Hello All,
My computer ace friend, who is now in China, were having a conversation
about a month ago over tea about starting our own tea site. He had the
rather brilliant idea of starting a wiki for tea. This lets folks
submit entries on teas they've tried, complete with pics. We've gotten
a start on it. Before I can do more, I need a digital camera. Steve (my
friend and proprietor of said site), being in China and possesing a
digital camera, will, I hope, make some good contributions. We've
gotten a start with two teas. The descriptions and pics aren't great,
but we hope to improve it. Once I clear it with him I'll post the link.

Does anyone know of something along these lines that already exists? I
think the format works well for bringing together tea enthusiasts.

Regards,
Nico

HI Nico,
I think your ideas cool. And you want to start a wiki site?

we already have wiki tea sites and the tea wiki is a featured site
recommended by wiki, here is my own link and the tea wiki that i help
on i translate the names/words of tea into english and some back to
chinese to check the validity of the tea classification. Since if we
are talking about a tea grown it china of course the chinese name will
be the original name, this helps in spotting duplicate names..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wu-Wo_Tea_Ceremony

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea

>we already have wiki tea sites and the tea wiki is a featured site
>recommended by wiki, here is my own link and the tea wiki that i help
>on i translate the names/words of tea into english and some back to
>chinese to check the validity of the tea classification. Since if we
>are talking about a tea grown it china of course the chinese name will
>be the original name, this helps in spotting duplicate names..
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W u-Wo_Tea_Ceremony

>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T ea


What my friend and I are working on is a Wiki site to which people can
submit entries for teas they have tried, and which other people can
edit and add to. I haven't seen anything like this yet.

I think tea newbies would benefit from a survey of different teas and
methods of preparation, etc. Chinese folks who contribute to this forum
may not realize how difficult it is to learn about and aquire good tea
in the US and other non-Asian countries. Mediocre tea is plentiful.
Even when you can get good tea, it's not easy to find straight forward
info about it and to find people to talk to about it. This is
especially the case which Chinese tea, which I hold to be the best, and
is slowly gaining popularity in the US.

I realize this forum does a lot of that, but what is missing, I think,
is a structured layout of different teas and tea types, methods, etc.
The openness that wikis provide allows experts from around the world to
contribute. I would love to have some Chinese people help out here. I
will provide more updates as the project comes along.

Nico

i know what you mean about america and tea, they/we gotta long way to
go. i live in asia and the US so when i am in asia i get my teas, with
the internet now it make it easier at least than 10 years ago to get
teas. getting back to your project, is it on the internet if it is not
put some of it up and we can take a look i have seen some sites that do
reviews on teas, one was an asian girl, cute pic. but really she was
doing reviews the problem with most sites is the are so commercial, try
my site for tea info... its not that much but at least i aint selling
tea!!!
http://teaarts.blogspot.com/

also if you need some help once you get something i can see i would be
glad to help. i just dont like getting involved in stuff that doesnt
go through. also i think danny would be good for the chinese
translations for the teas....i guess i or we should ask him first
hahahha////

-icetea

>also if you need some help once you get something i can see i would be
>glad to help. i just dont like getting involved in stuff that doesnt
>go through. also i think danny would be good for the chinese
t>ranslations for the teas....i guess i or we should ask him first
>hahahha///

Thanks,
The reason I haven't given out the link yet is because my friend and
not I am the webmaster of the host site, and I need to coordinate the
next steps with him. I will let everyone know as soon as I've
corresponded with him.

The place to share information about tea is REC.FOOD.DRINK.TEA.
Anybody or anything else is just pretenders. The information in this
group from the past ten years would choke a server. In most cases a
Wiki topic is better than nothing but not by much. The topics would
probably be nothing more than something about someone's favorite tea.
There's no such thing as mediocre teas just one's you don't like.
Price is not one of the four given tastes your buds are able to detect.
Blogs will replace Wiki because the author has the vested time and
interest. I'm waiting for the first IPOD cast about tea. I'm from the
old school of 'letters'. Dancing icons on webpages doesn't do it for
me. I probably wouldn't tune in on a webcast of anyone making tea in
their kitchen. I saw Martha Stewart do that once and she got
everything ass backwards. To help the newbies learn about tea it'll
have to be in Chinese because there are more of them. The rest of the
world knows more about tea than someone at Starbucks. My only advice
to newbies it's your tastebuds and anything else is just idiosyncratic
personality quirks and probably people with too much money to spend. I
just sent my brother two kilos of different commercial teas not costing
much more than a penny/gram and told him to have fun. I included a
couple of the asian 700ml treated shock quartz glass pots with metal
infusers which didn't cost more than a couple of bucks each. Babelfish
can translate any Chinese tea term characters I throw at it. I wished
it could handle pinyin terms. I get the clue from sites like TaoBao
and Ebay and store them in a simple Notepad file with utf-8 encoding.
I think the forest of teas from China are known in the West. It's just
the trees that sometimes get in the way. The earliest reference I have
to puerh for example is The Culture and Marketing of Tea, C.R. Harler,
1956, Oxford Press which I previously mentioned. It was the second
edition 10 years after the first. I don't know if puerh was mentioned
in the first post war book. What I learned about tea over the decades
was from my own purchases in stores and hitting the stacks for
additional information before Usenet. I'm using Ebay and Chinapost to
fill in the holes of my desired representative architectural collection
of puerh. Anything else I can find locally. If you can make a pot of
tea then our tea knowledge only differs in minutia.

Jim

Nico wrote:
> >we already have wiki tea sites and the tea wiki is a featured site
> >recommended by wiki, here is my own link and the tea wiki that i help
> >on i translate the names/words of tea into english and some back to
> >chinese to check the validity of the tea classification. Since if we
> >are talking about a tea grown it china of course the chinese name will
> >be the original name, this helps in spotting duplicate names..
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W u-Wo_Tea_Ceremony
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T ea
>
>
> What my friend and I are working on is a Wiki site to which people can
> submit entries for teas they have tried, and which other people can
> edit and add to. I haven't seen anything like this yet.
>
> I think tea newbies would benefit from a survey of different teas and
> methods of preparation, etc. Chinese folks who contribute to this forum
> may not realize how difficult it is to learn about and aquire good tea
> in the US and other non-Asian countries. Mediocre tea is plentiful.
> Even when you can get good tea, it's not easy to find straight forward
> info about it and to find people to talk to about it. This is
> especially the case which Chinese tea, which I hold to be the best, and
> is slowly gaining popularity in the US.
>
> I realize this forum does a lot of that, but what is missing, I think,
> is a structured layout of different teas and tea types, methods, etc.
> The openness that wikis provide allows experts from around the world to
> contribute. I would love to have some Chinese people help out here. I
> will provide more updates as the project comes along.
>
> Nico

jim nice post, the only thing i can add is if possible dont use a metal
anything and stick to glass or clay/porcelain ceramic, also use a
teapot with no infuser and pour over a strainer (again if possible not
metal but metal will work because it is not in contact long) then it
goes into the tea pitcher, (hope danny doesnt see me writing
'pitcher')hahhaha. the reason to skip the infuser is it cramps my
style,,,,i mean the tea's infusing/infusion.
icetea

I'll bother to reply to this when I'm able to discern what you're
talking about.

>I'll bother to reply to this when I'm able to discern what you're
>talking about.

To clarify, the above comment was directed at Jim.

To clarify again, I'm not looking to suplant this forum, which I am
certainly in no position to do, but rather to have a little space for
people to share their tea experiences in a forum whose structure would
make it accessible.

>The place to share information about tea is REC.FOOD.DRINK.TEA.
>Anybody or anything else is just pretenders.

Jim, I honestly don't know what I have done to provoke this antagonism,
but I view it, frankly, as incredibly childish and not worth any
further consideration. I certainly won't be intimidated, which is the
only rational for this that I can make out.

Nico

I think tea leaves need room to dance. The infuser is a compromise.
It gets the leaves out of the pot. I used the same clay Chinese pot
with clay infuser and bamboo handle at work for 20 years. It was
relatively shallow so you had to 'top' the pot for the infusion. After
the first cup no more brewing. I'd dump the leaves on a napkin, fold
and put in waste basket. It was no problem for cleaning services.
That was work. At home no infusers anywhere. I use a strainer or a
tea sock. Mostly my modified tea press where the strainer has been
retrofited to the lid and only comes into play when pouring. Sort of
an external strainer in the pot. I enjoy the agony of the leaves which
is why I only use glass for the pot. I like the British cup strainers
which fit on the tea cup rim so you can use two hands for the pot.

Jim

sherdwen wrote:
> jim nice post, the only thing i can add is if possible dont use a metal
> anything and stick to glass or clay/porcelain ceramic, also use a
> teapot with no infuser and pour over a strainer (again if possible not
> metal but metal will work because it is not in contact long) then it
> goes into the tea pitcher, (hope danny doesnt see me writing
> 'pitcher')hahhaha. the reason to skip the infuser is it cramps my
> style,,,,i mean the tea's infusing/infusion.
> icetea

"Nico" > writes:

> [...]
>
> To clarify again, I'm not looking to suplant this forum, which I am
> certainly in no position to do, but rather to have a little space for
> people to share their tea experiences in a forum whose structure would
> make it accessible.

In what way is RFDT inaccessible?

/Lew
---
Lew Perin /
http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html

Lewis 9/6/05

> "Nico" > writes:
>
>> [...]
>>
>> To clarify again, I'm not looking to suplant this forum, which I am
>> certainly in no position to do, but rather to have a little space for
>> people to share their tea experiences in a forum whose structure would
>> make it accessible.
>
> In what way is RFDT inaccessible?
>
> /Lew

Just think, Lew. With his own forum, Nico could pick and choose among those
who want to participate. He could cut right to the wheat, and chuck the
chaff. Of course, he will be lonely, but what they hay.

Michael

You don't have too. It is one of my stream of consciousness tea rants
brought on by lonely bloggers,webmasters,portals looking to generate
traffic for their own special interest. I give you Usenet is media
challenged. But for a discussion group we can hold our own while
Google never forgets and everything else is trash blowing down the
street. The only reason I stick around is this curmudgeon still can
learn a thing or two about tea. I'm sitting on the sofa drinking
another cup of Xiaguan Iron Cake. I've noted the taste of the single
note versus the complexity of others in another post. It stuck me it
is the taste of camphor from a recent cooked crop so I don't have to
spend my money on old stuff.

Jim

Nico wrote:
> I'll bother to reply to this when I'm able to discern what you're
> talking about.

Hey, Michael, pull out your old album of the Velvet Underground with
the Banana. That Nico is the same gender (I think).

Jim

Michael Plant wrote:
> Lewis 9/6/05
>
> > "Nico" > writes:
> >
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> To clarify again, I'm not looking to suplant this forum, which I am
> >> certainly in no position to do, but rather to have a little space for
> >> people to share their tea experiences in a forum whose structure would
> >> make it accessible.
> >
> > In what way is RFDT inaccessible?
> >
> > /Lew
>
> Just think, Lew. With his own forum, Nico could pick and choose among those
> who want to participate. He could cut right to the wheat, and chuck the
> chaff. Of course, he will be lonely, but what they hay.
>
> Michael

PUT YOUR LEAVES BACK in your pants.......you know it is funny no matter
where you go on the internet or even in real life, people like to argue
and compare...i say less fighting and more action...i say this forum is
ok,,, and when the wiki is up i will be there too, by the way my site
is good,,,,,just kidding..mmmm maybe not?!
icetea

On 6 Sep 2005 09:21:38 -0700, "Space Cowboy" >
wrote:

>You don't have too. It is one of my stream of consciousness tea rants
>brought on by lonely bloggers,webmasters,portals looking to generate
>traffic for their own special interest.

Don't worry Nico, I fall into that same category somewhere too because
I have been the subject of many of the same specious rants for years
now. Where I come from we call it "intolerance". It is this same
intolerance that has driven so many others away from here. Don't let
this self-proclaimed curmudgeon (a bad-tempered, disagreeable,
stubborn person) bully you around. Follow your own heart and do your
own thing. I don't particularly agree that yet another tea forum is
needed but then who am I to impose that belief upon others. Go for it
if that's what suites you, OR if RFDT doesn't suite you could try
Tea-Disc or Teamail as well.

Mike Petro
http://www.pu-erh.net
"In this work, when it shall be found that much is omitted, let it not be forgotten that much likewise is performed."
Samuel Johnson, 1775, upon finishing his dictionary.

>just think, Lew. With his own forum, Nico could pick and choose among >those
>who want to participate. He could cut right to the wheat, and chuck the
>chaff. Of course, he will be lonely, but what they hay.

>Michael

Wo there, my friend. I have no desire to control what people have to
say. I guess I perceived the possibility of having something to offer-
just maybe. I guess I imagined somebody wanting to look up a kind of
tea and seeing what others have written about it, or something. I'm no
expert in this kind of stuff. I just thought it might be cool and
wanted to see what other's thought of it.

I see this derision as completely unneccessary. Is what I said so
offensive that it warants this sort of thing? Why do you have to assume
the worst motives on my part? Why can't you formulate some constructive
criticism? Isn't that what this forum is about?

Let me just state this clearly. There is nothing anyone could possibly
type out in this kind of forum that will make me flinch for even a
second. My ego is not that fragile. I have nothing to prove. I just
want to get feedback and advice.

I think I'll just limit the site to folks who seek it out. We'll see
from there.

Respectfully,
Nico

>In what way is RFDT inaccessible?

>/Lew

What might (maybe), be lacking is an index of tea with info and
reviews, which curious people can access. In other words, a wikipedia
especially for tea.

Also, I do indeed like RFDT and will continue to use it, despite some
folks' seeming attempts to drive me from it. There are certainly many
very nice, knowledgable, and helpful people who frequent this forum,
and I wouldn't want that to change.

I suppose this is a good a time as any to express my appreciation to
all of you have provided clarity for me in my continuing quest to find
the best cup of tea.

Regards,
Nico

>Hey, Michael, pull out your old album of the Velvet Underground with
>the Banana. That Nico is the same gender (I think).

>Jim

Well, if my gender is really an important point of discussion, I
usually identify as male (Nico, in my case, being short for Nicolas).

I'm flattered that you'd take such an interest in me.

Nico

On 6 Sep 2005 22:01:30 -0700, "Nico" > wrote:

>>In what way is RFDT inaccessible?
>
>>/Lew
>
>What might (maybe), be lacking is an index of tea with info and
>reviews, which curious people can access. In other words, a wikipedia
>especially for tea.

Reminds me of the now stale "We Review Teas" site
(http://www.normbrero.com/cgi-bin/viewTea.cgi) which was a very good
effort that did exactly what you are speaking of. However, this is the
danger of such a site, it takes someone to commit to maintaining it
perpetually or it quickly becomes stale. There was talk of reviving
the above site in a sort of "open source" community model, but I am
not sure what the final decision ever was.

Mike Petro
http://www.pu-erh.net
"In this work, when it shall be found that much is omitted, let it not be forgotten that much likewise is performed."
Samuel Johnson, 1775, upon finishing his dictionary.

9/7/05


>> just think, Lew. With his own forum, Nico could pick and choose among >those
>> who want to participate. He could cut right to the wheat, and chuck the
>> chaff. Of course, he will be lonely, but what they hay.
>
>> Michael
>
> Wo there, my friend. I have no desire to control what people have to
> say. I guess I perceived the possibility of having something to offer-
> just maybe. I guess I imagined somebody wanting to look up a kind of
> tea and seeing what others have written about it, or something. I'm no
> expert in this kind of stuff. I just thought it might be cool and
> wanted to see what other's thought of it.

No, no, no. Just playing with words, just goofing around, just maintaining
my reputation for nasty. I agree with what Mike wrote in his last post:
Just go for it if it seems right to you. Nonetheless, be aware that there
are already alternatives out there, as he mentioned: TeaDisc, TeaMail, and
probably others you might uncover. If you do decide to proceed, here's my
advice: Thematize your site. There are already generalized tea sites, and
yours would be redundant. Just thoughts.
>
> I see this derision as completely unneccessary. Is what I said so
> offensive that it warants this sort of thing? Why do you have to assume
> the worst motives on my part? Why can't you formulate some constructive
> criticism? Isn't that what this forum is about?

No. This is usenet. I'll say whatever I damned well like, and you'll put my
posts in your kill file if you don't like it. Sorry, but that's reality.
>
> Let me just state this clearly. There is nothing anyone could possibly
> type out in this kind of forum that will make me flinch for even a
> second. My ego is not that fragile. I have nothing to prove. I just
> want to get feedback and advice.

Your post here proves otherwise. Sorry, but that's another reality.
>
> I think I'll just limit the site to folks who seek it out. We'll see
> from there.

So, Nico, now that we've had this little chat, where are you from, and what
is your favorite tea, and where do you get it? BTW, and this is for Mike and
others, please include your respective URL's in your signature so we can
click them with the spontaneous outbursts for which we have become justly
famous.

BTW, isn't :"Wiki" that encyclopoedia thing that invites the people's input?
If so, I'm a fan and support it wholeheartedly.

Michael

9/7/05


>> In what way is RFDT inaccessible?
>
>> /Lew
>
> What might (maybe), be lacking is an index of tea with info and
> reviews, which curious people can access. In other words, a wikipedia
> especially for tea.
>
> Also, I do indeed like RFDT and will continue to use it, despite some
> folks' seeming attempts to drive me from it. There are certainly many
> very nice, knowledgable, and helpful people who frequent this forum,
> and I wouldn't want that to change.
>
> I suppose this is a good a time as any to express my appreciation to
> all of you have provided clarity for me in my continuing quest to find
> the best cup of tea.
>
> Regards,
> Nico
>

Tea reviews. There's a theme worth doing. We had talked about it once
before, but I think the idea died. Perhaps your site could be a tea review
site. Could you table-ize it? Perhaps include discreet (sp?) places for 1)
type (broad), 1a) type (narrow), 2) source, 3) brewing temperature, 4)
amount of dry tea, 5) amount of wet water, 6) time the leaves swim in the
water, 7) comments, 8) other items I didn't think of. That way the verbose
and analytical would have there spaces, and the verbose and romantic would
also have theirs (the comments part). That way, your contribution would be
solid, especially if it were possible to organize the columns.

I suggest you illicit people to help you do it, especially those who have
already engaged in such projects in the past. Whaddaya say, Nico?

Michael

Mike 9/7/05


> On 6 Sep 2005 22:01:30 -0700, "Nico" > wrote:
>
>>> In what way is RFDT inaccessible?
>>
>>> /Lew
>>
>> What might (maybe), be lacking is an index of tea with info and
>> reviews, which curious people can access. In other words, a wikipedia
>> especially for tea.
>
> Reminds me of the now stale "We Review Teas" site
> (http://www.normbrero.com/cgi-bin/viewTea.cgi) which was a very good
> effort that did exactly what you are speaking of. However, this is the
> danger of such a site, it takes someone to commit to maintaining it
> perpetually or it quickly becomes stale. There was talk of reviving
> the above site in a sort of "open source" community model, but I am
> not sure what the final decision ever was.

Mike, from a non-technical point of view -- the only one I've got, I fear --
the major maintenance issue for "We Review Teas" was that it was a
controlled site wherein the site master controlled who could review and who
could not. A similar site, but one in which anybody could add their stuff,
would require fare less control and therefore time, right? (I just read
your WHOLE paragraph above. Disregard my drivel.)

Still, I'd like to see somebody -- Nico/Nicolas, perhaps -- do this.

Michael

Damn. Now I have to plow back through your posts and wonder how I came
up with that conclusion. Nah, I'll take your word for it.

Jim

Nico wrote:
> >Hey, Michael, pull out your old album of the Velvet Underground with
> >the Banana. That Nico is the same gender (I think).
>
> >Jim
>
> Well, if my gender is really an important point of discussion, I
> usually identify as male (Nico, in my case, being short for Nicolas).
>
> I'm flattered that you'd take such an interest in me.
>
> Nico

You're the guy who steals my ideas from this group and uses it on your
website under the guise of public domain. You run an infomercial
website with a stamp of approval from the various commercial links you
conveniently provide. The newsgroup charter prohibits commercial
posting. This is Usenet and not the WWW. You refuse to put up a
message board so we have to listen to the drool of websurfers. You so
far are the only lonely webmaster generating traffic for his site.
You've been joined by a few bloggers and a potential portal. It's a
matter of time before the group fills up with more special interest
links than discussion. If you can't say it here I'm not interested in
where you say it somewhere else. I'm not interested in anybody's blog,
website, portal. Anybody who uses the word intolerance is by
definition intolerant.

Jim

Mike Petro wrote:
> On 6 Sep 2005 09:21:38 -0700, "Space Cowboy" >
> wrote:
>
> >You don't have too. It is one of my stream of consciousness tea rants
> >brought on by lonely bloggers,webmasters,portals looking to generate
> >traffic for their own special interest.
>
> Don't worry Nico, I fall into that same category somewhere too because
> I have been the subject of many of the same specious rants for years
> now. Where I come from we call it "intolerance".

>No. This is usenet. I'll say whatever I damned well like, and you'll put my
>posts in your kill file if you don't like it. Sorry, but that's reality.

I certainly have no interest in censor anyone, Michael. I was just
suggesting that constructive criticism makes more sense than unprovoked
hostility and derision. Do you disagree? Sure, you or anyone else can
say what you like, but that doesn't entail that what you say makes
sense and cannot or shouldn't be objected to.

That said, upon reexamining your original post I saw the pun and I
actually laughed. It does, I think, nonetheless suggest that I want to
be some kind of puppet master of a forum and control what goes on. But,
as I think you now realize, the Wiki format is precisely not that at
all. It invites people to freely contribute to and edit posts.

To clarify once again, I at no point intended to antagonize anyone or
to suggest that this forum is inadequate. I simply had the idea that I
could contribute something that would be helpful to people.

>So, Nico, now that we've had this little chat, where are you from, and what
>is your favorite tea, and where do you get it?

I live in St. Paul, MN, where I recently graduated from Macalester
College with a major in philosophy. My favorite tea at the moment is
uncooked pu-ehr in its many incarnations, which I have really only
begun to explore. I find any vendors in China offer the best deals, but
I'm really a newbie at all of this.

Thank you, as well, for the very helpful input. That's all I was
looking for.

Regards,
Nico

>It is one of my stream of consciousness tea rants
>brought on by lonely bloggers,webmasters,portals looking to generate
>traffic for their own special interest.

I see nothing wrong with folks using this forum to spread information
or resources that people might find useful. I have found many such
resources through RFDT. It is, after all, fairly difficult just to find
a good online tea vendor, because there are so many mediocre ones (by
mediocre I mean overpriced, uninformed and carrying teas of lower
quality).

I also see no reason why RFDT needs to have a monopoly on all online
tea info. This is A forum, and forums have never been intended to be
isolated.

Regards,
Nico

>The newsgroup charter prohibits commercial
>posting. This is Usenet and not the WWW.

I understand your wariness to turn this forum into a commercial expose,
but, at the same time, there are a lot of resources on the WWW that can
be helpful, and can't simply be transplanted or completely conveyed on
this forum alone.

BTW, I'd like to know from people what is considered acceptable in
terms of linking to other sites. If I crossed the line, I apologize.

In Mike's defense, in the month or so that I've been here he's offered
MUCH more helpful advice than you have. In fact, I would have to say
that, while he seems to have no other motive than to offer lucid
guidance in an often confusing subject, you seem to spend quite a bit
of time antagonizing people, and not in a very lucid or constructive
way at that. I honestly don't mean to provoke you here, but your
relentless attacks on Mike call for some objections from a third party.
I'm just describing what I've observed.

>If you can't say it here I'm not interested in
>where you say it somewhere else. I'm not interested in anybody's blog,
>website, portal.

That's fine, Jim, but it should be clear that you hardly speak for
everyone.

And, for the record, I should state that the first time I became the
target of your ire is when I had the audacity to say I liked pu-ehr
with chrysanthemum (dare I say it again?). How does fit into your
objections?

Can I just say again that objecting to what someone says does not
entail an endorsement of censorship?

Nico

Space Cowboy wrote:
> You're the guy who steals my ideas from this group and uses it on your
> website under the guise of public domain.

Jim, that old song is getting lame. Just because you said that you used
a a tea can as a Rosetta Stone once doesn't entitle you to a
copyright on the word or the concept. My idea for a Puerh Rosetta Page
was spontaneous and was totally independent of anything you may have
ever said. The word is quite commonly used in reference to translations
of all kinds, it is practically a synonym for translation, for you to
think you are the only one who could think of it is rather arrogant.

Besides, hearing you bellyache about copyrights rings kind of hollow,
not to mention hypocritical, when you yourself openly condone defeating
copyright protection. http://tinyurl.com/9bvb8

> You run an infomercial
> website with a stamp of approval from the various commercial links you
> conveniently provide.

I guess you are reneging yet again, you said on 4/23/04 that "I'll take
your word you're website isn't a commercial venture". There is still to
this day nothing "commercial" about it Jim, I provide links to every
known online resource that I can find, whether they are commercial or
private is irrelevant as I provide them all as a public service and I
am affiliated with none of them. Calling it an infomercial is actually
slanderous, infomercials sell things, when have I ever offered anything
for sale on my website or on RFDT? Instead of being coy about my
sources, like you tend to be, I share what I learn with everyone. My
motives are simply to raise the quality/price/education bar in the
Western world. It is called a public service and judging by the traffic
it seems to be very popular in the online tea community, many of whom
frequent this group.

> The newsgroup charter prohibits commercial posting.

Another fine example of your ability to twist the truth on 2 counts.

1st) Nobody can "truthfully" call Pu-erh.net a commercial site as I
take great pains to NOT be associated with anything or anyone
commercial. I simply do "Consumer Reports" style reporting on the
Western Puerh world.

2nd) Show me specifically where the charter says that, because I think
you are GROSSLY misleading this group by making that statement. The
only quasi commercial reference is the prohibition of "advertising
herbal tea products".

BTW here is the actual charter lest anyone be swayed by Jim's hearsay.

"Discussion relating to tea, the world's second most consumed beverage
(after water), made by infusing or boiling the leaves of the tea plant
(C.
sinensis or close relatives) in water. Discussions of herbal teas
(e.g.
chamomile, sassafras, etc.) are also approved, but this newsgroup
should
NOT be used for advertising herbal tea products or discussing tea as
anything other than a beverage. Tea-as-medicine discussions should
take
place in misc.health.alternative."

The original thread can be found at http://tinyurl.com/cmznr


> This is Usenet and not the WWW. You refuse to put up a
> message board so we have to listen to the drool of websurfers. You so
> far are the only lonely webmaster generating traffic for his site.

Jim, I provide a public service, both here and on my website. What do
you offer this community other than a bunch of grief? I don't make
any money off of the site and nobody subsidizes my bills in any way.
Why should I pay extra money out of my pocket to put up a bulletin
board just to satisfy you? It isn't going to happen so just get over
it. I participate in the topics here that suite me, I was here long
before I made the website and I will be here long after it dies.

> If you can't say it here I'm not interested in
> where you say it somewhere else. I'm not interested in anybody's blog,
> website, portal.

Who died and made you the RFDT God? Just because you aren't interested
in something doesn't mean that others aren't, and it doesn't
meant that anyone who doesn't please you should go away either. I am
not interested in 90% of your irrational prose but yet you grace us
with it anyway, so why can't the rest of us say our piece?

Mike
www.pu-erh.net

Online tea vendors are a dime a dozen. It's a competitive market. If
they've been in business longer than a year they're probably okay. My
only advice is buy locally or on Ebay with a positive feedback rating
of higher than 20. That way I have the new sellers to myself who are
giving the stuff away like some dragon (large) and phoenix (small)
white tea pearls. There is no such thing as mediocre tea. It all
depends on your tastebuds. Your wallet can't make it taste any better.
RFDT is THE Record of Tea because Google never forgets. Anything else
is a server waiting to disappear. If you can't say it here you're
someone with a special interest elsewhere.

Jim

Nico wrote:
> >It is one of my stream of consciousness tea rants
> >brought on by lonely bloggers,webmasters,portals looking to generate
> >traffic for their own special interest.
>
> I see nothing wrong with folks using this forum to spread information
> or resources that people might find useful. I have found many such
> resources through RFDT. It is, after all, fairly difficult just to find
> a good online tea vendor, because there are so many mediocre ones (by
> mediocre I mean overpriced, uninformed and carrying teas of lower
> quality).
>
> I also see no reason why RFDT needs to have a monopoly on all online
> tea info. This is A forum, and forums have never been intended to be
> isolated.
>
> Regards,
> Nico

>Online tea vendors are a dime a dozen. It's a competitive market. If
>they've been in business longer than a year they're probably okay. My
>only advice is buy locally or on Ebay with a positive feedback rating
>of higher than 20. That way I have the new sellers to myself who are
>giving the stuff away like some dragon (large) and phoenix (small)
>white tea pearls. There is no such thing as mediocre tea. It all
>depends on your tastebuds. Your wallet can't make it taste any better.
>RFDT is THE Record of Tea because Google never forgets. Anything else
>is a server waiting to disappear. If you can't say it here you're
>someone with a special interest elsewhere.

>Jim

It's precisely BECAUSE there are so many vendors that refering to the
experience of others can be useful.

OK, as a matter of definition, something is mediocre ONLY in regard to
certain qualities which are valued. Of course it's subjective.

In almost every post directed to me, you suggest that I believe that
expensive teas are inherently better than cheaper ones. To my
knowledge, I've never said this. One of the points I have been able to
discern from you many rants is that you think most good tea can be
purchased in Asian markets (aka Chinatown). I don't know if you know
anything about Minneapolis, but there are indeed many Asian markets, at
which I shop all the time, and I do indeed buy tea from them regularly,
including CNNP cooked beengs and Xia Guan raw tuos. And yes, they are
good. And, believe it or not, I have gotten a lot of stuff off of ebay,
and it wasn't the most expensive stuff either.

To second Mike, who the hell are you to decide what is allowed in here
and what isn't? Do you ever take a moment to reflect on what you're
saying? Do you honestly think this forum is the be all and end all for
all tea info, and that NO other resource is of any use? What's it to
you, anyway, if someone posts a link or two, especially if other people
find those useful?

In all respect, you make very little sense. If you have a clear
critique of what I or Mike or anyone else says, I encourage you to post
it. If I'm full of it, tell me. But I just can't make any sense out of
this.

Nico

Thank you, Mike and Nico, for your recent statements regarding polite
behavior and general decorum. I surf the web and I also have blogged,
and therefore this Space Cowboy person refers to my opinions as
"drool." The guy doesn't know me, though I have often winced
through his egregious and execrable attacks against others.

Mike, I am grateful for the resources you have placed at my disposal,
and you sell nothing at your site. In fact, you must work assiduously
to create and maintain such a public-service. I can't begin to
imagine the countless hours you put into it so that other people may
benefit, yet some person, this Space Cowboy, attacks you? What has he
done for the common good? Where are Space Cowboy's accomplishments?
I wish to see them!

Nico, like you, I too am a newcomer to pu'er, and like you, I come
here to learn and not to encounter continual obfuscation, negativism,
and personal attacks. Neither you nor I nor anybody should come under
attack. Especially irritating is the lack of coherence in Space
Cowboy's rants. If one reads carefully his effusions with an attempt
to reach some understanding, one is bound for frustration.

A quick search of "Rosetta Stone" indicates many groups using the
metaphor, some to make money, so not. I'm certain the metaphor based
upon an archeological discovery pre-dates the use by this Space Cowboy
person or anybody using it for tea.

Nobody owns common metaphors. The idea is ridiculous. I'm certain
Champollion is laughing and rolling in his grave.

Grasshopper

I just brought the new guy up to speed so your accusation of
intolerance is in context. I first used the term Rosetta stone here
while you were an active poster. You change that story every time.
First it was public domain not copyright, then you couldn't have known
, and last serendipity. You're worse than Sasha fishing in other
groups for what people said but I stand by that statement because the
Supreme Court said I could do it for personal use and not because some
vendor tried to keep honest people honest. You say public service I
say infomercial with commercial links otherwise why not more links that
sells puerh? If you impose the criteria you're selling something. The
Charter taken as a whole prohibits commercial posting. We have a
hypocrite that accused TeaTalk of using the newsgroup for commercial
gain. This is a discussion group and if you can't say it here then
you're a special interest looking for traffic. 99% of what you say is
regurgitation so load up your site with hypertext anchors and provide
those for people who pay for bandwidth on newsgroup servers. Remember
this is Usenet and not WWW. I wouldn't want anybody chosen last for a
dodgeball team sticking up for me. The people most concered about God
are the sinners. If I don't care where you buy tea, then you don't
care where I do. All I can say if you recommend a site it is off my
list. I even changed puer sellers on Ebay. Now you can take a guess
and blabbermouth who you think that is. You're batting 50/50.

Jim

Mike Petro wrote:
> Space Cowboy wrote:
> > You're the guy who steals my ideas from this group and uses it on your
> > website under the guise of public domain.
>
> Jim, that old song is getting lame.
....

Space Cowboy wrote:
> I just brought the new guy up to speed so your accusation of
> intolerance is in context. I first used the term Rosetta stone here
> while you were an active poster. You change that story every time.

As I said Jim, lame, and rather trollish even. I say Troll because you
argue anything I have to say, right/left, black/white, even if I said
the the sun was shining you would argue it. I havent changed my stance
a bit, you simply change the way you twist the facts.

BTW, just because I was an active poster does NOT mean that I read your
post, I have been known to ignore and otherwise killfile many of your
posts due to your high S/N ratio and Ad Hominem attacks.


> You're worse than Sasha fishing in other
> groups for what people said but I stand by that statement because the
> Supreme Court said I could do it for personal use and not because some
> vendor tried to keep honest people honest.

So its okay for you to publicly teach people how to defeat copy
protection but its not ok for me to use the word "Rosetta"? Bit of a
double standard if you ask me. Your just peeved because you got caught.

> You say public service I
> say infomercial with commercial links otherwise why not more links that
> sells puerh?

Umm Jim, to my knowledge, I have the most complete list of vendors who
sell puerh that exisits in the English language. Show me a more
complete list and I will stand corrected but I think you are talking
out of your tail again.

> If you impose the criteria you're selling something. The
> Charter taken as a whole prohibits commercial posting.

Show me where Jim, in what twisted logic do you get that from, please
tell me. I quoted the actual charter and I dont see it in there
anywhere! Since I am not commercial your statement is groundless
anyway.


> We have a
> hypocrite that accused TeaTalk of using the newsgroup for commercial
> gain.

Once again you twist the facts, I got on their case for portraying that
this group was their own property, it was misleading at best. I dont
care if they linked to it, just portray it for what it is, they tried
to portray it as being theirs.

If you want to talk about being a hypocrite how about the fact that you
are now doing the EXACT same thing you criticized me for doing last
year when you said I should never buy tea off of ebay or the internet.
Look where you are buying your tea now!

<idiotic drivel sniped>

> I even changed puer sellers on Ebay. Now you can take a guess
> and blabbermouth who you think that is. You're batting 50/50.

Thats my point, I share information with others, you horde it..... If
you were truly intersted in contributing to the group you wouldnt be so
damn coy about everything.

Mike
www.pu-erh.net

> If you impose the criteria you're selling something.

Look, Jim. If Mike were selling something on his site, he would have be
getting money from someone. Unless you're willing to claim that vendors
pay him to put their links on his site, then your claim is simply
nonsense. Financial transactions are a necessary condition for selling.

Also, the term Rosetta Stone is a very commonly used metaphor. Just
take a look.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_stone

See especially the last section, "use as metaphor". (Man, wikipedia is
such a great resource...)

>This is a discussion group and if you can't say it here then
>you're a special interest looking for traffic

I think you're probably the only person who rejects any use of outside
online resources. Lots of other people link to them on this forum. Your
logic escapes me, and repeating something a lot doesn't make it true.
Even conceeding your point (a stretch), so what if Mike wants people to
visit his site? I'm glad I was able to find it through RFDT, because
it's super helpful, and this forum could not possibly contain all that
info in a systematic, accesible way. If somebody knows of a good online
resource, then I would consider myself worse off if they didn't share
it.

>You say public service I say infomercial with commercial links otherwise why not more >links that sells puerh?

If you think Mike is missing a vendor, why can't you just suggest one
like anyone else would. He provides his email in big ol' font at the
bottom of every page. I did a good amount of surfing for pu-erh before
I found his site, and thus far I haven't found a vendor with any kind
of selection that he's overlooked.

But I sense I might be wasting my time. I really doubt you're going to
concede any of these points. But maybe I can help you realize that your
highly negative and antagonizing posts here make it a less pleasant
place to be. I wouldn't be suprised if a few people have been put off
from posting here by it. In my book, what you're doing is far worse
than someone posting a link to some site, commercial or otherwise. If
you are indeed in the right, I challenge you to refute what I've said,
and not just repeat the same truisms.

If I'm way off base here, than I welcome everyone who thinks so to
openly call me out on it. I just think nonsense needs to be called by
what it is.

Nico

Nico

On 7 Sep 2005 14:36:02 -0700, "Space Cowboy" >
wrote:

>The
>Charter taken as a whole prohibits commercial posting.

Lets see, quoting from the original RFDT Charter documents:

From Thu Jan 12 14:07:15 1995
<snip>
Possible topics include:

- History of tea cultivation, trade, culture, etc.
- Tea preparation and service
- Effects of tea on health
- Relative merits of specific tea varieties, brands,
blends, etc.
- Where to find specific teas
<snip>

Pay particular attention to that last bullet....

The original thread can be found at http://tinyurl.com/cmznr

That's pretty much what I talk about when I am not defending myself
against your insipid attacks. So exactly how am I violating the
Charter? Please be specific Jim, VERY specific.

You know, when Sasha mentioned that you are actually a lawyer I was
floored. I used to think that Lawyers were getting a bum rap, but now
I see where all those odious Lawyer Jokes come from.

Mike Petro
http://www.pu-erh.net
"In this work, when it shall be found that much is omitted, let it not be forgotten that much likewise is performed."
Samuel Johnson, 1775, upon finishing his dictionary.

Hey Nico,

Might I suggest if you were going to do a Wiki for these purposes, I
agree with Michael that you should probably be able to drill down on
many different things. This is a little different than what I've seen
on a traditional Wiki, where the content is more free-form.

That being said, a looser Wiki-style with a tea-review thing integrated
into it would probably be kind of cool.


Nico wrote:
> That said, upon reexamining your original post I saw the pun and I
> actually laughed. It does, I think, nonetheless suggest that I want to
> be some kind of puppet master of a forum and control what goes on. But,
> as I think you now realize, the Wiki format is precisely not that at
> all. It invites people to freely contribute to and edit posts.

In article .com>,
"Nico" > wrote:


> In all respect, you make very little sense.

Hi Nico and all - the 'Space Cowboy' lives very well up
to his monicker. All I can tell you is it's best to ignore
him. I've had him plonked for many moons, and I like it
just fine. Whenever he does pop up in some quoted
text, it's always him and his bizzare vendetta against
a true web hero, Mike - a guy who has spent countless
hours putting together one of the best tea resources
on the web. His hatred is unaccountable, incredible.

I picture an angry old man, probably friendless, with
not much to do. Sympathy might be in order, but
give his comportment in this group all I can muster
is disdain and contempt.

Plonk him and have done with it - you won't miss
a thing, I promise..............p*

Space 9/7/05


> I just brought the new guy up to speed so your accusation of
> intolerance is in context. I first used the term Rosetta stone here
> while you were an active poster. You change that story every time.
> First it was public domain not copyright, then you couldn't have known
> , and last serendipity. You're worse than Sasha fishing in other
> groups for what people said but I stand by that statement because the
> Supreme Court said I could do it for personal use and not because some
> vendor tried to keep honest people honest. You say public service I
> say infomercial with commercial links otherwise why not more links that
> sells puerh? If you impose the criteria you're selling something. The
> Charter taken as a whole prohibits commercial posting. We have a
> hypocrite that accused TeaTalk of using the newsgroup for commercial
> gain. This is a discussion group and if you can't say it here then
> you're a special interest looking for traffic. 99% of what you say is
> regurgitation so load up your site with hypertext anchors and provide
> those for people who pay for bandwidth on newsgroup servers. Remember
> this is Usenet and not WWW. I wouldn't want anybody chosen last for a
> dodgeball team sticking up for me. The people most concered about God
> are the sinners. If I don't care where you buy tea, then you don't
> care where I do. All I can say if you recommend a site it is off my
> list. I even changed puer sellers on Ebay. Now you can take a guess
> and blabbermouth who you think that is. You're batting 50/50.
>
> Jim
>
> Mike Petro wrote:
>> Space Cowboy wrote:
>>> You're the guy who steals my ideas from this group and uses it on your
>>> website under the guise of public domain.
>>
>> Jim, that old song is getting lame.
> ...
>


Mike,

With due respect to you and others, Jim does have legal rights regarding the
use of the words "Rosetta Stone" on usenet in a tea context based in part on
his first use of the term in this regard. You guys misunderstand most of
what he writes because you do not read between the lines. A bit of tolerance
in his direction would be appeciated by what has become the silent majority
here for which I hopefully speak. Hope this helps.

Michael