todd@reed.UUCP (Todd Ellner) (11/04/85)
*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***
This is another vote for mod.recipies
Todd Ellnercraig@dcl-cs.UUCP (Craig Wylie) (11/07/85)
In article <2103@reed.UUCP> todd@reed.UUCP (Todd Ellner) writes: >This is another vote for mod.recipies > > Todd Ellner Not again -- where is the demonstrated volume of postings, I haven't seen a single recipie on the network (if I'm looking in the wrong places then sorry and could you please re-direct me to the news groups that contain said postings). Most recipies are available via your local bookshop, unless we are actually talking about creat(e)ing new recipies then this must be an un-needed load on the system. Unless otherwise shown a volume of postings:- A no vote for net.recipies Craig.
tomb@tekecs.UUCP (Tom Beach) (11/14/85)
> Not again -- where is the demonstrated volume of postings, I haven't seen > a single recipie on the network (if I'm looking in the wrong places > then sorry and could you please re-direct me to the news groups > that contain said postings). > > A no vote for net.recipies > > > Craig. I don't know where you're looking, or even if you really are, but you'll FIND them in net.cooks, normally in response to a: can somebody give me a ... ? type message. I don't count, but I'd estimate we're looking at 10-20 recipe postings/ week. Not massive volume, but significant. BTW you're the first no vote to ~12 Yes. Some of these are in fact original, others are referenced to the original source. Have we enough votes to act on this yet? If not, how many do we need? -- Tom Beach email: ..tektronix!tekecs!tomb "The past is another country; they do things differently there."
clewis@mnetor.UUCP (Chris Lewis) (11/15/85)
I'd normally mail this directly, but Tom seems to have provided the very reason for not making net.recipes. In article <5835@tekecs.UUCP> tomb@tekecs.UUCP (Tom Beach) writes: >> Not again -- where is the demonstrated volume of postings, I haven't seen >> a single recipie on the network (if I'm looking in the wrong places >I don't know where you're looking, or even if you really are, >but you'll FIND them in net.cooks, normally in response to a: Where else should recipes be than in net.cooks? If net.recipes was initiated, what would be left in net.cooks? Not much. And, almost everything could be legitimately cross-posted to *both*. Ask yourself, what things are in cookbooks? recipes. What else? Stuff highly related to recipes. What else? Nutrition? That's a recipe too! Count me as a no. Maybe your question should be "should we change the name of net.cooks to net.recipes". No to that too. (then where would the rest of the stuff in net.cooks go?) -- Chris Lewis, UUCP: {allegra, linus, ihnp4}!utzoo!mnetor!clewis BELL: (416)-475-8980 ext. 321
suze@terak.UUCP (Suzanne Barnett) (11/18/85)
> I'd normally mail this directly, but Tom seems to have provided > the very reason for not making net.recipes. > > In article <5835@tekecs.UUCP> tomb@tekecs.UUCP (Tom Beach) writes: > >> Not again -- where is the demonstrated volume of postings, I haven't seen > >> a single recipie on the network (if I'm looking in the wrong places > > >I don't know where you're looking, or even if you really are, > >but you'll FIND them in net.cooks, normally in response to a: > > Where else should recipes be than in net.cooks? If net.recipes > was initiated, what would be left in net.cooks? Not much. > And, almost everything could be legitimately cross-posted to *both*. > Ask yourself, what things are in cookbooks? recipes. What else? > Stuff highly related to recipes. What else? Nutrition? That's a recipe > too! > > Count me as a no. > > Maybe your question should be "should we change the name of net.cooks > to net.recipes". No to that too. (then where would the rest of the > stuff in net.cooks go?) > -- > Chris Lewis, > UUCP: {allegra, linus, ihnp4}!utzoo!mnetor!clewis > BELL: (416)-475-8980 ext. 321 The discussion of a new group arose in net.cooks to allow a net cookbook to be created. There is a LOT of discussion in net.cooks that doesn't include recipes: the best type of cookware; is it a good idea or not to get a microwave oven and why; I'm having a problem getting something to turn out right, anyone have any suggestions on how to make whatever work; requests for recipes; etc. A new group should be created that is a "subgroup" of net.cooks, such as "mod.cooks.recipes." I say mod. rather than net. since a volunteer has stepped forward to moderate it and edit any posted recipes as needed to format them for a net cookbook. -- ************************************************************** Suzanne Barnett-Scott uucp: ...{decvax,ihnp4,noao,savax,seismo}!terak!suze phone: (602) 998-4800 us mail: CalComp/Sanders Display Products Division (Formerly Terak Corporation) 14151 N 76th street, Scottsdale, AZ 85260
krossen@bbncca.ARPA (Ken Rossen) (11/21/85)
In article <887@terak.UUCP> suze@terak.UUCP (Suzanne Barnett) writes: > The discussion of a new group arose in net.cooks to allow a net > cookbook to be created. Yes. I am a great fan of net.cooks and I remember this. I thought it was a silly idea then, and what with non-technical newsgroups under closer scrutiny every day by them that pays the bills, I think it's an even sillier idea. You're telling me you can't get a "net cookbook" out of what already exists in net.cooks? I can, and do. I save the recipes I want, and I print them and put them in a binder. Why is this so hard? Yes, I know. The idea was to keep them in nroff source form. This perk hardly justfifies an increase in net traffic. People WILL double-post their recipes to net.cooks and net.recipes. > A new group should be created that is a "subgroup" of net.cooks, such > as "mod.cooks.recipes." I say mod. rather than net. since a volunteer > has stepped forward to moderate it and edit any posted recipes as > needed to format them for a net cookbook. I remember this too, and I say, let him save all recipes posted to net.cooks and accept recipes by mail. He can format them and maintain a net cookbook on his machine, and people who want a copy can send him mail. He can periodically post a BRIEF announcement of same in net.cooks. But I seriously doubt the cost of sending mod.recipes around the world is justified by the number of people who feel the need to have their recipes formatted "just so," especially when additional USENET traffic, particularly non-technical traffic, is at such a premium. net.recipes is a BAD idea. mod.recipes is also a bad idea. We don't need increased traffic that supplies no additional information to what exists. So a net.cooks reader votes NO to net.recipes in any form. -- Ken Rossen ...!{decvax,ihnp4,ima,linus,harvard,seismo}!bbncca!krossen --- or --- krossen@bbnccp.arpa