Carrot Top

It would seem to me that there are room for both, as jamiemaw said. But when someone starts discussing another persons professional business (restaurant, book, writings, cooking class, whatever) it would seem important to disclose anything that *could* be taken to show professional involvement in the field or connection to the person being discussed. That way an closer analysis can be given to the opinions being espoused.

That might be me that you are speaking of. I added my own sig line and real name to eGullet several months ago after considering the situation with "screen-names" when the thread discussing screen names was closed and the comment made by management that screen names were *not* really encouraged, or not encouraged as the only name provided. Previous to that, I had thought that screen names/nicknames *were* something encouraged - it seemed so to me because there were so many on-site, including forum hosts and at the time I joined it must not have been standard policy for forum hosts to provide their names as sig lines. As to the other food board, I have put my real name on there originally but removed it after getting a better sense of the place. It did *not* seem a happy place to be. I would hope that any place that *was* intent on making its users feel comfortable (as I believe eGullet does for the most part) would not incur this sense of unsurety as to motives of board management and operations. I removed my name from the other site *because* of these reasons. I post rarely there. eGullet seems to be demanding a higher level of professionalism in the ways in which it expects its users to interact. Therefore they *will* get my real name. Edited to add: Yesterday for a while there was no sig line for me. (If we need analyze each other's behavior and point fingers as to who is "merrily posting" (?) and other personal notes that must have taken some good detective work and a willingness to gossip about it, also, perhaps - for the intent of adding to the important information on this subject.) The reason being that I had asked to have my screen name changed to my real name and expected it to occur. It did not, due to record-keeping needs. Que sera.

The most startling story of food in the car was related to me in a "thank-you" card from a sixth grade student after a cookery/social studies fun activity with corn that I did one day at the school. (Here's a link to the activity:) Corny Kids Stuff The thank-you note said: "The corn was really good. My mom ate it in the car while she was driving me to soccer practice." Raw corn on the cob. With bits of butter and seasoning. Wrapped in wax paper ready to "microwave" (what can I say. How else to educate the non-cooking to the life of real corn but to make it too simple to avoid making). The life of a modern-day Mom with no time to eat, shown as she bites into an ear of raw corn as she drives along. . . ..

I can not remember proportions at the moment of coffee to water in bulk (but you can figure that out by using the general rule for coffee with minor adjustment depending how strong you'd like it to be) - but two notes: Allow a cup and a half per person if you can portion-wise and allow one minute brewing time per cup with those urns. If it is a 50C urn allow 50 minutes from when you plug it in for it to be ready.

These are serious things we are discussing and of course eGullet is not the only place on the internet that the right to privacy of the individual is being weighed and assessed against the considered greater good of society. Cyberspace is the new Wild West. There is great opportunity, all sorts of freedoms that would be inconceivable other places, and all the potentials that come with that for good or for bad. But the Wild West of the internet *is* becoming a more populated and settled place now. Will the shape it takes resemble the more typical forms of media we have already in existence? There is so much that *is* so very different about this form of communication that I personally doubt it. Last night I went to sleep worried about this. On a deeper level than just the level that worries about "professionalism". Though the concept of professionalism is never moot. Or it shouldn't be. What initially struck me last night while reading this thread was the fear. . .the fear, yes - I did not want to say it for I try to ignore gender as much as I can unless it is in pleasant thoughts - that existed about being stalked, being hurt, the fear of the hunted. . .that many women posting had defined as being part and parcel of the innate possibilities here. This is not to be taken lightly in any way. I wish it were not *mostly* we women that were subject to these ideas and realities, but as Steven mentioned, we are. But part of what is going on here is that *we* all of us, are defining reality during this process. The reality of action and of thought. Let me give you an example: In the field of Communications, it is now a proven theory that people who watch television in any amount above the miminal have a view of the world that is different than those who do not watch television. The media is the message. Television displays images that have a high emotional content level that often are skewed towards the sorts of stories that will grab attention. Often these stories are about terrible things happening. Of course, even the news broadcasts are spun this way. People who watch television have views of the world as a much more terrible place than people who do not. They mistrust everything on a much higher level, imposing this mistrust on even the innocuous that might not deserve it, in life. We shape our world with our perceptions. The world *does* act and react in large and small ways to the ways in which we think and act within it. It seems to me that we are building a world that nobody trusts. I really don't like this idea. ....................................................... Are there dangers *out there* in the world? Of course there are. I know them well and know them personally. I won't list my own personal experiences at length here but they are not on the more pleasant side of category. As a fourteen-year old runaway to New York City in the early 1970's there were many terrible things that happened. And then as a corporate manager at Goldman Sachs there were terrible things that happened too, all in a day's work. It can happen anywhere, these bad things. To anyone. In any environment. But here is the kicker: Let's remember that *most* bad things that happen to people, to women, happen with someone they know, someone close to them. I refuse to be terrorized into being a nameless being by the a**holes out there. To react and walk around as if feeling the need for protection, to me, is anethema. It tastes bad. And it shapes who we are and it shapes who they are. Who is *really* holding the reins when we react and live our lives in fear? ........................................................................ There are bullies everywhere. If we create a society (either here in cyberspace or out in the world) where they do not have to even be *asked* to give a real name (in a form that the public can see along with the words they are writing of opinion), the playground is much more open for them to enter. No, I don't think that knowing the name someone gives as real will lessen some very real problems. But it *is* a step towards definition of an environment where it is clear that truth is being asked for, and in a real way. We need more truth, in real ways. And we need to stop being pushed around by bullies who push our internal fear buttons. Maggie asked earlier that we discuss the advantages to using professional names. This, is my answer. When we *become* professional, we summon the entitlement that comes along with it. We raise the spectre of responsibility and the definitions of authority. The playing field is equalled in some indefineable way when we act as professionals. There is a bar that must be met in terms of how one acts. Nothing wrong with this, to my mind.

It is also possible that a disgruntled server or a line cook could use the guise of a pseudonym to post misleading comments without bearing the responsibility of the act. It would seem that even *if* a website requested users to register with their real names, the procedures neccesary to guarantee the veracity of the information would be quite cumbersome in any large website.

Nobody can finally ever really hope to know anothers true intent (sometimes even if you are married to them). Sometimes we don't even have full knowledge of our own true intent unless we take the time to be contemplative about ourselves and the ways we act and the things we desire. The idea of providing your name when posting opinion on a subject in a public place seems to me to be one way of embracing professionalism in the act of posting your opinion. It is one step towards creating credibility - not a full step, that is for sure, but it is a good-will gesture towards the attainment of it. This media *is* very different from print media. Who knows if it would ultimately be productive or useful or not? I like the idea because it sets a firmer tone of reality upon what can sometimes seem to be a very flaky place: cyberspace. Does anyone know of any websites with boards where real names *are* required? And if so, *is* there a greater level of accountability and/or credibility attached to the site in terms of reputation and content?

I am in full agreement with your points.

When the children come home in about half an hour, it is going to be just the time to make our own version of arroz con mango. Today it will be several pounds of frozen shrimp (defrosted, silly) quickly sauteed in a bit of olive oil then tossed with half a container of "Jack's Special Salsa" and simmered briefly with the bit of heavy cream that is in the carton. Served with half a baguette I threw into the freezer the other day. If they are good, that is. If they are bad, then I will have to chase them around hitting them on their heads with that frozen baguette, now won't I.

Thank you for sharing those two very touching stories, Steve. And thoughts sent - to Yach and Ed.

Don't say it too loud. We don't have dingos here *yet*. You might put some ideas into those busy little coffee-drinking parental heads.

I can not think of any thing the microwave does *better* than any traditional method - though sometimes quicker/easier when heating liquids - with one exception. Melting white chocolate.

Reminds me of two stories heard recently: In a small town in West Virginia near here (you will imagine how small when I tell you this story made both the local newspaper *and* the local TV news channel ) one of the guys that lived about five miles out of town (a mere walk over the hill) was having car problems. It would start and stop, make funny noises, start and stop again. Being a country guy, he checked all the usual suspect things that he could, then assumed it had to be a computerized component. Had to get the car to town to the garage. It took him about an hour to get there with all the starts and stops, but finally he made it. Slow day at the garage and besides, they were all his buds so they started searching for the problem. They could not figure it out either, so they all sat down to drink bad coffee, eat Tastee-Cakes and shoot the breeze waiting for an inspiration. As one of the guys sat facing the car, he heard a noise emit from it. A funny squeaky strangly noise. He hadn't had any liquor that morning, so it surprised him. "Did you hear that?!" he asked his friends. They all listened, and yes, again they heard it. Walking over to the car, they looked under the hood again. This time, with a flashlight, they searched every nook and cranny. There it was. A patch of fur was showing inbetween two parts of car where nobody has assumed that *any* thing Ford hadn't made, would fit. It was one of them durn raccoons. They had to take almost the entire insides of the car out to set the thing free - and when he was set free he just waddled placidly off to the bit of field in back of the garage, apparently none the worse for wear. The owner of the car was worse for wear though - three hundred dollars the worse for wear. Buddies or not, that garage bill had to be paid. .......................................................... I was channel surfing several months ago and ran into a show called "Pimp My Car". Naturally, the children shouted out excitedly that this was something they *must* see! I sat down to check it out. Apparently what they do on this show is well. . .pimp up peoples rotten old cars. They take an old junker and re-do it, but re-do it in a certain uh. . ."style". Pimp style. So to speak. The woman on the show had a tiny old car from the seventies and apparently she had been eating her meals in it since she owned it (she was college-age) and the person who had owned it before her must have been also. It was disgusting. Spills, crumbs, torn upholstery. The guys started to tear it apart and voila! What ran out but about a dozen RATS. Yes, rats. They had made a nest somewhere under the back seat and were living there! Living the Life of Riley, too, with all the food pieces they could find. The guys had to get face covers to clean the thing out for fear of inhaling the droppings which were. . .everywhere. .......................................................................... Sigh. Yes I eat in the car. Two children who have had long drives to make twice a month for several years are my excuse. If we take the time to stop the car and eat the drive will take close to two more hours than it does. So I can inform you that the current rate for a detailing job by a professional is $150. Sigh again.

There you go. Multi-cultural exchange at its best.

MFK Fisher and potatoes: How to Cook a Wolf

Put us together and you've got a Top Gifted Gourmet Carrot. Suitable for many purposes but not for sale at McDonalds.

It is sad that the world has come to such a place where the term "appy" is in common use. I think the source of the use of the original word "appetizing" is for one reason and one reason only. Say it aloud right now in a NY Jewish accent. It sounds good. It is the sort of word you want to say over and over again. Now "appy"? No. No.

I don't know what the secret is, for sure, GG. "Rose, Grandma Gourmet" with her knishes and chopped liver had one thing that those who dine "mostly" upon McD's and other fast-food do not have though. She had a direct and meaningful connection to a rich cultural heritage through the foods that she ate. It not only breaks my heart to see the ways in which corporate America erases these heritages but it also just plain scares me a bit in some emotional or philosophic way.

Tomorrow is Veterans Day in the United States - the day that we set aside to honor our veterans of war. That the wages of war in this world have been terrible is an undisputed fact. But there are stories of food and of sustenance that are of interest that come from these times from the men and women that were there - wherever "there" happened to be. I can think of the stories of hardtack during the Civil War. And the adage that "an army marches on its stomach". There has been a recent discussion of MRE's on eGullet - used as a matter of course by our military and then in the aftermath of the devastation of New Orleans to provide nourishment to the hungry. Some of my favorite stories have to do with the ways that our lives have been broadened by the exposure of foods from other countries, due to the fact of deployment rather than travel for pleasure (which is not always done by everyone in this world for many reasons, some financial, some other). America was enriched in the sense of being exposed to European foods in a massive way during WW2. The foods of Southeast Asia, the tastes and wonders, were brought back to the US after Korea and Vietnam. Other countries may have experienced the same sorts of introductions to foods from "other places" brought home by their own veterans. The way of sharing our foods is common to us all, no matter where we come from. There is so much to offer when we break bread. I would like to invite any veterans, or anyone who knows stories of foods that come from these times, to tell us of your tales. Write carefully, of course. We must write and think carefully when these things are discussed. Let's talk about the good that the food brought, or the interest, or the love. In food we can find connection to others. In this connection perhaps there is hope. And some pretty darn good stories of carousing in bars on weekend leaves, too, I bet. Edited to add a final note: I do not "really" expect to hear people write in their memories (though I do most assuredly hope for some stories) in this time of ultra PC where everyone is considered suspect of some dread error in life if they have participated in humanity's wars upon each other. This is merely my own way of setting a place at the table for those who were there, and of offering a listening ear about the sustenance there is to be found in food and its ways, even during terrible times.

I'm with you on the idea that no food should be beneath our discussion and with you on the fact that McDonalds will not kill off people from eating it. There *is* "Fast-Food Nation" and "Supersize Me" to consider though. I grew up eating a lot of junk food. A lot. Till I was grown. I have no health problems and am not overweight. My problem with McD's is that: 1) There *do* seem to be an awful lot of unhealthily obese people walking around and a lot of them *do* seem to congregate at fast-food havens. Is it the fault of the fast-food havens that they are unhealthily obese? I don't really know. 2) People use McD's and places of its ilk to the point where they do not seem to know anything *else* about food. That is not only their loss, but it is frightening to me in ways in some larger sense. 3) There is something rather awful to me about the idea that many children do not know how to peel a carrot or eat an apple without caramel sauce or a salad without ranch dressing. Again, McD's fault? Hmmm. (?) And now McD's wants to pretend to be "gourmet"? Give me a break. At this point it seems that even McD's thinks its not good enough for our *supposedly* health-conscious, foodie society. And it will pay lip service to the idea just as many individuals pay lip service to whatever idea seems the new and upcoming thing. And *some* naive individuals will be somewhat fooled by it. It is the way of marketing - it is the way of corporate America - it does not show a great deal of respect for people - but it does make $$$. Que sera sera. ........................................................... McD's should stick with its core competencies and be honest about it. And as for the idea that it is a *bad* place to feed kids - until this society decides that children need to be paid as much attention to for their basic needs (time to play, neighborhoods to play *in* with other children, the ability to go out for a walk in many places without fear, a world that is filled with "concerned and caring" adults who they can turn to who are not too busy with their own *needs* and desires, parents who have the time and resources available to dedicate to taking time with their children for healthy meals and the teaching of etiquette and proper behavior) until this society decides that this will happen *somehow*, that resources *will* be dedicated to children, McD's provides a certain service within this society. Rather a twisted one, yes. But better than nothing. And so it goes.

Yup, it *is* an evil genius indeed. I'm still on the lookout for the good guy geniuses to come and save the world. They must have gotten stuck on the subway or perhaps had to finish watching their favorite TV show before showing up. Still, I wait.

Good point. Tell you what, though. McDonald's is one place (as opposed to coffeehouses)(with good reason, granted) where children - in all their difficult decadent surprisingly endless messinesses, startling sudden loudnesses and unfinished imperfections - are welcome. Their siblings are even welcome, and that is really taking a risk. And thank god for that. At least there is somewhere they can go without the parent needing to watch warily with the stern disciplinarian cap on, ready to jump. That cap can be quite tiring to wear twenty-four hours a day.

Man, you just keep on smackin' 'em down, dude. Righteous.

I just bought a new coffeemaker. This seems to happen at least once a year. In between coffeemakers, there are other lovely electrical small kitchen appliance thingies that seem to demand that I buy them. Sometimes they get used, sometimes not. What a clutter on the countertops, though! I long for the open spaces of the free-range kitchen counter and sometimes even clear it off, moving these things into cupboards where they then creep out at night to perch again on the countertops. How many small kitchen appliances sit on your countertops? How many have been jailed up in the cupboards? Of all these small kitchen appliances (yes, please do count the immersion blenders and coffee-milk-frothers and so on!) how many do you actually *use* often? I've got seven on the countertops. Only seven at the moment. I hate to think of what is in the cupboards. It will take all my nerve to count the total. What are your stats? Edited to add: Oops. Eight on the counters. Forgot to count the microwave. It seems such a natural, organic Part of Things.