General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Clarification reqested on grading meat

Started by Kswck · · Last activity · 118 posts · 2,503 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
21 July 2005
Last activity
26 July 2005
Original author
Kswck
Posts
118
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
2,503
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 21–40 of 118
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Bob said:
    Curly Sue said:
    Quoted message said:

    >Please adjust your meds. Grow up. Or get a life. Whichever applies.

    Aw pshaw. Sheldon deserves anything he gets.

    But we don't. That's the point. This is not rec.BobvSheldon!

    I think (that) Bob's anti-Sheldon posts are a helluva lot more entertaining
    than the bashing of Sandra Lee which so many people support. At least Bob's
    not talking behind Sheldon's back.

    Bob

    hey, maybe sandra should take sheldon on as co-host. now *that* would be
    entertaining!

    --

    saerah

    "It's not a gimmick, it's an incentive."- asterbark, afca

    aware of the manifold possibilities of the future

    "I think there's a clause in the Shaman's and Jujumen's Local #57 Union
    contract that they have to have reciprocity for each other's shop rules."
    -König Prüß

  2. Curly Sue <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 06:28:23 -0700, "The Ranger"


    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Curly Sue <[email hidden]> wrote in message


    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > [Dave pointing out Sue's logic problem]
    But we don't. That's the point.


    Don't speak for me. You don't have the right or privilege.
    I am quite capable of standing up for myself and don't
    need you as my mouthpiece.


    I wasn't speaking for you or to you. I'm speaking for those
    of us who come here for rec.food.cooking.

    [censored]. Unless I missed a post letting us know you are royalty, you
    were using the wrong pronoun. "We" is plural, and all inclussive. You
    overstepped your bounds by thinking you could be for me.

    As far as speaking for those that "come here for rfc" that's another
    pattented line of [censored]. You come here to read anything and
    everything that gets posted, while voicing your opinions on matters that
    have nothing whatsoever to do with rfc.

    Again, your own words, "Please adjust your meds. Grow up. Or get a
    life. Whichever applies."

    ObPseudoFood: Kraft Mac-n-Cheese.

    The Ranger

  3. The Ranger said:

    Curly Sue <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 06:28:23 -0700, "The Ranger"


    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Curly Sue <[email hidden]> wrote in message


    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    > > [Dave pointing out Sue's logic problem]
    > But we don't. That's the point.
    Don't speak for me. You don't have the right or privilege.
    I am quite capable of standing up for myself and don't
    need you as my mouthpiece.


    I wasn't speaking for you or to you. I'm speaking for those
    of us who come here for rec.food.cooking.

    [censored]. Unless I missed a post letting us know you are royalty, you
    were using the wrong pronoun. "We" is plural, and all inclussive. You
    overstepped your bounds by thinking you could be for me.

    What part of "rec.food.cooking" don't you understand? Regardless of
    what you might say, WE, meaning anyone who reads this group, is here
    for rec.food.cooking. Otherwise, you'd be someplace else. So don't
    give me that "oooo, you don't speak for me" baloney.

    You might enjoy Sheldon v. Bob, but the level of ugliness in the OP is
    grotesque. That might appeal to you, but it's indefensible.

    But you have my permission to try anyway.

    Sue(tm)
    Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!

  4. cathyxyz said:
    Curly Sue said:
    Dave Smith said:

    Curly Sue wrote:

    >
    >You might think that you're delivering a fatal wound to Sheldon by
    >posting his name in a subject, but you're just revealing yourself to
    >be a boor. RFC is a cooking group Bob, not your personal platform
    >for vendettas.
    >
    >And don't even try with the "But mommy, Sheldon started it!" or "Mommy
    >he said bad things about Italians." You're not doing much to maintain
    >the dignity of Italians and Italian-Americans.
    >
    >Please adjust your meds. Grow up. Or get a life. Whichever applies.
    >

    Aw pshaw. Sheldon deserves anything he gets.

    But we don't. That's the point. This is not rec.BobvSheldon!

    Sue(tm)
    Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!

    I assume you are using the term "we" in the Royal sense?

    No, I mean people who come to rec.food.cooking for cooking
    discussions.

    If I didn't

    Quoted message said:

    like what Pastorio said, I am quite capable of telling him myself. In
    this case I think Shelly got his "just desserts".

    Please re-read Bob's post. Do you seriously think it had any affect
    on Sheldon? Do you really get gratification out of reading such
    schoolyard name-calling? Read it- it's juvenile.

    Sue(tm)
    Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!

  5. Curly Sue said:

    You might enjoy Sheldon v. Bob, but the level of ugliness in the OP is
    grotesque. That might appeal to you, but it's indefensible.

    You'll have a little more credibility on that issue when you start
    complaining about the [censored] Sheldon posts. Until then, accept that he makes
    himself a target for venom.

  6. Curly Sue <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...
    [snip]

    Quoted message said:

    You might enjoy Sheldon v. Bob, but the level of ugliness
    in the OP is grotesque. That might appeal to you, but it's
    indefensible.

    And where, exactly, does Sheldon's beauty shine through? Certainly not
    when he goes on-and-on about someone's ethnicity.

    Oh, yeah. You _like_ that side of him and applaud his wit and charm
    during those outbursts... You and all the "we's" you included prior.

    Right.

    The Ranger

  7. Curly Sue said:

    On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 15:45:52 +0200, cathyxyz
    <[email hidden]> wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I assume you are using the term "we" in the Royal sense?

    No, I mean people who come to rec.food.cooking for cooking
    discussions.


    Well, as this thread has ceased to be a "cooking discussion", I fail to
    see why it still interests you so much.

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    If I didn't like what Pastorio said, I am quite capable of telling him myself. In
    this case I think Shelly got his "just desserts".

    Please re-read Bob's post. Do you seriously think it had any affect
    on Sheldon? Do you really get gratification out of reading such
    schoolyard name-calling? Read it- it's juvenile.

    Sue(tm)
    Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!

    It always amazes me that you always try to tell people what to do in
    this group, or give them your "permission". <sigh>. Who died and made
    you Boss?

    The point is, you do not have the right to speak for anyone other than
    yourself, so go easy on the "we".

    And if these posts offend you, my suggestion would be: don't read them.

    Cathy

  8. Dave Smith said:
    Curly Sue said:

    You might enjoy Sheldon v. Bob, but the level of ugliness in the OP is
    grotesque. That might appeal to you, but it's indefensible.

    You'll have a little more credibility on that issue when you start
    complaining about the [censored] Sheldon posts. Until then, accept that he makes
    himself a target for venom.

    I did not complain about Sheldon being a target of anything. The
    issue is Bob's post, creating a subject on rfc with someone's name in
    it, for the purpose of venting his spleen to no good purpose. It
    accomplishes nothing but raise the level of ugliness and lower the
    level of maturity.

    You're right. I don't complain about (or defend) Sheldon or Chung,
    Bob's other favorite aggression release. You also have a good point.
    After reading his wack-o post it's clear that Bob does belong in that
    category.

    Sue(tm)
    Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!

  9. cathyxyz said:
    Curly Sue said:

    On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 15:45:52 +0200, cathyxyz
    <[email hidden]> wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I assume you are using the term "we" in the Royal sense?

    No, I mean people who come to rec.food.cooking for cooking
    discussions.


    Well, as this thread has ceased to be a "cooking discussion", I fail to
    see why it still interests you so much.

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    If I didn't like what Pastorio said, I am quite capable of telling him myself. In
    this case I think Shelly got his "just desserts".

    Please re-read Bob's post. Do you seriously think it had any affect
    on Sheldon? Do you really get gratification out of reading such
    schoolyard name-calling? Read it- it's juvenile.

    Sue(tm)
    Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!

    It always amazes me that you always try to tell people what to do in
    this group, or give them your "permission". <sigh>. Who died and made
    you Boss?

    Yes, I am amazing.

    Quoted message said:

    The point is, you do not have the right to speak for anyone other than
    yourself, so go easy on the "we".

    We can do whatever we want, can't we?

    Quoted message said:

    And if these posts offend you, my suggestion would be: don't read them.

    If you don't like my posts, take your own advice.

    Sue(tm)
    Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!

  10. Curly Sue patted herself on the back and said:


    Yes, I am amazing.

    And don't forget modest too....

    Quoted message said:


    Quoted message said:

    The point is, you do not have the right to speak for anyone other than
    yourself, so go easy on the "we".

    We can do whatever we want, can't we?

    Quoted message said:

    And if these posts offend you, my suggestion would be: don't read them.

    If you don't like my posts, take your own advice.

    Sue(tm)
    Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!

    Yes, Boss. Anything you say, Boss.
    Cathy

  11. Shaun aRe said:

    Shldn strained and:

    <Removed by sanitation services>

    I see the senna pods kicked in then.

    Shaun aRe


    Be careful Shaun, or you will have the RFC-police after you too! 🙂
    Cheers
    Cathy

  12. "Curly Sue" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    cathyxyz said:
    Curly Sue said:

    On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 08:33:10 -0400, Dave Smith
    <[email hidden]> wrote:

    >Curly Sue wrote:
    >
    >
    >>
    >>You might think that you're delivering a fatal wound to Sheldon by
    >>posting his name in a subject, but you're just revealing yourself
    >>to
    >>be a boor. RFC is a cooking group Bob, not your personal platform
    >>for vendettas.
    >>
    >>And don't even try with the "But mommy, Sheldon started it!" or
    >>"Mommy
    >>he said bad things about Italians." You're not doing much to
    >>maintain
    >>the dignity of Italians and Italian-Americans.
    >>
    >>Please adjust your meds. Grow up. Or get a life. Whichever
    >>applies.
    >>
    >
    >Aw pshaw. Sheldon deserves anything he gets.

    But we don't. That's the point. This is not rec.BobvSheldon!

    Sue(tm)
    Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!

    I assume you are using the term "we" in the Royal sense?

    No, I mean people who come to rec.food.cooking for cooking
    discussions.

    If I didn't

    Quoted message said:

    like what Pastorio said, I am quite capable of telling him myself. In
    this case I think Shelly got his "just desserts".

    Please re-read Bob's post. Do you seriously think it had any affect
    on Sheldon? Do you really get gratification out of reading such
    schoolyard name-calling? Read it- it's juvenile.

    I really must disagree with you. I thought Bob's post was pertinent,
    concise and accurate.

    Ophelia

  13. Curly Sue said:
    Dave Smith said:
    Curly Sue said:

    You might enjoy Sheldon v. Bob, but the level of ugliness in the
    OP is grotesque. That might appeal to you, but it's
    indefensible.

    You'll have a little more credibility on that issue when you start
    complaining about the [censored] Sheldon posts. Until then, accept that
    he makes himself a target for venom.

    I did not complain about Sheldon being a target of anything.

    That wasn't what was being raised. It was about the absence of "when you
    start complaining about the [censored] Sheldon posts." What seems to be a
    blind spot. The point being that my few posts are significant carriers
    of the seeds of destruction, but Sheldon's are just, "Oh, well, that's
    how he is..." and not noted.

    Quoted message said:

    The issue is Bob's post, creating a subject on rfc with someone's
    name in it, for the purpose of venting his spleen to no good purpose.
    It accomplishes nothing but raise the level of ugliness and lower the
    level of maturity.

    But when Sheldon does it, no comment from you. When Sheldon does it day
    after day, no comment. When Sheldon calls people incredible, pejorative
    names for the sheer delight of vulgarity, no comment. When Sheldon
    denigrates people because he thinks they might have made a mistake and
    he invents bizarre perversions about their mother's sexual habits, no
    comment. Ethnic slurs, no comment. He's been doing it for years and you
    finally notice the "level of ugliness" done in direct response to
    Sheldon's relentless malice - finally, a comment; but nothing for Sheldon.

    Quoted message said:

    You're right. I don't complain about (or defend) Sheldon or Chung,
    Bob's other favorite aggression release. You also have a good point.
    After reading his wack-o post it's clear that Bob does belong in
    that category.

    I'm truly sorry that I've distressed you. And I'm a tad distressed that
    you can't seem to grasp the inconsistency of your position. That Sheldon
    does what he does day after day, week after week, month after month,
    year after year and you have nothing to say about "the level of ugliness
    [and] the level of maturity." When he's given some of his own in return,
    suddenly you come awake, and throw a few namecalling grenades of your own.

    Chung crossposted to this group and all the others he could find to
    which I've ever posted with the very specific intention of creating the
    very opinion you carry; to embarrass me and to create negative feelings.
    He, apparently accurately, surmised it would finally reflect badly on me
    and some people here would blame me for his actions. It seems to have
    stuck with you. Looks like another blind spot.

    There's always the killfile.

    Pastorio

  14. Curly Sue said:
    Quoted message said:

    You'll have a little more credibility on that issue when you start
    complaining about the [censored] Sheldon posts. Until then, accept that he makes
    himself a target for venom.

    I did not complain about Sheldon being a target of anything. The
    issue is Bob's post, creating a subject on rfc with someone's name in
    it, for the purpose of venting his spleen to no good purpose. It
    accomplishes nothing but raise the level of ugliness and lower the
    level of maturity.

    But as I said, Sheldon deserves anything dished his way because of his
    cybertourettes. I have to admit that I have not generally in favour of this
    sort of thing in a news group, but Sheldon makes himself fair game for spleen
    venting when so many of his posts are childishly profane, vulgar and just plain
    silly. He passes himself off as an expert and then gives blatantly false
    information. Then he dares to lock horns with a professional chef who
    obviously knows a lot more about cooking than he.

    Quoted message said:

    You're right. I don't complain about (or defend) Sheldon or Chung,
    Bob's other favorite aggression release. You also have a good point.
    After reading his wack-o post it's clear that Bob does belong in that
    category.

    Is Chung still here? He went into the filter a long time ago along with subject
    lines that have anything to do with him.

  15. "Curly Sue" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    What part of "rec.food.cooking" don't you understand? Regardless of
    what you might say, WE, meaning anyone who reads this group, is here
    for rec.food.cooking. Otherwise, you'd be someplace else. So don't
    give me that "oooo, you don't speak for me" baloney.

    If it's gonna make anyone happier, I will gladly give Sue
    my proxy to speak for me on this topic, based on what she's
    said so far. There, the use of "we" is now completely
    legitimate from any perspective you like, and we can HOPEFULLY
    get back to discussing food and cooking. (I wish...)

    Bob M.

  16. Bob Myers said:

    "Curly Sue" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    What part of "rec.food.cooking" don't you understand? Regardless of
    what you might say, WE, meaning anyone who reads this group, is here
    for rec.food.cooking. Otherwise, you'd be someplace else. So don't
    give me that "oooo, you don't speak for me" baloney.

    If it's gonna make anyone happier, I will gladly give Sue
    my proxy to speak for me on this topic, based on what she's
    said so far. There, the use of "we" is now completely
    legitimate from any perspective you like, and we can HOPEFULLY
    get back to discussing food and cooking. (I wish...)


    Or switch the debate to Mandarin, where there is one "we" that means
    "all of us" and another that means "me and him but not you". -aem

  17. Dave Smith said:

    Is Chung still here? He went into the filter a long time ago along
    with subject lines that have anything to do with him.

    I believe Chung spawned more separate filters in my newsreader than any
    other one person. Him, his name in subjects, various topics, and
    assorted newsgroups that he would cross-post to.

    On the subject of Sheldumb, he's a vile person who should be roundly
    ignored. He craves attention.

    Brian

  18. On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 13:07:38 -0400, "Bob (this one)" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    Chung crossposted to this group and all the others he could find to
    which I've ever posted with the very specific intention of creating the
    very opinion you carry; to embarrass me and to create negative feelings.
    He, apparently accurately, surmised it would finally reflect badly on me
    and some people here would blame me for his actions. It seems to have
    stuck with you. Looks like another blind spot.

    There's always the killfile.

    Pastorio

    I know!!!! Why don't you use one???

    Sue(tm)
    Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!

  19. Curly Sue said:
    Bob (this one) said:

    Chung crossposted to this group and all the others he could find to
    which I've ever posted with the very specific intention of creating the
    very opinion you carry; to embarrass me and to create negative feelings.
    He, apparently accurately, surmised it would finally reflect badly on me
    and some people here would blame me for his actions. It seems to have
    stuck with you. Looks like another blind spot.

    There's always the killfile.

    Pastorio

    I know!!!! Why don't you use one???

    Touche... good riposte.

    Except I'm not the one having all this gastric distress. All these
    off-topic posts... whatever has this group come to?

    Um...

    Pastorio

  20. On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 17:03:55 -0400, "Bob (this one)" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:
    Curly Sue said:
    Bob (this one) said:

    Chung crossposted to this group and all the others he could find to
    which I've ever posted with the very specific intention of creating the
    very opinion you carry; to embarrass me and to create negative feelings.
    He, apparently accurately, surmised it would finally reflect badly on me
    and some people here would blame me for his actions. It seems to have
    stuck with you. Looks like another blind spot.

    There's always the killfile.

    Pastorio

    I know!!!! Why don't you use one???

    Touche... good riposte.

    Except I'm not the one having all this gastric distress. All these
    off-topic posts... whatever has this group come to?

    But you are indeed the one with the agita. Obviously Sheldon gets to
    you in a serious way. If you put him in your killfile or ignore his
    posts, the problem goes away on so many levels.

    Sue(tm)
    Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.