Huh? How's That Again ???

One time on Usenet said:

Quoting from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biryani

In Bangladesh, Tehari refers to Biryani prepared
by adding the meat to the rice, as opposed to
traditional Biryani where the rice is added to
the meat.

I think they mean that Tehari is mostly rice with some meat
added to it, but traditional Biryani is a meat dish with less
rice added. But even if I'm right, their description sounds
goofy...

--
Jani in WA

Mark Thorson said:

Quoting from:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biryani

In Bangladesh, Tehari refers to Biryani prepared
by adding the meat to the rice, as opposed to
traditional Biryani where the rice is added to
the meat.

Isn't Wiki fun?

I just realized that chilaquiles isn't what I thought it was. Migas is
actually what I enjoy making and eating.

And I think Wiki's definition of mole sauce makes the most sense to
me.

Karen

Mark Thorson said:

Quoting from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biryani

In Bangladesh, Tehari refers to Biryani prepared
by adding the meat to the rice, as opposed to
traditional Biryani where the rice is added to
the meat.

I wish Shankar were still posting. Here is what appears to be a more
congent definition, in a discussion by real East Bengalis, it seems:
<http://www.banglacricket.com/alochona/archive/index.php/t-22008.html>.

Victor

On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 23:57:05 +0200, [email hidden] (Victor Sack)

Quoted message said:

Mark Thorson said:

Quoting from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biryani

In Bangladesh, Tehari refers to Biryani prepared
by adding the meat to the rice, as opposed to
traditional Biryani where the rice is added to
the meat.

I wish Shankar were still posting. Here is what appears to be a more
congent definition, in a discussion by real East Bengalis, it seems:
<http://www.banglacricket.com/alochona/archive/index.php/t-22008.html>.

Victor

where is shankar? i'd forgotten about him. very knowledgeable
fellow.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy said:

where is shankar? i'd forgotten about him. very knowledgeable
fellow.

He posts very occasionally on uk.* food groups. I'm pretty sure he left
rfc because it is regularly drowned in OT and other garbage and because
most people with with some serious knowledge of, or interest in anything
food-related have left.

Victor

On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 23:54:19 +0200, [email hidden] (Victor Sack)

Quoted message said:

blake murphy said:

where is shankar? i'd forgotten about him. very knowledgeable
fellow.

He posts very occasionally on uk.* food groups. I'm pretty sure he left
rfc because it is regularly drowned in OT and other garbage and because
most people with with some serious knowledge of, or interest in anything
food-related have left.

Victor

too bad.

your pal,
blake

In article <[email hidden]>,

blake murphy said:

On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 23:54:19 +0200, [email hidden] (Victor Sack)

Quoted message said:

blake murphy said:

where is shankar? i'd forgotten about him. very knowledgeable
fellow.

He posts very occasionally on uk.* food groups. I'm pretty sure he left
rfc because it is regularly drowned in OT and other garbage and because
most people with with some serious knowledge of, or interest in anything
food-related have left.

You don't have to be "pretty sure". He posted several times before he
actually left, threatening that if the [censored] didn't stop, he was gone.
It didn't stop, and he is gone. It's a pity, but what can we do?

Dan Abel said:

Quoted message said:

(Victor Sack) said:

blake murphy <[email hidden]> wrote:

> where is shankar? i'd forgotten about him. very knowledgeable
> fellow.

He posts very occasionally on uk.* food groups. I'm pretty sure he left
rfc because it is regularly drowned in OT and other garbage and because
most people with with some serious knowledge of, or interest in anything
food-related have left.

You don't have to be "pretty sure". He posted several times before he
actually left, threatening that if the [censored] didn't stop, he was gone.
It didn't stop, and he is gone.

I do not recall a single such post of his. Could you point me to one?
Actually I highly doubt you could, as threatening to withdraw his person
has always been as far as possible from Shankar's style. Rather, his
occasional posts on the subject can be exemplified by this one:
<http://groups.google.com/group/rec.food.cooking/msg/b58e4e2254dda34a>.
The visigoths have since prevailed.

Quoted message said:

It's a pity, but what can we do?

I guess it is pretty obvious, if it is the general "we" you are
addressing.

Victor

In article <[email hidden]>,

(Victor Sack) said:

Dan Abel said:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] (Victor Sack) wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You don't have to be "pretty sure". He posted several times before he
actually left, threatening that if the [censored] didn't stop, he was gone.
It didn't stop, and he is gone.

I do not recall a single such post of his. Could you point me to one?
Actually I highly doubt you could, as threatening to withdraw his person
has always been as far as possible from Shankar's style.

I remember several, although I can't find them now. We all have time
constraints, and he just didn't want to wade through the off-topic
posts.

In article <[email hidden]>,

blake murphy said:

where is shankar? i'd forgotten about him. very knowledgeable
fellow.

your pal,
blake

Working hard. Looking for jars. :-)
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://www.jamlady.eboard.com - story and
pics of Ronald McDonald House dinner posted 6-24-2007

Dan Abel said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

(Victor Sack) said:

Dan Abel <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> [email hidden] (Victor Sack) wrote:
You don't have to be "pretty sure". He posted several times before he
actually left, threatening that if the [censored] didn't stop, he was gone.
It didn't stop, and he is gone.

Quoted message said:

I do not recall a single such post of his. Could you point me to one?
Actually I highly doubt you could, as threatening to withdraw his person
has always been as far as possible from Shankar's style.

I remember several, although I can't find them now. We all have time
constraints, and he just didn't want to wade through the off-topic
posts.

I remember those too, in fact there were entire sub-threads with
Shankar saying he was fed up and if things didn't change he would
leave. I liked Shankar, he was knowlegeable but was also willing to
discuss other points of view, accept his errors, and learn from
others. It's been quite a few years now that he's been gone from rfc,
too bad.

Sheldon