Carrot Top

Erotica is a higher accolade than porn. These photos are not porn. They are erotica. Heh.

You are very lucky! My particular favorites in that series are the one on Vienna's Empire and the one on Russia and the one that combines four countries in an unusual grouping (my own books are in an unpacked box at the moment so can not exactly remember) that might be Switzerland, Turkey, Armenia and another. Very lucky. There are forty weekends there in that box, I think.

There is an interesting dish called "Buttermilk Cakes with Chicken, Ham and Walnuts" that comes from the early 1900's in my collection. Rich, hearty, sort of awe-inspiring in the sense of simplistic luxury it has. (Yes, of course I was there when it was being used at the turn of the century - I don't know why people even bother to ask this anymore.) Of course if you want something quick and more easily prepared there is nothing wrong with a big tub of salmon caviar, lots of sour cream, and a bowl of chives in the middle of the table to ladle and scoop and sprinkle onto the pancakes. Pernods with water as beverage.

Please don't encourage her. Malaysia. And its foods. And way of life look like a paradise of sorts. (though of course nothing is a complete and utter paradise) But my goodness she does make it look close to it.

From everything that I know of Abra, I would not have a problem calling her "chef" any day. The parameters of the word, which used to be strictly formal, a term of some detailed entitlement, may have stretched to include other concepts that did not exist in the same ways in previous times in the ways that they do now. Just my opinion.

On a more serious tack, it would be interesting to see some current accurate statistics on these sorts of things (stalking or harrassment or whatever) that are directly linked to anonymity on these sorts of boards or on the internet in general. And to see comparison statistics in terms of those sorts of things that happen in "real life". Not that one single case is to be disregarded in the least sense. But it would be interesting to know these things.

Eh. Personally I think Culinary Bear's luxury of advantage is in that he is six foot four inches and carries a knife.

Taking the question of anonymity a bit further afield but still on-topic, I hope (please delete if it is not), I would like to raise the question of how the anonymity in general that exists on the internet affects the larger public's final perception of its credibility as information source. I have heard that in academic circles, internet sources (unless linked to some other form of journalistic endeavor where different sorts of controls are in place) are not allowable as an outside source when being used in a scholarly paper that does have an annotated bibliography of research notes and sources. Is this true?

It is always a surprise to discover how very much of "nothing" there is in the cupboard. Today was the day to sort out the fridge. I didn't think there was anything in there. But your idea gave me hope. A whole lotta nothing was there. Some bacon and a chunk of parmesan with a bit of parsley, eggs, and some pasta = pasta carbonara. Pork ribs that had been slow cooked then frozen because of something or other, plus half a head of cabbage and a knob of ginger, some garlic, soy sauce, etc. = potstickers. Two lone carrots, some frozen peas, half a green and half a red pepper and the end bit of a head of celery with one chicken breast and some rice and spices = curried chicken and veggies (with rice). Sweet "nothings". (No, won't eat them all at once.)

It isn't my sense that most of the people on this thread are speaking about any one person in particular - seems to me that in general the discussion has a good full range of concerns within the topic. Most of the posts have been oriented towards attempting to define what anonymity "means" to the person posting - and whether it is something meaningful in their own lives as tool of whatever shape. Personally I don't care about the specific individual case that has popped up here and there for discussion. My concerns are more broad-based. It *does* worry me that my concern for the more global concept *was* at one point assumed to be "incident-specific". It can be worrisome to be gathered into a grouping of people without having made specific claim to *be* part of that grouping. Part of the problem within this media is that assumptions can be quickly made without the more accurate information that *is* provided in the more traditional method of communication that is person-to-person. Again - yet another reason that I, personally, am *for* the idea of creating a place where accountability of source could be called upon in matters of conflict where reputation is involved. Of course that is only my opinion and it certainly is not in any way my call, anywhere except the places that I am responsible for within my own scope of administration.

It occurs quite often in organizations that members of the organization are not fully informed as to "what is going on" by management. This provides the opportunity that management desires to *be* management. The ultimate question that arises to those who are *not* management in each case where this happens is: Do I trust this management? If so, if the trust is there, there should be no worries.

Hey. All I know is what they teach in Communications Theory 101. What anyone wants to do with it is up to them.

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.