[PeterLucas (o/s)]

On 19 Jan, 23:27, "Bob Terwilliger" >
wrote:
> Peter was still stupid, and couldn't get his story straight:
>
> >> I found your posts from 1996 when you weren't able to.
>
> > And yet you couldn't find mine from 92-93??
>
> Not until you provided the link, no.



Ahhhhh, so your self proclaimed staus as "internet defec.....errrr,
detective" is a pile of shit.

Thank you for clearing that up.


>
> > But 10-1 you were a REMF.
>
> What? I never claimed to be a Vietnam vet. I was only 16 years old when the
> last helicopter left Saigon. You must have me confused with someone else who
> makes you feel all gooey inside. I am a Praying Mantis vet, an Urgent Fury
> vet, a Peace for Galilee vet, a Desert Shield vet, and a Desert Storm vet,
> though.


BFD.

You spent the time on a nice safe ship, right *away* from any danger.

Typical of you.


>
> > Quite apart from the fact that you post bogus "menus" all the time.
>
> Your envy is showing again! LOL
>
> You only *think* the menus are bogus because they are beyond the ability of
> a dull-witted clumsy hominid like you.

ROFLMAO!!!


Many, *many* people on here have called you out on your 'supposed'
menus.

And all you do is bluster, bullshit, and attack.

ergo, you are a fraud.


>In many cases I've posted pictures,


photobucket.com

Open up an account and put all your 'pictures' up there.

It doesn't cost you anything, as i know that's very important for you.



> though I don't feel the obsessive need for approval that you seem to feel..


It's a food group, I post urls to pictures of food that *I* have made.

And you dissaprove???

Jealousy???? MUCH!!!!!



>
> > You've been proven once to be a complete and utter ****ing liar (by me) as
> > far as telling people when they started posting and when they didn't.
> > (Funny that, as soon as I hit you with the proof, you shut the **** up and
> > have avoided *the subject ever *since!!
>
> I shut up? No, I admitted that I was wrong:
> Message-ID: >


I don't see an admission of your stupidity there....... all i see is a
'Message ID'.

Once again, you think that 'bullshit will baffle brains'.

Post your apology in full, ***-boi.

Otherwise, all people will see is that you are a ****ing liar.........
as per usual.

>
> What more do you think needs to be said? That you are even more worthless a
> ****tard now than you were then?
>
> > You arrogant little ****ing twerp.
>
> Ahhh... now we get to the heart of the matter! You feel threatened by me!



Errrrrrrrrr, not at all, ***-boi.


My comment "You arrogant little ****ing twerp" was in reply to the
condescending manner in which you replied to a female member of this
group.

But that's you all over, isn' t it Boobie twitiliger??


> Has your breadwinner been expressing discontent with you again, and casting
> her eye toward the 90% of men who are *better* than you? Back in my Navy
> days, Australian women threw themselves at American sailors left and right,
> because they knew they'd be SATISFIED. It's entirely possible that I ****ed
> her bow-legged when my ship visited Australia in the mid-nineties, and ever
> since that time, you have failed to measure up -- if you know what I mean!



Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, my SO isn't black.


It's a well know fact here in Brisbane that in the mid-nineties, our
black population went down dramatically after you ******s came into
port!!!

Seems the blacks were the only 'score' you could get, and most of you
got c*nt struck and married them and took them back home!!
ROFLMFAO!!!!!

Quite apart from that.......... the SO has seen your 'pic' .


Lin is obviously sight challenged.

[Nancy Young[_2_]]

I am Tosk wrote:

> says...
>>
>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:44:22 -0800, Dan Abel > wrote:

>>> Having to scroll down through 1000 lines to read a "me too" is just
>>> another reminder for a killfile entry.
>>
>> LOL! That equates to another vote for top posting.
>
> What readers are you guys using that makes it so hard to scroll to the
> new text? For me it is a keystroke, no more..

I don't have a problem, still, people should trim to relevent text,
not just tack on their comments.

But if I open a post and the first thing I see is "I would use paprika" ...
I just move on. I don't feel like reading all the text below to see
what comment they're responding to. I want to see "What spice
would you use in this dish" then the paprika comment. In a perfect
world. I don't read top posts with rare exception.

nancy

[Melba's Jammin']

In article >,
Sqwertz > wrote:

> > This prevents the posts from appearing on any of the *banter
> > "family" of sites.
>
> And while I was there I installed a new WebTV background for people
> who use WebTV to read my posts (why didn't somebody tell me the
> previous link was dead? Hrmpff!).
>
> -sw

Ohfer!! I saw tranny and thought of a muscle car. Shame on you. LOL!

--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://web.me.com/barbschaller 1-9-2010

[Melba's Jammin']

In article >,
Christine Dabney > wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 18:36:36 -0800, sf > wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:16:49 -0500, Goomba >
> >wrote:
> >
> >>I recall when RFC was far more cooking/food oriented and miss those days.
> >
> >Oh? Who were you before you posted as Goomba?
>
> She's right, and she's always been Goomba.
>
> Christine

Mmmm, don't be so sure of that. :-)

--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://web.me.com/barbschaller 1-9-2010

[Melba's Jammin']

In article
>,
Dan Abel > wrote:
> Having to scroll down through 1000 lines to read a "me too" is just
> another reminder for a killfile entry.

Might only be 10-20 lines if people would trim posts
before responding. :-( Too many people who know better refuse to do
it.

--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://web.me.com/barbschaller 1-9-2010

[Michel Boucher[_3_]]

WTF > wrote in news:0gcbl5p1kght0omlcgtt9mn5418maqod3s@
4ax.com:

>>I'm not being mysterious at all. Didn't think anybody would care.
>>Who did you post as back then?
>
> Does it matter, stop stroking your ego

And here, ladies and gentlemen is one example among many of thread
degeneration. Topics quickly cease to be adhered to and *we* get into
****ing matches and one-upmanship and pathetic whinging about this and
that.

QED.

--

I have nothing against God.
It's his fan club I can't stand.

spotted on a poster

[Janet]

--Bryan wrote:
>>> So, Hi. I'm hoping this board will become a favorite and a place
>>> where I can have conversations with like minded foodies.
>>
>>> -Mags

It's not a board. It's a usenet usergroup. You may be reading it through a
board, but if so they are just pretending that it is their content.

[Michel Boucher[_3_]]

sf > wrote in news:mf6al5t3djn1tf8mdvnp9igdq96ttksj6u@
4ax.com:

>>To wit the point about...wait for it...*editing*.
>
> Which bottom posters often neglect to do.

I don't know what universe you're in, but what characterizes editing vs.
top posting is the *editing* part. Top posters are much more often prone
to pass over editing and therefore send on masses of information which is
not relevant to their one line comment.

--

I have nothing against God.
It's his fan club I can't stand.

spotted on a poster

[Lou decruss]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 09:36:42 -0500, I am Tosk
> wrote:

>In article >,
>says...

>> LOL! That equates to another vote for top posting.
>
>What readers are you guys using that makes it so hard to scroll to the
>new text? For me it is a keystroke, no more..

I'm using the same reader sf uses and what she's using for arguments
for top-posting are all stupid. There is no logical argument for top
posting and there is only a few very rare occasions when a whole post
needs to be left intact.

Lou

[ChattyCathy]

blake murphy wrote:

> On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 13:33:13 -0000, Ophelia wrote:
>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 10:16:34 -0800 (PST), ImStillMags wrote:
>>>
>>>> As with other boards, there are antagonists and friends and
>>>> cliques.
>>>
>>> There are only the infidels and the Cabal. Anything else is just
>>> your imagination.
>>>
>>
>> Now, now, Steve... you know TINC
>>
>> and anyway, I am still a member
>>
>> --
>
> i wouldn't join any non-existent cabal that would have me as a member.

Is that you Groucho?
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

[ChattyCathy]

ImStillMags wrote:


> LOL....you guys are, at least, fun to read and at most a very
> interesting collection of cooks.

Stick around Mags, it just gets "cook-ier".

;-)
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

[ChattyCathy]

Sqwertz wrote:

> On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 10:16:34 -0800 (PST), ImStillMags wrote:
>
>> As with other boards, there are antagonists and friends and cliques.
>
> There are only the infidels and the Cabal. Anything else is just
> your imagination.

So what does that make you? A Cinfedal, perhaps?

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

[blake murphy[_2_]]

On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 11:15:21 -0600, Michel Boucher wrote:

> blake murphy > wrote in news:c0dk76ajpeos
> :
>
>> power to the people!
>
> Proletarii vseh stran, soedinyaïtes'!

well, let's not go hog wild.

your pal,
blake

[blake murphy[_2_]]

On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 15:38:55 -0600, Melba's Jammin' wrote:

> In article >,
> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 22:06:51 -0600, Melba's Jammin' wrote:
>
>>> Yes, well, we still haven't received your application nor your
>>> registration fee. It's a good thing you can't post until you get those
>>> documents submitted.
>>
>> it looks like your fascist pig-state is crumbling. power to the people!
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
> Dang! Another coup! Where's Fidel when I need him?

put your money into canned cream of mushroom soup. that will see you
through the hard times to come.

your pal,
blake

[blake murphy[_2_]]

On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:44:22 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 18:32:27 -0600, Michel Boucher
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>sf > wrote in newsbu9l5hfv1h8fq1trhgqobnmdsm1512ua6@
>>>4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> Try figuring it out in a long, messy thread. If bottom posting is the
>>>> rfc rule, then another rule should be that text be trimmed enough to
>>>> prevent scrolling.
>>>
>>>To wit the point about...wait for it...*editing*.
>>
>> Which bottom posters often neglect to do.
>
> Then perhaps you should consider killfiling them?
>
> Having to scroll down through 1000 lines to read a "me too" is just
> another reminder for a killfile entry.

that drives me nuts, too. but face it, some people just refuse to Act
Right, i.e., do it the way i do.

your pal,
blake

[Ophelia[_7_]]

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 15:38:55 -0600, Melba's Jammin' wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> blake murphy > wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 22:06:51 -0600, Melba's Jammin' wrote:
>>
>>>> Yes, well, we still haven't received your application nor your
>>>> registration fee. It's a good thing you can't post until you get those
>>>> documents submitted.
>>>
>>> it looks like your fascist pig-state is crumbling. power to the people!
>>>
>>> your pal,
>>> blake
>>
>> Dang! Another coup! Where's Fidel when I need him?
>
> put your money into canned cream of mushroom soup. that will see you
> through the hard times to come.

lol
--
--
https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

[blake murphy[_2_]]

On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 23:51:22 -0800, sf wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:44:22 -0800, Dan Abel > wrote:
>
>>In article >,
>> sf > wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 18:32:27 -0600, Michel Boucher
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>> >sf > wrote in newsbu9l5hfv1h8fq1trhgqobnmdsm1512ua6@
>>> >4ax.com:
>>> >
>>> >> Try figuring it out in a long, messy thread. If bottom posting is the
>>> >> rfc rule, then another rule should be that text be trimmed enough to
>>> >> prevent scrolling.
>>> >
>>> >To wit the point about...wait for it...*editing*.
>>>
>>> Which bottom posters often neglect to do.
>>
>>Then perhaps you should consider killfiling them?
>>
>>Having to scroll down through 1000 lines to read a "me too" is just
>>another reminder for a killfile entry.
>
> LOL! That equates to another vote for top posting.

i just don't like top posting because my first reaction is 'what were we
talking about again?' (especially when threads drift, as they almost
invariably do.)

with a bottom post, you skim what went before and usually are oriented to
what's being said.

in any case, people could edit better (including taking care with
attributions), but it's not a major source of irritation for me.

your pal,
blake

[blake murphy[_2_]]

On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:59:22 -0800, Christine Dabney wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:40:36 -0800, sf > wrote:
>
>>You know I've been here a long time, longer than Goomba, and this ng
>>has never been the fairy tale some posts would like to think it used
>>to be.
>
> Well..I was here a few years before you got here, and it was a lot
> better. Believe it or not. Tammy, Modom, Miche and I, and I forget
> who else started here the same year, in 1994...and it was different.
> You weren't here then, and you don't know how it was...and we do.
>
> Christine

maybe so, maybe not. i've been posting here for quite a while (around the
mid-nineties somewhere) and if it were *all* cooking and recipes i don't
think i would have hung around, for good or ill. there's a reason why
folks don't care much for rec.food.recipes.

your pal,
blake

[blake murphy[_2_]]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:44:13 GMT, PeterL2 wrote:

> Christine Dabney > wrote in
> :
>
>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:14:41 GMT, PeterL2 >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>I do remember Stephanie DeSilva though.
>>
>> I do too..and I remember that I came in shortly after a split
>> attempt...
>>
>
> I don't involve myself with that sort of shit. My life has too many *real*
> situations, to be bothered to be involved in some ****ant "takeover bid" by
> some internet ****ant with a Hitler complex.

yeah, too many people to insult for not being the manly man that you
unquestionably are yet daring to criticize you. that could keep anyone
busy. well, not anyone, but you now what i mean.

blake

[WTF[_2_]]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:34:33 -0600, Michel Boucher
> wrote:

>WTF > wrote in news:0gcbl5p1kght0omlcgtt9mn5418maqod3s@
>4ax.com:
>
>>>I'm not being mysterious at all. Didn't think anybody would care.
>>>Who did you post as back then?
>>
>> Does it matter, stop stroking your ego
>
>And here, ladies and gentlemen is one example among many of thread
>degeneration. Topics quickly cease to be adhered to and *we* get into
>****ing matches and one-upmanship and pathetic whinging about this and
>that.
>
>QED.

...and Michel Boucher can always be counted on to comment every time,
whinny bitch.

[WTF[_2_]]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 19:26:07 +0200, ChattyCathy
> wrote:

>ImStillMags wrote:
>
>
>> LOL....you guys are, at least, fun to read and at most a very
>> interesting collection of cooks.
>
>Stick around Mags, it just gets "cook-ier".
>
>;-)

Give me a wet one chatty

[WTF[_2_]]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 19:34:58 +0200, ChattyCathy
> wrote:

>Sqwertz wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 10:16:34 -0800 (PST), ImStillMags wrote:
>>
>>> As with other boards, there are antagonists and friends and cliques.
>>
>> There are only the infidels and the Cabal. Anything else is just
>> your imagination.
>
>So what does that make you? A Cinfedal, perhaps?

..........there is no cabal

[WTF[_2_]]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 12:51:01 -0500, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:44:22 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> sf > wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 18:32:27 -0600, Michel Boucher
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>sf > wrote in newsbu9l5hfv1h8fq1trhgqobnmdsm1512ua6@
>>>>4ax.com:
>>>>
>>>>> Try figuring it out in a long, messy thread. If bottom posting is the
>>>>> rfc rule, then another rule should be that text be trimmed enough to
>>>>> prevent scrolling.
>>>>
>>>>To wit the point about...wait for it...*editing*.
>>>
>>> Which bottom posters often neglect to do.
>>
>> Then perhaps you should consider killfiling them?
>>
>> Having to scroll down through 1000 lines to read a "me too" is just
>> another reminder for a killfile entry.
>
>that drives me nuts, too. but face it, some people just refuse to Act
>Right, i.e., do it the way i do.
>
>your pal,
>blake

.......get your hand off my ass Blakipoo.

[ChattyCathy]

Christine Dabney wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 01:50:46 -0800, sf > wrote:
>
>> And I don't remember Miche as
>>an old timer or even close to one. She only became apparent in the
>>"miche" persona a *very* few years ago to me.
>
> Both Miche and Tammy were posting before I got here. And I joined mid
> year in 1994. And both Miche and Tammy will/can confirm that they
> joined in 1994...and they have done so in the past. I remember them
> vividly..as I do several other illustrious posters.

I made my first post to this group in May 2005... IIRC, it had something
to do with cooking lamb. Does that score me any (orgasmic) brownie
points? Just curious.
--
Cheers
Chatty (non-illustrious-still-a-newbie) Cathy

[sf[_9_]]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 12:56:10 -0500, blake murphy
> wrote:

>i just don't like top posting because my first reaction is 'what were we
>talking about again?' (especially when threads drift, as they almost
>invariably do.)
>
>with a bottom post, you skim what went before and usually are oriented to
>what's being said.

I feel the exact opposite. I'll scroll down if I need a reminder and
I don't want to rehash the topic before I get to a new response.
>
>in any case, people could edit better (including taking care with
>attributions), but it's not a major source of irritation for me.

It's a major problem for me. Obviously they have no idea who said
what. If that's the case, then just cut out everything except what
you're responding to.

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

[Ophelia[_7_]]

"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
...
> Christine Dabney wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 01:50:46 -0800, sf > wrote:
>>
>>> And I don't remember Miche as
>>>an old timer or even close to one. She only became apparent in the
>>>"miche" persona a *very* few years ago to me.
>>
>> Both Miche and Tammy were posting before I got here. And I joined mid
>> year in 1994. And both Miche and Tammy will/can confirm that they
>> joined in 1994...and they have done so in the past. I remember them
>> vividly..as I do several other illustrious posters.
>
> I made my first post to this group in May 2005... IIRC, it had something
> to do with cooking lamb. Does that score me any (orgasmic) brownie
> points? Just curious.

*Gasp* *Shock* *Horror* you mean you are not willie waving?????

heh me neither)

--
--
https://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/

[Omelet[_7_]]

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> >Well..I was here a few years before you got here, and it was a lot
> >better. Believe it or not. Tammy, Modom, Miche and I, and I forget
> >who else started here the same year, in 1994...and it was different.
> >You weren't here then, and you don't know how it was...and we do.
> >
>
> '94? How do you know that for sure? I have no idea what year I came
> here and I haven't been able to google my first post for years.

I looked back a bit (and I've change posting nick's) and it looks like
the first post under "Katra" was 1996.

But, who cares? <g>
--
Peace! Om

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

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>

Subscribe:

[Omelet[_7_]]

In article
>,
Melba's Jammin' > wrote:

> In article
> >,
> Dan Abel > wrote:
> > Having to scroll down through 1000 lines to read a "me too" is just
> > another reminder for a killfile entry.
>
> Might only be 10-20 lines if people would trim posts
> before responding. :-( Too many people who know better refuse to do
> it.

I don't refuse, sometimes I just forget!
I'm trying diligently to fix that...
--
Peace! Om

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

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>

Subscribe:

[Omelet[_7_]]

In article >,
"Janet" > wrote:

> --Bryan wrote:
> >>> So, Hi. I'm hoping this board will become a favorite and a place
> >>> where I can have conversations with like minded foodies.
> >>
> >>> -Mags
>
> It's not a board. It's a usenet usergroup. You may be reading it through a
> board, but if so they are just pretending that it is their content.

That happens. I've seen it and it ticks me off.
--
Peace! Om

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

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>

Subscribe:

[ChattyCathy]

Ophelia wrote:
>
>
> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
> ...

>> I made my first post to this group in May 2005... IIRC, it had
>> something to do with cooking lamb. Does that score me any (orgasmic)
>> brownie points? Just curious.
>
> *Gasp* *Shock* *Horror* you mean you are not willie waving?????
>
> heh me neither)
>
No willie, no waving ;-)
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

[sf[_9_]]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 03:20:04 -0800, "Bob Terwilliger"
> wrote:

>sf wrote:
>
>>>> I have no idea what year I came here and I haven't been able to google
>>>> my first post for years. I know a key word but google doesn't burp up
>>>> the post I'm thinking of.
>>>
>>> Any particular reason you're being so mysterious about the "key word" or
>>> other details of the post you're trying to find?
>>>
>> I'm not being mysterious at all. Didn't think anybody would care.
>
>I found your posts from 1996 when you weren't able to. Maybe I can find the
>one you're looking for earlier. What do you recall about the earlier post?
>
'96 sounds about right.
>
>> Who did you post as back then?
>
>I answered that question from you when you asked two weeks ago. Why should I
>bother telling you again, when you just disregard the answer and keep asking
>the question?
>
Oh, so I'm supposed to tattoo it on my arm? <shrug> Some people
think they're at the center of the universe.


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

[sf[_9_]]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:34:33 -0600, Michel Boucher
> wrote:

>WTF > wrote in news:0gcbl5p1kght0omlcgtt9mn5418maqod3s@
>4ax.com:
>
>>>I'm not being mysterious at all. Didn't think anybody would care.
>>>Who did you post as back then?
>>
>> Does it matter, stop stroking your ego
>
>And here, ladies and gentlemen is one example among many of thread
>degeneration. Topics quickly cease to be adhered to and *we* get into
>****ing matches and one-upmanship and pathetic whinging about this and
>that.
>
You forgot denigration and name calling.


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

[sf[_9_]]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 08:35:30 -0600, Stu > wrote:

>You got me wondering, went looking which took me two days but finally
>found one of my posts about taffy making from 1989 that I had replied
>to the washington.edu listserve. I know I've older posts, gonna keep
>looking, thank god for archives..

Good lord, college list serves.

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

[Michel Boucher[_3_]]

WTF > wrote in news:s9ubl558g2rh3g3up0nriv65hvm19rib7s@
4ax.com:

> ..and Michel Boucher can always be counted on to comment every time,
> whinny bitch.

And here you see the best example so far of homo incommodo, an extinct
branch of the unfortunately longer lasting homo escator domini, who until
recently inhabited the plains of usenet boredom.

--

I have nothing against God.
It's his fan club I can't stand.

spotted on a poster

[Michel Boucher[_3_]]

sf > wrote in news:9l0cl55utatrk8cu8ist3t57gmj19ba7hi@
4ax.com:

>>And here, ladies and gentlemen is one example among many of thread
>>degeneration. Topics quickly cease to be adhered to and *we* get into
>>****ing matches and one-upmanship and pathetic whinging about this and
>>that.
>
> You forgot denigration and name calling.

It was covered under pathetic whinging.

--

I have nothing against God.
It's his fan club I can't stand.

spotted on a poster

[WTF[_2_]]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:16:07 -0600, Michel Boucher
> wrote:

>WTF > wrote in news:s9ubl558g2rh3g3up0nriv65hvm19rib7s@
>4ax.com:
>
>> ..and Michel Boucher can always be counted on to comment every time,
>> whinny bitch.
>
>And here you see the best example so far of homo incommodo, an extinct
>branch of the unfortunately longer lasting homo escator domini, who until
>recently inhabited the plains of usenet boredom.

Why do you always have to be so negative? Is it genetic, or is it
that you're nothing but a whinny bitch?

[WTF[_2_]]

On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 21:01:23 +0200, ChattyCathy
> wrote:

>Ophelia wrote:
>>
>>
>> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
>> ...
>
>>> I made my first post to this group in May 2005... IIRC, it had
>>> something to do with cooking lamb. Does that score me any (orgasmic)
>>> brownie points? Just curious.
>>
>> *Gasp* *Shock* *Horror* you mean you are not willie waving?????
>>
>> heh me neither)
>>
>No willie, no waving ;-)

glad to hear that ...... now where's that wet one?

[George Shirley]

Ophelia wrote:
>
>
> "ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Christine Dabney wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 01:50:46 -0800, sf > wrote:
>>>
>>>> And I don't remember Miche as
>>>> an old timer or even close to one. She only became apparent in the
>>>> "miche" persona a *very* few years ago to me.
>>>
>>> Both Miche and Tammy were posting before I got here. And I joined mid
>>> year in 1994. And both Miche and Tammy will/can confirm that they
>>> joined in 1994...and they have done so in the past. I remember them
>>> vividly..as I do several other illustrious posters.
>>
>> I made my first post to this group in May 2005... IIRC, it had something
>> to do with cooking lamb. Does that score me any (orgasmic) brownie
>> points? Just curious.
>
> *Gasp* *Shock* *Horror* you mean you are not willie waving?????
>
> heh me neither)
>
I would be terribly shocked if either of you was waving your own willie.
Don't forget I used to work with a lot of Brits, I seem to remember
all that vulgar slang they used. <G>

[Nancy2]

> So, Hi. * *I'm hoping this board will become a favorite and a place
> where I can have conversations with
> like minded foodies.
>
> -Mags

It isn't a board, it's a Usenet newsgroup. Other than that, it's what
you see.

N.

[Nancy2]

On Jan 16, 6:25*pm, Terry Pulliam Burd > wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 14:52:09 -0600, Melba's Jammin'
>
> > wrote:
> >Welcome to the fray. *I haven't received your membership application and
> >entry fee yet and I believe the bylaws state that you're not allowed to
> >post until the Cabal (TINC) has approved your request for membership.
>
> Wait a sec! I thought we voted at the last Cabal (TINC) meeting that
> the Trollops got to vote on this, too! I'll take my bribe, erm,
> membership application fee in US cash, please.
>
> Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd
>
> ---
>
> "If the soup had been as warm as the wine,
> if the wine had been as old as the turkey,
> and if the turkey had had a breast like the maid,
> it would have been a swell dinner." Duncan Hines

When was the last Cabal (TINC) meeting? I must have slept through
it.

N. (member of the A list, B list and Cabal, but not a Trollop and
proud of it)