Conference turris::cooks

    	Just as a quick note to the moderators since I was guilty of this
    latest infraction...For the first time, I decided to look through the
    index rather than do a DIR/TITL=GENERAL when trying to decide whether
    or not to start a new note. There was no "general" in the index and
    nothing resembling it in the entire list of chicken recipes. So, I ask
    you, what good is the index? If people are expected to search all the
    notes, then get rid of the index. It's just confusing and misleading.

  >>  or not to start a new note. There was no "general" in the index and
  >>  nothing resembling it in the entire list of chicken recipes. So, I ask

	I don't get it.  It's listed in 5.6.

    Yes, this recipe has been in the index under "General".  Danielle and
    I have retitled many of the chicken recipes to collect them under
    "chicken", as such this would be "CHICKEN: General Gao's or Tso's or
    XXX Chicken".  Would that have made it easier?
    
    ed

This makes a total of 64 notes with COOKIE in the title.  

Given that each note is pretty exclusive (e.g. Cookies, round, chocolate, made
by my next door neighbor, on thursdays, only when it's cold), I'd always be
tempted to create a new note.

I know you folks have real work to do, but it would be great to consolidate ALL
cookie notes into one generic cookie note.

			-JP
			  (unofficial cooks new topic monitor)

    	That wouldn't have made it easier since I did try checking under
    both. I must have just missed it under "general." Perhaps I would have
    caught it if it had been in both places. This is becoming a rathole. So
    from now on, I'll go back to using directory for such things and ignore
    the index.

    One way to get a "quick" result for "dir /titl=" is to
    "SEARCH/NOTE=5.* general"
    
    I quoted the "quick" because too general a search criteria
    would not be a quick way to do it such as "sea/not=5.* cook".
    
    ed

    
    ed, the index is a wonderful thing.  :>

   - di

    The problem with the index, is that it is alphabetical by first letter. 
    That explains why we have a note about fresh water clams under R
    because "Racoons love 'em".
    
    But it is handy to search there rather than do a DIR of the conference.
    

    About once every 6-10 months I do a dir/out=cooks.txt and then
    I have a nice index to EDIT any time I feel like, so I can do 
    a search on ANY string. Very quick if you spend a lot of time
    looking for things in this conference as it is quite large.
    
    Monica

    RE: "Raccoons love 'em (fresh water clams/mussles)"
    
    Could also be found with "search/note=5.* clams"
    
    If I change the title so that clams is first it comes out as:
    
    clams: "Raccoons love 'em (fresh water clams/mussles)"
    
    Which doesn't help whoever is looking for "mussles"
    
    or some such thing.
    
    On the other hand I have considered a mod to the indexing
    program to alter such titles so that, e.g., this would get
    listed under clams, mussles and raccoons.  I'd have to be careful
    that it doesn't end up under wild game.  Though I could change it
    to just frech water clams and mussles.  :-)
    
    ed

I also use a regular dir extract to a text file for searching for topics.

However, if you want to use the index in a reasonably fast manner, using the
character cell interface, use the commands:

	EXTRACT/BUFFER INDEX 5.*
	EVE BUFFER INDEX

This gets you a local copy to play with instead of having to go after the index
across the net every time.  You can then use eve to search the buffer
repeatedly.... and you ALWAYS have search repeatedly, unless you're lucky.  I
usually search my directory extract once for each word before I give up and
create a new note.

By the way, when you exit notes, you get a chance to save the INDEX buffer in a
file!

    Another problem is mis-spelled words.  If I were going to look up
    something with MUSSELS, I would spell it this way, as it is in the
    dictionary, therefore, when people mis-spell it, I may not get a match.
    
    There is no good answer, and I think the moderators are doing a
    fabulous job, and the more I can search for the better.  However, I
    have learned not to assume there are no notes with the first search,
    and I also copy over the directory once in a while and scan through
    them all.
    
    Dick 

    instead of
    	EXTRACT/BUFFER INDEX 5.*
	EVE BUFFER INDEX
    
    use
	EXTRACT/BUFFER INDEX 5.last
	EVE BUFFER INDEX
    
    5.L has 'everything' in it
    
    ed

    Yet another way of searching for a word in a title without repeatedly
    doing a DIRECTORY, or a SEARCH/NOTES=5.* is to do the following:
    
    	Notes> DIR/OUT=cooks.log 1-L
    	Notes> SPAWN SEARCH COOKS.LOG word
    
    For example:
    
    	Notes> spawn search cooks.log tofu
    
    would produce:
    
       322  NETCOM::HANDEL       20-AUG-1986    63  Tofu is good for you
      2116  GEMVAX::ROSS         27-NOV-1989     0  Tofu-Tuna Florentine
    Press Return to continue:
    
    You can also fine tune your search command, as for example:
    
    	Notes> spawn search/match=and cooks.log cake,apple
    
    would produce:
    
       742  BOOVX2::SERGIO        1-OCT-1987     0  CAKE: Jewish Apple Cake
      2701   TYGON::WILDE         1-NOV-1990     7  CAKE: Old-Fashioned Applesauce e
    Press Return to continue:
    
    The beauty of this method is that you are searching locally without
    having to exit out of COOKS.   Just press Return to clear your screen
    and you're right back where you were, free to go directly to any of the
    notes that resulted from your search.
    

    My friends:

    I have a problem with the reorganization of notes: Many times we find
    in note 9999. where all the notes regarding cookies were moved, a ref.
    to "as .0 requests...", that was OK in the original Square cookies note,
    but is no longer correct after they were regrouped as cookies.

    If we need to regroup the notes, then the person that undertakes this
    very difficult task should also edit notes and cross references, in 
    order to keep the coherence and COHESION of the conference.

    Regards,

    Juan-Carlos

    You may note that this has been done with many recently moved notes
    and this will be done as time and resouces permit.  With move than
    800,000 lines of text to manage it is almost as much of a problem
    as accounting for pointers to notes that get deleted by their authors
    from time to time.
    
    As well as duplicate notes, etc.
    
    ed

    RE: .12
    
    If you don't get a match, then shorten the word you're using for the
    search.  For instance, shorten "mussels" to "muss" and you'll find the
    entries spelled both correctly and incorrectly.
    
    Searching for things is not always an exact science, so you've gotta be
    creative...
    
    Cara
    

    RE: .17  by PINION::PSYCHE::COLELLA 
    
    >RE: .12
    
    >If you don't get a match, then shorten the word you're using for the
    >search.  For instance, shorten "mussels" to "muss" and you'll find the
    >entries spelled both correctly and incorrectly.
    
    But not "muscles", or "musels".  
					   ^   ^  
					  (.\ /.) 
					   \ U /   
					    `-'   
					     V    

 or mueslix :-)

Hello,

Do you think this one could be retitled to SAUCE: Duck   
or similar? DUCK:Sauces ?

Cheers,
~Sheridan~
:^)

    
    
    I'm getting a little sick of the petty comments that people are making
    every time someone enters a note.  Every day, I get into this note
    and find a couple of new recipes and then a couple of replies that
    state that the recipe should have been entered somewhere else.  
    
    I personally believe that the reaction to new recipes should be 
    "wow... this looks great", not "why isn't this a reply to nnnn".
    Given a positive reaction, I'd be tempted to enter more new recipes
    as I find them.  Given a negative reaction which is typical, I'd
    probably never bother to enter another recipe!
    
    It seems that there are just a handful of people who are "policing" and
    are not moderators.  The following is directed at them:
    
    If the organization of this notes file bother you so much, then why 
    don't you become a moderator?  I'm sure the current moderators would 
    welcome your help!  Instead, you just add to the clutter by adding 
    a nasty reply so that even if the base noter gets back in and tries 
    to move his note to be a reply where it should be, there is your 
    nasty little reply hanging around!
    
    I agree that organization is nice to have but when someone new
    opens this conference for the first time and doesn't know about
    the organization we are trying to maintain, they will make a mistake.
    And if you jump on their case, they'll probably never enter another
    note!  Who needs to be publicly chastised?
    
    I'm kind of bummed that there are so few new recipes in here now.
    A couple of years ago, there would be a dozen or more every day!  Now
    there is about a dozen a month!  Maybe if we could all just loosen
    up a bit, then we might get more new recipes!
    
    Karen

    
    
	Rep .21 Karen
    
    My replies are inside of >>>
    
    I'm getting a little sick of the petty comments that people are making
    every time someone enters a note.  Every day, I get into this note
    and find a couple of new recipes and then a couple of replies that
    state that the recipe should have been entered somewhere else.  
    
    >>> As a long time reader and now a moderator I understand what you 
        are saying but alot of time was spent re-organizing this conference
        awhile back. Previous to the re-org the conference was to put it
        nicely a mess and very difficult to find anything in it. 
    >>>
    I personally believe that the reaction to new recipes should be 
    "wow... this looks great", not "why isn't this a reply to nnnn".
    Given a positive reaction, I'd be tempted to enter more new recipes
    as I find them.  Given a negative reaction which is typical, I'd
    probably never bother to enter another recipe!
    
    >>> Again, the conference has some basic rules and organization that
       people should follow. Personally I don't think it's too much to
       ask people to check in the directory for a existing string to 
       place an entry before starting a new note. I realize that it may
       seem alittle unfriendly but I think it's necessary.
    >>> 
    
    It seems that there are just a handful of people who are "policing" and
    are not moderators.  The following is directed at them:
    
    If the organization of this notes file bother you so much, then why 
    don't you become a moderator?  I'm sure the current moderators would 
    welcome your help!  Instead, you just add to the clutter by adding 
    a nasty reply so that even if the base noter gets back in and tries 
    to move his note to be a reply where it should be, there is your 
    nasty little reply hanging around!
    
    I agree that organization is nice to have but when someone new
    opens this conference for the first time and doesn't know about
    the organization we are trying to maintain, they will make a mistake.
    And if you jump on their case, they'll probably never enter another
    note!  Who needs to be publicly chastised?
    
    I'm kind of bummed that there are so few new recipes in here now.
    A couple of years ago, there would be a dozen or more every day!  Now
    there is about a dozen a month!  Maybe if we could all just loosen
    up a bit, then we might get more new recipes!
    
    >>> Again speaking as a long time reader I don't believe the lack of 
        new entries has much to do with the organization of the conference
        but it has to do alot more with what has happened the past 3+ 
        years to Digital. This conference has lost alot of contributors
        through layoffs, greener pastures, just toooo much work to do, ...
    	so I think that's why you see the problem you describe.
    
        I try to moderator in a hands off style and I see both sides of
        this problem. I also believe that the conerence needs to maintain
        some sense of organization to be useful to its users. So how would
        you tell a newbie about the conference's policies??? Maybe, WOW
        this looks great but it should be in Note xxx. Is that any less
        "negative"??? I really believe newbies should take the time to
        read about how the conference is structured before entering things. 
    
    
    -mike   <with his moderator's hat on and off>
    

>>>    If the organization of this notes file bother you so much, then why 
>>>    don't you become a moderator?  I'm sure the current moderators would 
>>>    welcome your help!  Instead, you just add to the clutter by adding 
>>>    a nasty reply so that even if the base noter gets back in and tries 
>>>    to move his note to be a reply where it should be, there is your 
>>>    nasty little reply hanging around!

I might say the same to you.  If you are displeased by the way people respond in
this file, why don't YOU become a moderator.  

>>>    I agree that organization is nice to have but when someone new
>>>    opens this conference for the first time and doesn't know about
>>>    the organization we are trying to maintain, they will make a mistake.
>>>    And if you jump on their case, they'll probably never enter another
>>>    note!  Who needs to be publicly chastised?

On the other hand, if you never correct a noveice noter who makes a mistake out
of ignorance, they'll never learn.  

Also, I might add that you have a very negative outlook on notes.  You seem to
read mean and nasty attitudes into things.  Have you given any thought to the
possibility that the writer did not mean to be nasty, and in fact was trying to
be helpful, but you misunderstood?  Since your note follows so recently on the
replies to note 4030 (where a person evidently used WRITE when they meant to use
REPLY), let me take those replies as an example.  I took the first reply as a
kind, gentle reminder to the noter that he should take some corrective action
(move his note).  The followup was a joke.  Neither appeared to be nasty to me.

=jp

re: .23
>>I might say the same to you.  If you are displeased by the way people respond in
>>this file, why don't YOU become a moderator.  

He is.

 Moderator        Access              Mail Address                   Privileges
 MWOLINSKI        STAR::MWOLINSKI     STAR::MWOLINSKI                [MKW]
 WINALSKI         GEMCIL::WINALSKI,   GEMGRP::WINALSKI               [MK]
                  GEMGRP::WINALSKI,
                  GEMNT3.ZKO.DEC.COM::WINALSKI,
                  TLE::WINALSKI
 

    I've been reading and contributing to ::COOKS for years and I very much
    appreciated/appreciate the better layout the conference has taken on.

    However, I do agree that a little tact and diplomacy go a long way.  A
    noter who starts new notes for existing topics is likely to be an
    enthusiastic NEW noter and we don't want to scare someone off by
    *appearing* unappreciative -- do we?

    Maybe a "form" note placed someplace here that could either be forwarded
    or referenced that gives them a few simple pointers like DIR/TITLE or
    DIR/KEYWORD etc. and reminds them to read the conference guidelines would 
    be in order?  Pleasantly worded, of course ;)  

    gailann  

>>this file, why don't YOU become a moderator.  

>>>He is.

	He didn't write the note.  Karen did.

     re: Bob
    
     I think that .23 was referring to Karen Healy's note, not Mike
    Wolinski's.
    
     re: the terrible dilemma of WRITE vs REPLY
    
     In FISHING-V2 (which I moderate), the offending note is simply moved
    to the appropriate note and is forwarded to the author with the
    explanation that a suitable string was already extant and oh, by the
    way here it is. This prevents additional replies by quasi conference
    policemen say "you should have used note n.*" etc. And the fact that
    the gentle suggestion to the novice noter occurs offline helps prevent
    the loss of face that a reply to a note might bring. 
    
     Just a suggestion from another person who believes in organization.
    
     The Doctah

    
    Let me just clarify...
    
    I believe that the organization is a great thing.  I just think that
    those who make mistakes should be notified off line, not in a public
    way.  I agree with the "form letter" to be sent to new noters.
    
    FWIW, I do carefully check note 5 before entering a new note.  However,
    I don't check note 5 every time I read a new reply like some people
    do, just to "police" the notes file.  
    
    Re: being a moderator...
    
    Well, since I only object to the "move it" replies, you would find
    me only deleting those replies.  Not much use as a moderator...
    
    Karen
    
    
    

And now a word from your primary conference moderator.

I took over hosting this conference and therefore the primary 
moderation responsibilities several years back when it didn't have a 
home and was in danger of disappearing.  I don't have time either to 
do the constant reorganization work necessary to keep things orderly 
and findable in COOKS, nor to do hand-holding for newbies or the 
clueless.  For that reason, I've enlisted the help of co-moderators 
who have more time to devote to such things.

I offer this general guideline for writing to this conference:

o If your remark is directed at or of interest to the conference
  readership in general, post it as a reply (if it is in response
  to something already said) or as a new topic (if it is a new
  topic of discussion).

o If your remark is directed at or of interest to an individual,
  send that person e-mail and DO NOT post to this conference.


As for any conference policing that might be necessary, please leave 
that to the moderators.  We don't need a reply to tell us when 
someone's accidentally said WRITE when they meant REPLY.  If that 
person needs to be told, it should be done by e-mail.

Now let's go back to recipes.

--PSW, COOKS moderator