Dick Adams wrote:
>
> "Bob" > wrote in message ...
>
> > Yes, actually ("Bob" makes authentic sourdough - presumably bread
> although the only news we have is about failed starter).
>
> > Wanna place a little wager on it?
>
> OK, but who is going to be the referee?

Hey Dick,

don't put him under more pressure than he already is by making him show
pictures.

Now, he got his starter (or it's coming soon) and maybe he finds his
peace playing with it.
Small miracles happen every day - even in Texas.

And - in regards to Kenneth, you sure know a hell more than I about nose
microorganism sourdough inoculation techniques and how to **** off
people, although with "Bob" it's really easy, anyone can do it, no
effort required - it just happens naturally. I suspect, he is actually
planning to go that route beforehand, like being predisposed in some
way.

I push comes to shove, Ticker could be referee. Charles needs to ask if
s/he wants to, though - I doubt it, cats are smart.

Maybe we all should just admit, that yes, this is the right way to make
"Chewy French Baguette", and yes, that's exactly how it should look, and
it's a terrific job, you pay the bet and we move on.

This altar worshipping knee sliding head bouncing psychopathic sick
trolling eliteish psychopathic personality petulant child pontificating
technique is really interesting right now. One can learn from it, it can
come handy one day. But it gets old after a while if it's repetitive,
and it's getting there.

I am curious how long he holds out. He promised something like a starter
phase 3 ( http://samartha.net/GC.html ) response (or was it linear, I
don't remember) to every post. That can be exhausting. We'll see.

Samartha

Ps.: that typo was intentional to fool the search engines
--
remove -nospam from my email address, if there is one
SD page is the http://samartha.net/SD/

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 14:35:21 -0600, Samartha Deva
> wrote:

>don't put him under more pressure than he already is by making him show
>pictures.

<yawn>

Bob wrote:
>
> On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 14:35:21 -0600, Samartha Deva
> > wrote:
>
> >don't put him under more pressure than he already is by making him show
> >pictures.
>
> <yawn>

see, I was right, you're getting tired :-)

S.

--
remove -nospam from my email address, if there is one
SD page is the http://samartha.net/SD/

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 14:35:21 -0600, Samartha Deva
> wrote:

>And - in regards to Kenneth, you sure know a hell more than I about nose
>microorganism sourdough inoculation techniques

Hi Samartha,

Might you be confusing me with someone else?

All the best,

--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 14:44:56 -0600, Samartha Deva
> wrote:

>> <yawn>

>see, I was right, you're getting tired :-)

Nope - bored.

But Wood's book just came in from the library, so now perhaps I can
find out the truth about all this cult idolatry over self starting
cultures.

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 16:53:33 -0400, Kenneth
> wrote:

>>And - in regards to Kenneth, you sure know a hell more than I about nose
>>microorganism sourdough inoculation techniques

>Might you be confusing me with someone else?

Samartha has been posting while stoned again.

Ignore him.

Bob wrote:

> But Wood's book just came in from the library, so now perhaps I can
> find out the truth about all this cult idolatry over self starting
> cultures.

That book is fraught with psychopathology. I'm afraid it might
not be up to your standards.

--
Reg email: RegForte (at) (that free MS email service) (dot) com

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 21:50:36 GMT, Reg > wrote:

>> But Wood's book just came in from the library, so now perhaps I can
>> find out the truth about all this cult idolatry over self starting
>> cultures.

>That book is fraught with psychopathology. I'm afraid it might
>not be up to your standards.

What are you referring to?

The Introduction makes reference to "catching" yeast. That's hardly
psychopathology. It also discusses particular kinds of yeasts native
to an area. If yeasts are particular to an area, the assumption is
that they must be "caught" from the environment to be put to use.

But I intend to keep an open mind. I am still trying to figure out why
some people can get a culture to self start whereas others can't and
must rely on "catching" yeasts from the atmosphere. Then there are
people like me who can't even catch a yeast.

My objective it to figure out what is really going on here, not waste
my time in ****ing contests with skunks. Maybe that why their culture
self starts - they **** in it.

Samartha Deva wrote:

> I push comes to shove, Ticker could be referee.

Not for bread. She has specialised in sourdough *starter* tasting. I am sure she would not mind
giving an opinion on the quality of different sourdough starter cultures. She has no problem
giving an opinion on practically everything else. Of course they would have to bring their
starter here. The trip to San Fransisco, where she won the National Sourdough Tasting, was so
traumatic that she has barely left the house since. She has declined to enter any more contests,
saying only that she has nothing left to prove. I know the travel is the real reason.

Speaking of opinions, she did offer a comment on the quality of discourse here at r.f.s.in recent
times. Ticker was sitting on the mouse pad reading the mail when I was catching up on the latest
slog of notes. Without my even asking her thoughts, she gave me a disgusted look, made a motion
with her left paw as if she was covering something nasty in a litter box, and left. She went
over to the couch and buried her head under the pillow. She does that when she is distraught
about things.

She can be so elequent. Somtimes without even having to say an indelicate word.

Regards,

Charles

--
Charles Perry
Reply to:

** A balanced diet is a cookie in each hand **

Bob wrote:

> On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 21:50:36 GMT, Reg > wrote:
>
>
>>>But Wood's book just came in from the library, so now perhaps I can
>>>find out the truth about all this cult idolatry over self starting
>>>cultures.
>
>
>>That book is fraught with psychopathology. I'm afraid it might
>>not be up to your standards.
>
>
> What are you referring to?
>

Do you have to ask? I was joking. Reread some of your posts perhaps.

> But I intend to keep an open mind. I am still trying to figure out why
> some people can get a culture to self start whereas others can't and
> must rely on "catching" yeasts from the atmosphere.

I'm all for it.

--
Reg email: RegForte (at) (that free MS email service) (dot) com

"Samartha Deva" > wrote in message =
...

> you sure know a hell more than I about nose microorganism=20
> sourdough inoculation techniques ...

Well, actually, it is just a theory. But someday, who knows,=20
maybe I will get a Nobel prize for that recognition. It is
entirely consistent with most of the facts. And those facts with
which is inconsistent are most likely to be lies. =20

(That is for *inadvertent* nose inoculation, as in starter sniffing.
The forcible way has not been mentioned here yet, but probably=20
will be, judging by recent trends.)=20

> and how to **** off people ...

Just doing my job, but thanks, anyway.

> If push comes to shove, Ticker could be referee.

Ticker declined. But maybe Igno* NNN... ? He seems to be
a good person and we should try to make use of his talents. (His
numbers NNN are still fluctuating, but that is probably because he
is still trying to shake off the Russian Mob.)

---
DickA=20