http://www.recfoodcooking.com

aem's wish is my command.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
...
> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>
> aem's wish is my command.

Tie?

Cant tell!

cshenk wrote:

>
> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
> ...
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>>
>> aem's wish is my command.
>
> Tie?
>
> Cant tell!

Heh. You owned up first... Choose a TFH ;-)

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

"ChattyCathy" wrote
> cshenk wrote:

Hee i have a benie and an 'around the house'. I finally settled on :
Formal Occasions. Tough choice though witht he Tiara.

"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
...
> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>
> aem's wish is my command.
> --
> Cheers
> Chatty Cathy

Maybe. It depends on how bored I am.

I'm #2. There was already a "No" vote.

Durn. I need a new hat.

"Jenny" wrote

> I'm #2. There was already a "No" vote.
>
> Durn. I need a new hat.

Hehe It's only my 3rd. Oh, will go shopping!

cshenk wrote:

> "Jenny" wrote
>
>> I'm #2. There was already a "No" vote.
>>
>> Durn. I need a new hat.
>
> Hehe It's only my 3rd. Oh, will go shopping!

Well, there's more than enough TFH's to go around... You can both have
one.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

"ChattyCathy" wrote
> cshenk wrote:
>> "Jenny" wrote
>>
>>> I'm #2. There was already a "No" vote.
>> Hehe It's only my 3rd. Oh, will go shopping!
>
> Well, there's more than enough TFH's to go around... You can both have
> one.

Cool! This one was so close, unless yor computer records show other, we
tied ;-)

cshenk wrote:

> "ChattyCathy" wrote
>> cshenk wrote:
>>> "Jenny" wrote
>>>
>>>> I'm #2. There was already a "No" vote.
>>> Hehe It's only my 3rd. Oh, will go shopping!
>>
>> Well, there's more than enough TFH's to go around... You can both
>> have one.
>
> Cool! This one was so close, unless yor computer records show other,
> we tied ;-)

It has happened before... so I decided that if it happened again I'd
just award two TFHs ;-)
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 20:59:30 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:

> cshenk wrote:
>
>> "Jenny" wrote
>>
>>> I'm #2. There was already a "No" vote.
>>>
>>> Durn. I need a new hat.
>>
>> Hehe It's only my 3rd. Oh, will go shopping!
>
> Well, there's more than enough TFH's to go around... You can both have
> one.

tsk, tsk. where are Rules and Standards?

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:

> On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 20:59:30 +0200, ChattyCathy wrote:
>
>> cshenk wrote:
>>
>>> "Jenny" wrote
>>>
>>>> I'm #2. There was already a "No" vote.
>>>>
>>>> Durn. I need a new hat.
>>>
>>> Hehe It's only my 3rd. Oh, will go shopping!
>>
>> Well, there's more than enough TFH's to go around... You can both
>> have one.
>
> tsk, tsk. where are Rules and Standards?

Right where I like 'em...

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

ChattyCathy > wrote in on
Sep Sun 2009 01:44 pm

> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>
> aem's wish is my command.

Did you know if you leave the site after voting and then vote again you don't see that silly cheat
page.

--
Is that your nose, or are you eatting a banana? -Jimmy Durante

hahabogus wrote:

> ChattyCathy > wrote in
> on Sep Sun 2009 01:44 pm
>
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>>
>> aem's wish is my command.
>
> Did you know if you leave the site after voting and then vote again
> you don't see that silly cheat page.
>
Yabut, that's cheating ;-)
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

ChattyCathy > wrote in
on Sep Sun 2009 01:57 pm

> hahabogus wrote:
>
>> ChattyCathy > wrote in
>> on Sep Sun 2009 01:44 pm
>>
>>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>>>
>>> aem's wish is my command.
>>
>> Did you know if you leave the site after voting and then vote again
>> you don't see that silly cheat page.
>>
> Yabut, that's cheating ;-)

go figure....

--
Is that your nose, or are you eatting a banana? -Jimmy Durante

On Sep 27, 11:44 am, ChattyCathy > wrote:
> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>
> aem's wish is my command.
> --
My post was just a joke. It always amuses me when a design conflicts
with a desire, if that's not too vague. In other words, the OP
apparently (though he may also have been joking) wanted people to go
look at a site, but the way he posted about it almost insured that no
one would go look. So I chuckled at it. (Naturally, some took it
seriously and flailed about with the usual cries of horror about spam,
but they were as irrelevant as usual.) -aem

aem wrote:

> On Sep 27, 11:44 am, ChattyCathy > wrote:
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>>
>> aem's wish is my command.
>> --
> My post was just a joke. It always amuses me when a design conflicts
> with a desire, if that's not too vague. In other words, the OP
> apparently (though he may also have been joking) wanted people to go
> look at a site, but the way he posted about it almost insured that no
> one would go look. So I chuckled at it. (Naturally, some took it
> seriously and flailed about with the usual cries of horror about spam,
> but they were as irrelevant as usual.) -aem

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHhootD0_mQ
or
http://tinyurl.com/c8vxku

;-)
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

In article >,
ChattyCathy > wrote:

> aem wrote:
>
> > On Sep 27, 11:44 am, ChattyCathy > wrote:
> >> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
> >>
> >> aem's wish is my command.
> >> --
> > My post was just a joke. It always amuses me when a design conflicts
> > with a desire, if that's not too vague. In other words, the OP
> > apparently (though he may also have been joking) wanted people to go
> > look at a site, but the way he posted about it almost insured that no
> > one would go look. So I chuckled at it. (Naturally, some took it
> > seriously and flailed about with the usual cries of horror about spam,
> > but they were as irrelevant as usual.) -aem
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHhootD0_mQ
> or
> http://tinyurl.com/c8vxku
>
> ;-)

I love British Humor... ;-D
--
Peace! Om

"Human nature seems to be to control other people until they put their foot down."
--Steve Rothstein


Subscribe:

On 2009-09-27, Omelet > wrote:
> In article >,

>> > seriously and flailed about with the usual cries of horror about spam,

Didn't you get the wrong MP skit?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anwy2MPT5RE

nb

On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 12:11:55 -0700 (PDT), aem >
wrote:

>On Sep 27, 11:44 am, ChattyCathy > wrote:
>> http://www.recfoodcooking.com
>>
>> aem's wish is my command.
>> --
>My post was just a joke. It always amuses me when a design conflicts
>with a desire, if that's not too vague. In other words, the OP
>apparently (though he may also have been joking) wanted people to go
>look at a site, but the way he posted about it almost insured that no
>one would go look. So I chuckled at it. (Naturally, some took it
>seriously and flailed about with the usual cries of horror about spam,
>but they were as irrelevant as usual.) -aem

I have absolutely no idea what this is all about. I must have either
missed it or have a key word filtered out.

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

sf wrote:

>
> I have absolutely no idea what this is all about. I must have either
> missed it or have a key word filtered out.
>

There was a thread a few days ago where the OP had a 'mystery' tinyurl
in it; aem made a joke about it...

Anyway, bottom line is this: if somebody you don't know from Adam (or
anybody you do know for that matter) posts just a tinyurl link (i.e.
you have no idea what/where you'll end up) would/do you click on it?

FWIW, I agree with some here that say if they "know" the poster they'll
probably click on the link.

However, if I'm posting a link myself, I usually put in the full link
*plus* the tinyurl (for those who have newsreaders that 'wrap' long
URLs over more than one line, which can render them 'un-click-able')
and I see quite a few others do the same. Mind you, even using a full
link doesn't always give an accurate indication of what to expect. Life
is full of little risks, ain't it? <veg>
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

In article >,
ChattyCathy > wrote:

> sf wrote:
>
> >
> > I have absolutely no idea what this is all about. I must have either
> > missed it or have a key word filtered out.
> >
>
> There was a thread a few days ago where the OP had a 'mystery' tinyurl
> in it; aem made a joke about it...
>
> Anyway, bottom line is this: if somebody you don't know from Adam (or
> anybody you do know for that matter) posts just a tinyurl link (i.e.
> you have no idea what/where you'll end up) would/do you click on it?
>
> FWIW, I agree with some here that say if they "know" the poster they'll
> probably click on the link.

You left out an important part. As I remember (and I'm too lazy to look
it up), the whole post shouted SPAM!

> However, if I'm posting a link myself, I usually put in the full link
> *plus* the tinyurl (for those who have newsreaders that 'wrap' long
> URLs over more than one line, which can render them 'un-click-able')
> and I see quite a few others do the same. Mind you, even using a full
> link doesn't always give an accurate indication of what to expect. Life
> is full of little risks, ain't it? <veg>

I still wouldn't click on it, if I didn't know the poster and it was
obviously a spam post. The spammer can easily include an absurdly long
URL that goes to something related to food that looks interesting, and a
tinyURL that points to spam. I wouldn't put it past them, either.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Dan Abel wrote:
>
> You left out an important part. As I remember (and I'm too lazy to
> look it up), the whole post shouted SPAM!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anwy2MPT5RE

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

On Mon, 28 Sep 2009 08:54:00 +0200, ChattyCathy
> wrote:

>
>However, if I'm posting a link myself, I usually put in the full link
>*plus* the tinyurl (for those who have newsreaders that 'wrap' long
>URLs over more than one line, which can render them 'un-click-able')
>and I see quite a few others do the same. Mind you, even using a full
>link doesn't always give an accurate indication of what to expect. Life
>is full of little risks, ain't it? <veg>

I agree with the practice of posting both long and short links... Tiny
also has a "preview" type link that I find very annoying, but I guess
people who are nervous can feel better with. Personally, I'm in the
don't care range. I don't click on suspect links most of the time and
when I do my AV pre-checks it for viruses. I'm a pretty safe
consumer. I haven't ever had a significant virus and what I've had
was something stuck off in a temp file (once or twice only). <shrug>
I'm not scared of that.

My DD's computer came home from college loaded with hijackers, Trojans
and viruses (at least I thought they were viruses). It took me a
while and I had to go to a Hijack This forum, but I cleaned it up on
my own without resorting to reformatting.

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

l, not -l wrote:

> Maybe; it depends on who posted the link. I would click on the link
> if from someone trusted on the list; but, would not if from a stranger
> or the usual suspects on RFC.

Usual suspects. Love that term <g>
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

"l, not -l" > wrote in
:

> Maybe; it depends on who posted the link. I would click on
> the link if from someone trusted on the list; but, would not
> if from a stranger or the usual suspects on RFC.

I agree.