Question for Ripon

When they start to repeat themselves it is time to bail out. The rest of the world won't give a squat about another tea book. Reminds me of a time when some buffoon from Britain was trying to impress me with his knowledge of tea and never heard of o'clock teas. So take your sticky notes with the website tea addresses and order the oldest puerh you can find and report back how fresh it tastes.

Jim

It's the first time it's been used in this ng. When you see the [Edited for top posting] the spelling and grammar flames aren't far behind. Common sense would tell me VCBC would be ideal for discovering teas. It isn't. We had that discussion several years ago in the group. That alone shows the group knowledge not available elsewhere.

Jim

It was open stage night in rec.food.drink.tea, when Space Cowboy stepped up to the microphone and muttered:

No, it doesn't - unless one is trying to be defensive. It means that I reordered the posts for coherence should anyone else ever read it.

And you know, with 100% certainty, that this was only EVER discussed in this group?

No, it doesn't. It means that members of this group have not been exposed to that knowledge elsewhere or that they haven't talked about it with others.

That does not make it exclusive information.

If you're having trouble following posts get a threaded newsreader. If you're cheap like me Google is threaded so you can catch up there. Nothing worse than N levels of > in a thread. Anybody who edits ain't doing you a favor. In this case the edit is for sound bites and not a substantive argument. You know something like the bright idea of there is nothing new under the sun retort. Wait that would be an oxyidjut. I thought I'd save you a trip to VCBC looking for tea. It ain't worth my time or the taxpayers money to have the local library look it up on Nexus. One of the mantras in my posts is always to give you insight into tea you won't find anywhere else. I'm in an Indian store the other day stocking up on Indian masala for my traditional holiday Chai Eggnog. Anyway the store was empty and the owner was in a talkative mood explaining the future expansion of his store. I told him I buy teapots from all over the world and NEVER ONCE bought one from India. There are Indian import stores galore and you would expect your choice of teapots. Anyway he said teapots are an English craze. He said Indians and Chinese as far as he knew brew and drink tea from the same cup. They consider it an individual health drink and not a social beverage for 'tea gossip'. Here is a case of generalization expressed in words and now protected by copyright. You are now required to quote me relating the information gathered from the owner. BTW 'OXYIDJUT' has never been used in USENET and is the sole copyright of yours truly. I think I've succeeded to the GOOGLE highest eschlon and slang dictionaries by creating a first word use.

Jim

"Derek" wrote in message news:Xns943CD4C4A6CF8dagwinn@130.133.1.4...

If you're cheap like me, you can use Mozilla Thunderbird, which is threaded and a free download (unless you pay for connect time).

dmh

It was open stage night in rec.food.drink.tea, when Space Cowboy stepped up to the microphone and muttered:

Wonderful logic. Especially given that I've watched my own posts not show up on my own newsserver and yet replies to them do. Funny how things can disappear from threads.

(It also happens when people use "X-No-Archive" headers.)

I can agree with that.

No, in this "case" the edit was to put things in chronological order. Nothing was removed from what you wrote. And the fact that you disagree with my post doesn't not make my point insubstantive.

I didn't go to BC searching for tea, genius. Nor did I have time while I was there to even consider visiting Chinatown.

Over the years, I've noticed that you often write as if all of your "insights" are completely new and unique. I hate to break it to you, but they're not all new.

No kidding. Oops. I'm sorry. I'm not supposed to have known this information before you posted it, am I?

Either that, or I can quote the response from the guy at my local teashop when I asked him the same question a few years back.

If I ever do use it, I will be sure to cite the appropriate source. It is, at least, new.

It was open stage night in rec.food.drink.tea, when David M. Harris stepped up to the microphone and muttered:

Or be cheap like me and use Xnews which is free and use the news.individual.net servers, which are also free.

The only charge is connection.

Derek wrote in news:Xns943D8824870E7dagwinn@130.133.1.4:

What cheap has to do using Google, I don't know. Reading news via a Web interface for any length of time is excruciatiing, IMO. Possibly it could induce grumpiness in posters; none in evidence in this thread, of course, no, none at all.

Like you, I love Xnews, and there are several other great "free" clients. Where is it written that one must pay through cash or else through suffering?

And certainly "threading" doesn't excuse or explain posting on top of quoted material one bit.

It was open stage night in rec.food.drink.tea, when fLameDogg stepped up to the microphone and muttered:

Web based interfaces for just about anything are a pain. The only exceptions I've seen are some very nice Blogging programs, and some of the automated classroom systems (WebCT & Blackboard) that do a very nice job of creating an online adjunct to the classroom experience.

Umm....the EULAs for Microsoft products? Oh, wait. That's "both...and" not "or else".

I completely agree with your assertion that anecdotal evidence of the absence of Indian teapots is more interesting than chatting with a store peon about multiple infusions.

But the issue at hand is not whether anecdotal evidence is better than corporate profiteering. The issue is whether or not your posts are unique sources of this information. Short of direct quotation, they are not. After all, you got your information from somewhere or someone else just like the rest of us.

As for being a "tic-for-tac posting perve," I didn't edit your message because top posting bothers me. I edited because I wanted to keep the text in chronological order. And I will always acknowledge when I have changed someone else's post - even simply the order. If that still bothers you...I really don't care.

As for not being grateful for your advice - it wasn't advice. It was written to repeat an erroneous point about the inherent uniqueness of the information in this group. If I had asked for advice on where to find good tea in Vancouver, I would have appreciated any given. But I am not going to feign gratuity for something that is unsolicited and, in fact, not really assistance.

Top post edits, now bottom post edits, what next a white space post edit where nothing is said because really there's nothing new from the other side except paraphrasing what he previously said on the subject which was so conveniently edited under the guise of chronological order but nothing more than a vailed attempt to conceal the fact he has nothing new to say because if he did he'd have to admit somebody else said it first and dismissed any examples under the ubiquitous catchall theory that the chicken came first because if it was said here it was learned or derived elsewhere contrary to the fact that imagination and inspiration allows us to ask new questions why certain teapots aren't more plentifull and some teas taste better with multiple infusions for many more reasons than price ie., questions precede discovery which allows us to say things not found elsewhere irregardless of common public banality QED which leads me to elevate myself to the highest status as a Google icon symbol for creating the second word or phrase never before used on the planet in subsequent days and as a byproduct receiving a third possible Google honoraria of the longest run on sentence where some ingrate will have to edit the sentence which is consistent with my mantra of always including something fresh while the only claim of fame for some leech is tagging along for a ride on my posts but has been preceded by other bloodsuckers who only whine and don't contribute except to say the world is round because it is common knowledge or any other trivial mundane specious argument you can find in any other usenet post on any subject simply used by people who idle their cars at the gas pump who don't have a clue.

Jim

"Derek" wrote in message news:Xns943E8ABFB276Ddagwinn@130.133.1.4...

It was open stage night in rec.food.drink.tea, when Space Cowboy stepped up to the microphone and muttered:

Rambling as an attempt to avoid responding to assertions?

Now there's something I've never seen before.

I've seen it before. It's popular with high school students, people who haven't thought out their beliefs, and the mentally ill. Since none of us who post here regularly (except, possibly, Ripon) live in a major tea-growing country, own a tea plantation, make teapots by hand, or have written books on either of these subjects after privately interviewing people who do any of those things, I'd say that we all learned our info from someone else- which means it's not proprietary. That is true of all tea lists which seem to be populated mainly by men and women in North America and Western Europe- neither place being well known for producing tea or original teapots, or tool that are used exclusively as part of a tea ceremony.

Unless SC is getting his tea information directly through letters written by a tea-drinking lama living on top of a mountain in Tibet, whom he me while travelling there looking for unknown tea-lore, than everything he knows came from sources that are available to everyone.

Finally something new in rfdt. Now let go of my coattails and go find somebody else to hold your hand.

Jim

It was open stage night in rec.food.drink.tea, when Space Cowboy stepped up to the microphone and muttered:

I wouldn't ride on your coattails if I was crippled in both legs and it was the only way I could cross the street to take a dump.

Now if you had wanted to talk about the rather duplicitous way that Rippon was asking questions without informing us that it (apparently) was research for a book, you might actually appear as intelligent as you think you are.

Don't be so hasty. Skip the ride and just take a dump on his coattails.

--crymad

DerekXns9441AC09F90EBdagwinn@130.133.1.411/28/03 17: snipped-for-privacy@gwinn.us

Derek,

I think you might be a bit hard ripping into poor Ripon; his "research" questions certainly engendered a lot of interest among us, and I believe he did tell us about his book. Cut the guy some slack. He's a pretty good citizen here in the play pen. Just my opinion.

Michael

It was open stage night in rec.food.drink.tea, when Michael Plant stepped up to the microphone and muttered:

Michael,

I think the questions are good, and I don't intend to be "ripping hard" into Ripon. This was, after all, the only time I made any critical comments about him or the book.

Never the less, I do not remember any comment about writing a book until someone specifically asked about it. Only then did we find out (and only then did Jim pull out his soapbox).

I'm not "anti-Ripon" or even "anti-Ripon's-book." But it's not like this was investigative reporting whereby telling us why he was asking the questions would ruin the final product.

Now we know, and it's no big deal to me that the questions are for a book. But I would have liked to have known from the beginning. Not telling us until explicitly asked makes it *look* like there's something to hide.

And that's the only point I was trying to make.