting some through.
> >>
> >> Apparently if you want to kill a moderated group for some reason,
> >> get yourself appointed to the job.
> >>
> >>> I'm still up for it if they are interested.
> >> I think you'd do a good job, though some changes would have to be
> >> made for me to be interested in the group.
> >>
> >> nancy
> >
> > <shrugs> It's up to the current list owner at this point.
> > I just set up one on Yahoo groups if anyone else other than Jean is
> > interested.
>
> I joined!

I saw you there. :-)
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

In article >,
"Jean B." > wrote:

>
> It still isn't in my list of yahoo groups, nor is it coming up in
> a search of new recipe-related groups. Odd.

Sending you an invite to .
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

On May 17, 9:12*pm, Omelet > wrote:
> In article >,
> *"Jean B." > wrote:
>
>
>
> > It still isn't in my list of yahoo groups, nor is it coming up in
> > a search of new recipe-related groups. *Odd.
>
> Sending you an invite to .
> --
> Peace! Om

I can't see it either, when I do a search for it.

A suggestion...when you are at the home page, copy the link and post
it here. Then it should be easy to find. I have been a yahoo groups
member for over 10 years, and that seems to be the best solution on
how to find a group..

Also, you can put the link in your signature.

Christine

On Sun, 17 May 2009 22:10:03 -0500, Omelet >
wrote:

>In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 17 May 2009 15:51:22 -0500, Omelet >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I set up a Yahoo group.
>> >Jean joined, so that's a start. :-)
>>
>> I went to the sign in... it's asking for a LOT of information I'd
>> rather not give. What is necessary and what isn't. I don't want ANY
>> email from Yahoo.
>
>Ok. I've been a member of Yahoo now for a few years and NEVER get any
>e-mail from them and it did not appear to increase my spam load.
>
>Many of those fields they ask for are optional. :-)
>
>I'm on a few groups there.

They aren't letting me through w/o telling all. I HAVE to give name,
gender, birth date etc. I don't mind giving my zip code. I could
lie, but what's the point? I just want to know how much of this is
made public. I want nothing showing on a "profile" unless I want it
to show.

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

In article
>,
wrote:

> On May 17, 9:12*pm, Omelet > wrote:
> > In article >,
> > *"Jean B." > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > It still isn't in my list of yahoo groups, nor is it coming up in
> > > a search of new recipe-related groups. *Odd.
> >
> > Sending you an invite to .
> > --
> > Peace! Om
>
> I can't see it either, when I do a search for it.
>
> A suggestion...when you are at the home page, copy the link and post
> it here. Then it should be easy to find. I have been a yahoo groups
> member for over 10 years, and that seems to be the best solution on
> how to find a group..
>
> Also, you can put the link in your signature.
>
> Christine

I see you there, thanks for the link:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/recfoodrecipes/
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Sun, 17 May 2009 22:10:03 -0500, Omelet >
> wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > sf > wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, 17 May 2009 15:51:22 -0500, Omelet >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I set up a Yahoo group.
> >> >Jean joined, so that's a start. :-)
> >>
> >> I went to the sign in... it's asking for a LOT of information I'd
> >> rather not give. What is necessary and what isn't. I don't want ANY
> >> email from Yahoo.
> >
> >Ok. I've been a member of Yahoo now for a few years and NEVER get any
> >e-mail from them and it did not appear to increase my spam load.
> >
> >Many of those fields they ask for are optional. :-)
> >
> >I'm on a few groups there.
>
> They aren't letting me through w/o telling all. I HAVE to give name,
> gender, birth date etc. I don't mind giving my zip code. I could
> lie, but what's the point? I just want to know how much of this is
> made public. I want nothing showing on a "profile" unless I want it
> to show.

I totally understand. :-)

Like I said tho', I've been a member there for a few years, at least 3
or more (don't recall exactly) and it's never increased my spam load,
but that all goes to the gmail address, not the personal centurytel one.
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

On Sun, 17 May 2009 23:49:52 -0500, Omelet >
wrote:

>In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 17 May 2009 22:10:03 -0500, Omelet >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article >,
>> > sf > wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Sun, 17 May 2009 15:51:22 -0500, Omelet >
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >I set up a Yahoo group.
>> >> >Jean joined, so that's a start. :-)
>> >>
>> >> I went to the sign in... it's asking for a LOT of information I'd
>> >> rather not give. What is necessary and what isn't. I don't want ANY
>> >> email from Yahoo.
>> >
>> >Ok. I've been a member of Yahoo now for a few years and NEVER get any
>> >e-mail from them and it did not appear to increase my spam load.
>> >
>> >Many of those fields they ask for are optional. :-)
>> >
>> >I'm on a few groups there.
>>
>> They aren't letting me through w/o telling all. I HAVE to give name,
>> gender, birth date etc. I don't mind giving my zip code. I could
>> lie, but what's the point? I just want to know how much of this is
>> made public. I want nothing showing on a "profile" unless I want it
>> to show.
>
>I totally understand. :-)
>
>Like I said tho', I've been a member there for a few years, at least 3
>or more (don't recall exactly) and it's never increased my spam load,
>but that all goes to the gmail address, not the personal centurytel one.

What shows up on a profile?

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

On Sun, 17 May 2009 23:05:38 -0600, Christine Dabney
> wrote:

>
>I was just checking the settings stuff on yahoo groups, and you can
>choose to hide your profile, so that only your display name will be
>visible.
>
Now I'm having trouble joining the group. I seem to be caught in a
loop.


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

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> What shows up on a profile?

Check mine.
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

On Mon, 18 May 2009 00:16:52 -0500, Omelet >
wrote:

>In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
>> What shows up on a profile?
>
>Check mine.

I don't do Yahoo groups, so I have no idea how to check it.

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

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Sun, 17 May 2009 23:05:38 -0600, Christine Dabney
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >I was just checking the settings stuff on yahoo groups, and you can
> >choose to hide your profile, so that only your display name will be
> >visible.
> >
> Now I'm having trouble joining the group. I seem to be caught in a
> loop.

Hang on. I'll send an invite to anyone that wants one. :-)

So can the other moderators!
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

On Mon, 18 May 2009 00:19:50 -0500, Omelet >
wrote:

>In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 17 May 2009 23:05:38 -0600, Christine Dabney
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >I was just checking the settings stuff on yahoo groups, and you can
>> >choose to hide your profile, so that only your display name will be
>> >visible.
>> >
>> Now I'm having trouble joining the group. I seem to be caught in a
>> loop.
>
>Hang on. I'll send an invite to anyone that wants one. :-)
>
>So can the other moderators!

I think my problem is beyond that.

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