mara@panix.UUCP (Mara Chibnik) (02/01/90)
In article <1532@umigw.MIAMI.EDU> aem@mthvax.cs.miami.edu writes: calls for discussion of establishing an unmoderated newsgroup to include only recipes: >it seems that a separate newsgroup for just recipes would be a *real good >idea*. rec.food.cooking would remain for discussions of technique, >equipment, ingredients and so on, and the new group would solely be recipes. I think it's a sad idea. For many reasons. The only impoartant reason is, of course, that I like the group the way it is. ;-) But there are justifications, or explanations. First, I'm not really sure what a recipe is. Suppose someone asks how to make an omelet, complaining about always getting scrambled eggs (or vice versa). The answer, which I think might reasonably be posted as SCRAMBLED EGGS: RECIPE (or omelet, ditto) is really a presentation of technique. And maybe also of equipment. Second, if you separate these discussions you lose their synergy. I posted a recipe that I thought of when someone asked about a technique that I use in the recipe. I've seen other people do the same thing. There are recipes that I think of trying because I've seen them in the context of some interesting discussion of techniques or equipment or ingredients. There are other complications, too. Someone recently asked for inexpensive recipes. But it's not easy to figure out what someone else finds inexpensive. My cheapest recipes use the staples that *I* have on hand; if I need to buy something that I wouldn't otherwise have around, even if it doesn't cost a lot, it costs *me* more. Finally, it isn't clear to me whether the recipes would be (or ought to be) crossposted to rec.food.cooking. If enough people think it's worth the effort to cull the recipe articles from rec.food.cooking and spend the bandwidth on presenting them in a separate group, I probably wouldn't vote against it. (This isn't a commitment; I'm open to discussion.) But I wouldn't vote for it either. If it's meant to take the recipes out of rec.food.cooking, my vote is clearly no. -- TRY MAIL TO apple!panix!mara mara@panix.uucp cmcl2!panix!mara Mara Chibnik Life is too important to be taken seriously.
wbt@cbnews.ATT.COM (William B. Thacker) (02/02/90)
In article <2359@ruuinf.cs.ruu.nl> piet@cs.ruu.nl (Piet van Oostrum) writes: > ` >I am also in favor of the group. But the issues above suggest a moderated >newsgroup, just for the purpose of filtering out non-recipes and setting >the follow-up field to rec.food.cooking. This can be handled almost >automatically (one keystroke per message). Even easier than that. >Another issue that comes up is the format of the recipes. Alt.gourmand had >a consistent format, so that you can print a nice cookbook. What about the >new group? If we decide to moderate the group, it may even be possible to find a moderator willing to maintain an archive, as (I think) was done with alt.gourmand. Also, the moderator could use a consistent set of keywords; e.g., "vegetarian, low-salt, Chinese, salad". This would aid in menu planning and such. I don't think moderation is *necessary*, but I certainly can't see any way it would hurt (except that postings would be delayed about a day... big deal.) I believe it would improve the group, overall. - - - - - - - - valuable coupon - - - - - - - clip and save - - - - - - - - Bill Thacker AT&T Network Systems - Columbus wbt@cbnews.att.com Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero
dak1@cbnewsi.ATT.COM (darren.a.kall) (02/10/90)
Yes, absolutely! I know that there are recipe searchers who are only interested in recipes and not discussion. I know because I am one. It is not always easy to tell from the title if there is a recipe present in text. This requires reading the first screen full of a posting. This is an annoying waste of time. I vote for the creation of a new re.food.recipes group. darren Kall att!hocpa!dak 201-834-1620