| |
Main
Date: 24 May 2006 15:17:39
From: Gerard Eberlein
Subject: revisiting fermentation
|
.....one thing I'm finding out about brewing is everyone has a different
view on what is best. In this case fermentation. I've been told that
pitching is fine at 71-72 F and then keep the room at 70 to 71 F is fine.
Others tell me to pitch at 72 then move it to a cooler spot, like 65-66.
Still others say don't pitch unless below 70 and keep it in a 65 deree temp
right off the bat. I have 3 floors and 3 temps. in my house. 74, which is
too high, 71 which is the lowest temp my girlfriend can handle (she guilts
me by putting on a blanket and looking cold) and about 64degrees downstairs
( the A/C blower is in the spare room, so it can go as low as 62 degrees)
I'm not mashing yet, but would like to in the future. I don't want all these
esters and fusols I keep reading about. I'm open to any and all suggestions
(except "ditch the girlfriend", which I'm sure one of you will come up with,
LOL.) Thanx in advance.
Gerard
|
|
| |
Date: 24 May 2006 17:54:06
From: Mike Undercofler
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
It depends what you are after. Are you trying to brew to a specific style?
If so, stick to the temps recommended for that style. Are you brewing to
your own taste? If so, do that. My favorite brew is an APA left to ferment
in primary and secondary at 75 deg F. I like the fruit notes the high temp
adds to it.
Mike
--
Mike Undercofler
Howard, PA
Email: michael@**cut_from_stars_to_arrows >>mlux2.com
"Gerard Eberlein" <dormouse@charter.net > wrote in message
news:oj2dg.32$6F7.0@fe03.lga...
> .....one thing I'm finding out about brewing is everyone has a different
> view on what is best. In this case fermentation. I've been told that
> pitching is fine at 71-72 F and then keep the room at 70 to 71 F is fine.
> Others tell me to pitch at 72 then move it to a cooler spot, like 65-66.
> Still others say don't pitch unless below 70 and keep it in a 65 deree
> temp
> right off the bat. I have 3 floors and 3 temps. in my house. 74, which is
> too high, 71 which is the lowest temp my girlfriend can handle (she guilts
> me by putting on a blanket and looking cold) and about 64degrees
> downstairs
> ( the A/C blower is in the spare room, so it can go as low as 62 degrees)
> I'm not mashing yet, but would like to in the future. I don't want all
> these
> esters and fusols I keep reading about. I'm open to any and all
> suggestions
> (except "ditch the girlfriend", which I'm sure one of you will come up
> with,
> LOL.) Thanx in advance.
> Gerard
>
>
>
>
|
| | |
Date: 24 May 2006 18:21:30
From: Gerard Eberlein
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
I like stouts and IPA's, as a matter of fact I have the stout in secondary
and the IPA in primary at the moment.
"Mike Undercofler" <michael@mlux2.com > wrote in message
news:avudncxzw-hjSOnZRVn-sg@adelphia.com...
> It depends what you are after. Are you trying to brew to a specific style?
> If so, stick to the temps recommended for that style. Are you brewing to
> your own taste? If so, do that. My favorite brew is an APA left to ferment
> in primary and secondary at 75 deg F. I like the fruit notes the high temp
> adds to it.
>
> Mike
>
> --
> Mike Undercofler
> Howard, PA
> Email: michael@**cut_from_stars_to_arrows>>mlux2.com
> "Gerard Eberlein" <dormouse@charter.net> wrote in message
> news:oj2dg.32$6F7.0@fe03.lga...
> > .....one thing I'm finding out about brewing is everyone has a different
> > view on what is best. In this case fermentation. I've been told that
> > pitching is fine at 71-72 F and then keep the room at 70 to 71 F is
fine.
> > Others tell me to pitch at 72 then move it to a cooler spot, like 65-66.
> > Still others say don't pitch unless below 70 and keep it in a 65 deree
> > temp
> > right off the bat. I have 3 floors and 3 temps. in my house. 74, which
is
> > too high, 71 which is the lowest temp my girlfriend can handle (she
guilts
> > me by putting on a blanket and looking cold) and about 64degrees
> > downstairs
> > ( the A/C blower is in the spare room, so it can go as low as 62
degrees)
> > I'm not mashing yet, but would like to in the future. I don't want all
> > these
> > esters and fusols I keep reading about. I'm open to any and all
> > suggestions
> > (except "ditch the girlfriend", which I'm sure one of you will come up
> > with,
> > LOL.) Thanx in advance.
> > Gerard
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
|
| | | |
Date: 24 May 2006 22:37:00
From: Mike Undercofler
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
As I said, it is a matter of taste. I'm no judge of styles, by a long shot.
I know what I like, and what I don't, but only by tasteing it and deciding
at that moment.
There are quite a few folks in this group that can give you details about
how specific styles should look and taste. If you are out to brew for
competitions, those are the folks you should talk to.
If you just want to brew beer that you like, the best bet is to brew, and
taste. Then go from there. Cooler temps for longer times will lower your
fruit esters. Higher temps and shorter times will raise them. Higher temps
with longer times will raise your alcohol taste and drop everything else
except the bitters. Go too long, too high, and you'll get some good cooking
vinegar. :)
Finding your own personal favorites takes time and testing.
Mike
--
Mike Undercofler
Howard, PA
Email: michael@**cut_from_stars_to_arrows >>mlux2.com
"Gerard Eberlein" <dormouse@charter.net > wrote in message
news:M%4dg.50$Ft.5@fe04.lga...
>I like stouts and IPA's, as a matter of fact I have the stout in secondary
> and the IPA in primary at the moment.
>
>
> "Mike Undercofler" <michael@mlux2.com> wrote in message
> news:avudncxzw-hjSOnZRVn-sg@adelphia.com...
>> It depends what you are after. Are you trying to brew to a specific
>> style?
>> If so, stick to the temps recommended for that style. Are you brewing to
>> your own taste? If so, do that. My favorite brew is an APA left to
>> ferment
>> in primary and secondary at 75 deg F. I like the fruit notes the high
>> temp
>> adds to it.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> --
>> Mike Undercofler
>> Howard, PA
>> Email: michael@**cut_from_stars_to_arrows>>mlux2.com
>> "Gerard Eberlein" <dormouse@charter.net> wrote in message
>> news:oj2dg.32$6F7.0@fe03.lga...
>> > .....one thing I'm finding out about brewing is everyone has a
>> > different
>> > view on what is best. In this case fermentation. I've been told that
>> > pitching is fine at 71-72 F and then keep the room at 70 to 71 F is
> fine.
>> > Others tell me to pitch at 72 then move it to a cooler spot, like
>> > 65-66.
>> > Still others say don't pitch unless below 70 and keep it in a 65 deree
>> > temp
>> > right off the bat. I have 3 floors and 3 temps. in my house. 74, which
> is
>> > too high, 71 which is the lowest temp my girlfriend can handle (she
> guilts
>> > me by putting on a blanket and looking cold) and about 64degrees
>> > downstairs
>> > ( the A/C blower is in the spare room, so it can go as low as 62
> degrees)
>> > I'm not mashing yet, but would like to in the future. I don't want all
>> > these
>> > esters and fusols I keep reading about. I'm open to any and all
>> > suggestions
>> > (except "ditch the girlfriend", which I'm sure one of you will come up
>> > with,
>> > LOL.) Thanx in advance.
>> > Gerard
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
|
| |
Date: 24 May 2006 19:32:07
From: John Bleichert
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
Gerard Eberlein <dormouse@charter.net > wrote:
> .....one thing I'm finding out about brewing is everyone has a different
> view on what is best. In this case fermentation. I've been told that
> pitching is fine at 71-72 F and then keep the room at 70 to 71 F is fine.
> Others tell me to pitch at 72 then move it to a cooler spot, like 65-66.
> Still others say don't pitch unless below 70 and keep it in a 65 deree temp
> right off the bat. I have 3 floors and 3 temps. in my house. 74, which is
> too high, 71 which is the lowest temp my girlfriend can handle (she guilts
> me by putting on a blanket and looking cold) and about 64degrees downstairs
> ( the A/C blower is in the spare room, so it can go as low as 62 degrees)
> I'm not mashing yet, but would like to in the future. I don't want all these
> esters and fusols I keep reading about. I'm open to any and all suggestions
> (except "ditch the girlfriend", which I'm sure one of you will come up with,
> LOL.) Thanx in advance.
> Gerard
>
Go by what it says on the yeast packet/vial. For my $0.02 I've found
that cellaring in secondary (or tertiary) for a couple weeks in the
low 60s really helps to mellow and ale and take the hard edges off (I
make mostly English style ales).
Also, after taste-testing a bottle and finding out that the batch is
carbonated, get all those bottles somewhere where it's around 60F. If
bottles sit in 70-something degrees past the point where they are
carbonated, they get really harsh. IMHO.
For the ales I've made, low 60s seems best. Haven't gotten to lagering
yet! Getting a fridge this summer for that purpose.
--------------------------------------------
John Bleichert - syborg@earthlink.net
The heat from below can burn your eyes out!
|
| | |
Date: 25 May 2006 09:50:32
From: Dave Smith
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
I think this is the best advice. Look on the packet, or look it up
online, find the ideal temp for your yeast.
Also, the temp on the inside of your carboy can be as much as 8 degrees
higher than your room temp. So just because you have a 70 degree room
doesn't mean you have adequate cooling for your carboy.
Dave
In article <Xw2dg.6254$x4.1731@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net >,
John Bleichert <syborg@earthlink.net > wrote:
> Go by what it says on the yeast packet/vial.
|
| | |
Date: 25 May 2006 14:50:38
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
On Wed, 24 May 2006 19:32:07 GMT, <syborg@earthlink.net > wrote:
> Go by what it says on the yeast packet/vial.
I disagree. The manufacturers suggested temp tends to be on the high side.
IMO, the bottom end of their range (or lower) is probably better.
John.
|
| | | |
Date: 25 May 2006 09:58:15
From: Denny Conn
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
> I disagree. The manufacturers suggested temp tends to be on the high side.
> IMO, the bottom end of their range (or lower) is probably better.
I completely agree with you. I think this is another case where their
recommendation is based more on yeast performance than beer quality.
But the bottom line is to follow your own tastes. If your beer has too
many esters for you, try a lower temp next time. If it's too clean for
your tastes, try a higher temp.
---------- >Denny
--
Life begins at 60...1.060, that is.
|
| | | | |
Date: 25 May 2006 14:00:28
From: Gerard Eberlein
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
"Denny Conn" <denny.g.conn@ci.eugene.or.us > wrote in message
news:4475E227.7AC2E158@ci.eugene.or.us...
> John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
>
> > I disagree. The manufacturers suggested temp tends to be on the high
side.
> > IMO, the bottom end of their range (or lower) is probably better.
>
> I completely agree with you. I think this is another case where their
> recommendation is based more on yeast performance than beer quality.
> But the bottom line is to follow your own tastes. If your beer has too
> many esters for you, try a lower temp next time. If it's too clean for
> your tastes, try a higher temp.
>
> ---------->Denny
> --
> Life begins at 60...1.060, that is.
I do like those citrusy backround flavours in some IPA's and I like molassas
overtones in my stouts, as opposed to the typical drier stouts. I tried a
brew club bourbon stout the other day and while somewhat sweet finish it
wasn't at all sugary. very nice balance for my palate.IPA's I've found I
prefer the not so bittered with high hop flavours to those more bittered.
never had an APA so I don't know the difference if any in biterness. still
new to brewing and while I love specialty beers, the prices are outrageous
sometimes so I haven't sampled too many. mostly drink Ice beers when I just
go to a party store, which are so weak in comparisan. The reason I got kick
started into brewing again is I went to a brewery and sampled many beers
there and when I try to drink Ice beer now it's got no taste. I'm on a hunt
for a beer more so that I love vs. competition. some might say I'm selfish
but hey, I'm the same way when I cook...I learned to cook so I could have
food the way I like it and if others do also, great. If not, more for
me..LOL.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 25 May 2006 19:13:22
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
On Thu, 25 May 2006 14:00:28 -0400, <dormouse@charter.net > wrote:
> I'm on a hunt
> for a beer more so that I love vs. competition. some might say I'm selfish
> but hey, I'm the same way when I cook...I learned to cook so I could have
> food the way I like it and if others do also, great. If not, more for
> me..LOL.
I'm the same way, my only goal is to make beer that I like. I don't really
care how it would score in a competition. It wouldn't matter to me if it
got first place or last place, as long as I enjoyed drinking it.
John.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 25 May 2006 11:35:38
From: Denny Conn
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
Gerard Eberlein wrote:
>I'm the same way when I cook...I learned to cook so I could have
> food the way I like it and if others do also, great. If not, more for
> me..LOL.
I came to brewing from a hobby cooking background. I find that a lot of
the best brewers started out cooking. Very similar skills involved.
------------ >Denny
--
Life begins at 60...1.060, that is.
|
| |
Date: 24 May 2006 12:24:03
From: Denny Conn
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
Gerard Eberlein wrote:
>
> .....one thing I'm finding out about brewing is everyone has a different
> view on what is best. In this case fermentation. I've been told that
> pitching is fine at 71-72 F and then keep the room at 70 to 71 F is fine.
> Others tell me to pitch at 72 then move it to a cooler spot, like 65-66.
> Still others say don't pitch unless below 70 and keep it in a 65 deree temp
> right off the bat. I have 3 floors and 3 temps. in my house. 74, which is
> too high, 71 which is the lowest temp my girlfriend can handle (she guilts
> me by putting on a blanket and looking cold) and about 64degrees downstairs
> ( the A/C blower is in the spare room, so it can go as low as 62 degrees)
> I'm not mashing yet, but would like to in the future. I don't want all these
> esters and fusols I keep reading about. I'm open to any and all suggestions
> (except "ditch the girlfriend", which I'm sure one of you will come up with,
> LOL.) Thanx in advance.
> Gerard
What you're finding is that there's more than one way to make good beer,
and how you make it depends on your own personal tastes. In your case,
if it were me, I'd go for the room that's 64. That's a great temp, and
keep in mind that the exothermic effects of fermentation can increase
the temp by 8-10F. I keep my fermenter in a large plastic tub of
water. If it gets too cold, I can put an aquarium heater in the water.
If it gets too warm, I out ice packs in the water.
--------------- >Denny
--
Life begins at 60 - 1.060, that is.
Reply to denny_at_projectoneaudio_dot_com
|
| | |
Date: 24 May 2006 16:59:21
From: Gerard Eberlein
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
I just checked the temp in the lower room again. When the A/C is running it
gets as low as 57 F. Too low?
"Denny Conn" <me@privacy.net > wrote in message
news:4474B2D3.93AB5553@privacy.net...
> Gerard Eberlein wrote:
> >
> > .....one thing I'm finding out about brewing is everyone has a different
> > view on what is best. In this case fermentation. I've been told that
> > pitching is fine at 71-72 F and then keep the room at 70 to 71 F is
fine.
> > Others tell me to pitch at 72 then move it to a cooler spot, like 65-66.
> > Still others say don't pitch unless below 70 and keep it in a 65 deree
temp
> > right off the bat. I have 3 floors and 3 temps. in my house. 74, which
is
> > too high, 71 which is the lowest temp my girlfriend can handle (she
guilts
> > me by putting on a blanket and looking cold) and about 64degrees
downstairs
> > ( the A/C blower is in the spare room, so it can go as low as 62
degrees)
> > I'm not mashing yet, but would like to in the future. I don't want all
these
> > esters and fusols I keep reading about. I'm open to any and all
suggestions
> > (except "ditch the girlfriend", which I'm sure one of you will come up
with,
> > LOL.) Thanx in advance.
> > Gerard
>
> What you're finding is that there's more than one way to make good beer,
> and how you make it depends on your own personal tastes. In your case,
> if it were me, I'd go for the room that's 64. That's a great temp, and
> keep in mind that the exothermic effects of fermentation can increase
> the temp by 8-10F. I keep my fermenter in a large plastic tub of
> water. If it gets too cold, I can put an aquarium heater in the water.
> If it gets too warm, I out ice packs in the water.
>
> --------------->Denny
> --
> Life begins at 60 - 1.060, that is.
>
> Reply to denny_at_projectoneaudio_dot_com
|
| | | |
Date: 25 May 2006 02:01:23
From: Scott Sellers
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
Gerard Eberlein <dormouse@charter.net >:
>I just checked the temp in the lower room again. When the A/C is
>running it gets as low as 57 F. Too low?
I think this would be ideal, at least for the first few days of
the fermentation. As others have stated, fermenting brew puts
out a certain amount of heat. 57F + that heat probably puts you
in the mid '60's. I'd say you are lucky. I'd love to have a
consistent 57F space to ferment in.
You might need to move the brew to a warmer spot if the
fermentation slows down prematurely. This shouldn't be a problem
if keep an eye on it. Just don't let the temp of the beer get
too low. Like Mike Dixon suggested, think about getting a
thermometer on your fermenter, so you will know what is going on
in their.
Finally, not beer related, but if you can figure out how not to
top-post (I know some software makes this harder than others), it
will be easier for everyone to carry on a coherent discussion.
cheers,
Scott S
>"Denny Conn" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>news:4474B2D3.93AB5553@privacy.net...
>> Gerard Eberlein wrote:
>> >
>> > .....one thing I'm finding out about brewing is everyone has a different
>> > view on what is best. In this case fermentation. I've been told that
>> > pitching is fine at 71-72 F and then keep the room at 70 to 71 F is
>fine.
>> > Others tell me to pitch at 72 then move it to a cooler spot, like 65-66.
>> > Still others say don't pitch unless below 70 and keep it in a 65 deree
>temp
>> > right off the bat. I have 3 floors and 3 temps. in my house. 74, which
>is
>> > too high, 71 which is the lowest temp my girlfriend can handle (she
>guilts
>> > me by putting on a blanket and looking cold) and about 64degrees
>downstairs
>> > ( the A/C blower is in the spare room, so it can go as low as 62
>degrees)
>> > I'm not mashing yet, but would like to in the future. I don't want all
>these
>> > esters and fusols I keep reading about. I'm open to any and all
>suggestions
>> > (except "ditch the girlfriend", which I'm sure one of you will come up
>with,
>> > LOL.) Thanx in advance.
>> > Gerard
>>
>> What you're finding is that there's more than one way to make good beer,
>> and how you make it depends on your own personal tastes. In your case,
>> if it were me, I'd go for the room that's 64. That's a great temp, and
>> keep in mind that the exothermic effects of fermentation can increase
>> the temp by 8-10F. I keep my fermenter in a large plastic tub of
>> water. If it gets too cold, I can put an aquarium heater in the water.
>> If it gets too warm, I out ice packs in the water.
>>
>> --------------->Denny
>> --
>> Life begins at 60 - 1.060, that is.
>>
>> Reply to denny_at_projectoneaudio_dot_com
--
Scott Sellers
|
| | | | |
Date: 25 May 2006 09:53:04
From: Dave Smith
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
I'm kind of hijacking the thread, but why is top posting more difficult
to read? I like the response at the top as I do not have to scroll to
read it. Are you getting some kind of daily digest that makes bottom
posting more convenient? Just curious,
Dave
In article <Td8dg.6474$x4.4035@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net >,
Scott Sellers <scottsellers@mindspring.com > wrote:
> Finally, not beer related, but if you can figure out how not to
> top-post (I know some software makes this harder than others), it
> will be easier for everyone to carry on a coherent discussion.
>
> cheers,
> Scott S
|
| | | | | |
Date: 25 May 2006 10:52:03
From: Ryan Case
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
Dave Smith wrote:
> I'm kind of hijacking the thread, but why is top posting more difficult
> to read? I like the response at the top as I do not have to scroll to
> read it. Are you getting some kind of daily digest that makes bottom
> posting more convenient? Just curious,
> Dave
This is something that I find frustrating about our local group Dave. If
you notice on the Yahoo group I always try to edit my replies so that I
am replying under what I am replying to.
It is a very historical debate, but what you will find is that folks
that have been on usenet for a long long time will almost always bottom
reply, or even reply in line with what they are replying to.
Folks that are fairly new to usenet and usenet type groups will usually
top post because their Microsoft software is preset that way and they
don't bother to change it until coplained at a lot.
I happen to know that this isn't the case with you as you are 1.) on a
Mac and 2.) not a newb to computers or the net.
What I have found, regardless of personal preference, is that almost no
one ever complains about bottom posting, but close to half of the people
on usenet despise top posting. ;~)
Ryan
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 25 May 2006 14:04:03
From: Gerard Eberlein
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
"Ryan Case" <usenet@jamesrobert.us > wrote in message
news:127brm42g7jq772@corp.supernews.com...
> Dave Smith wrote:
> > I'm kind of hijacking the thread, but why is top posting more difficult
> > to read? I like the response at the top as I do not have to scroll to
> > read it. Are you getting some kind of daily digest that makes bottom
> > posting more convenient? Just curious,
> > Dave
>
> This is something that I find frustrating about our local group Dave. If
> you notice on the Yahoo group I always try to edit my replies so that I
> am replying under what I am replying to.
>
> It is a very historical debate, but what you will find is that folks
> that have been on usenet for a long long time will almost always bottom
> reply, or even reply in line with what they are replying to.
>
> Folks that are fairly new to usenet and usenet type groups will usually
> top post because their Microsoft software is preset that way and they
> don't bother to change it until coplained at a lot.
>
> I happen to know that this isn't the case with you as you are 1.) on a
> Mac and 2.) not a newb to computers or the net.
>
> What I have found, regardless of personal preference, is that almost no
> one ever complains about bottom posting, but close to half of the people
> on usenet despise top posting. ;~)
>
> Ryan
>
Not a problem...I didn't set anything i just open a reply window now and try
to remember to scroll to the bottom hit enter once or twice and
post...unless I have one too many beers I may forget once in a while ;)
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 26 May 2006 10:03:21
From: Dave Smith
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
Ya, I jumped onto usenet back in the early 90's using tin on a vax. Talk
about oldschool! For myself I prefer to have the new text appear at the
top. I really have no desire to reread what has already been posted. For
instance, Gerard posted after you and there is a full page of text
before his reply. So I had to scroll to the bottom to read what he had
to say.
I'm not all fired up about it, I was just curious.
Dave
In article <127brm42g7jq772@corp.supernews.com >,
Ryan Case <usenet@jamesrobert.us > wrote:
> I happen to know that this isn't the case with you as you are 1.) on a
> Mac and 2.) not a newb to computers or the net.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 26 May 2006 22:11:56
From: Scott Sellers
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
Dave Smith <dave@nowhere.com >:
>Ya, I jumped onto usenet back in the early 90's using tin on a vax. Talk
>about oldschool! For myself I prefer to have the new text appear at the
>top. I really have no desire to reread what has already been posted. For
>instance, Gerard posted after you and there is a full page of text
>before his reply. So I had to scroll to the bottom to read what he had
>to say.
As others have noted, when you are replying in context, you
typically edit out the parts you're not directly addressing.
>I'm not all fired up about it, I was just curious.
>Dave
One more thing, a poster might make several points, and you might
want to address any, some, or all of them. Posting in context
makes it easy to do this, clearly and directly, without having to
re-invent (or restate) the wheel. The top poster's task is much
more difficult, simply from a clear writing stance.
Aside from aiding clarity, posting in context also keeps us
honest, in that you are confronting what someone actually wrote.
This becomes especially important in cases where there is some
sort of controversy. In contrast, top posting is a traditional
refuge of scoundrels.
Posting in context is a more rigorous approach. I think the
clear, in-depth communication it fosters is worth the slight
extra effort, and is a real strength of Usenet communication, as
opposed to, say IRC.
Bill Gates thought otherwise, and thus was born M$ Outlook
Express. In this case, we all suffer from his crippled,
grasping, mercenary vision.
I'll make this my last $.02, strictly FWIW.
Scott S
--
Scott Sellers
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 26 May 2006 14:10:14
From: Ryan Case
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
Dave Smith wrote:
> Ya, I jumped onto usenet back in the early 90's using tin on a vax. Talk
> about oldschool! For myself I prefer to have the new text appear at the
> top. I really have no desire to reread what has already been posted. For
> instance, Gerard posted after you and there is a full page of text
> before his reply. So I had to scroll to the bottom to read what he had
> to say.
>
> I'm not all fired up about it, I was just curious.
Didn't figure you were. You don't really strike me as the kind of guy
who gets fired up! Can't say I know too many homebrewers that do though.
Ryan
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 28 May 2006 08:56:06
From: Dave Smith
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
I thought of something today while replying to an email. All email
clients I have ever used are "top posting". Strange that I've never
heard a complaint about top posting email but in newsgroups it is a very
important topic.
Dave
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 28 May 2006 17:06:49
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
On Sun, 28 May 2006 08:56:06 -0700, <dave@nowhere.com > wrote:
> I thought of something today while replying to an email. All email
> clients I have ever used are "top posting". Strange that I've never
> heard a complaint about top posting email but in newsgroups it is a very
> important topic.
There is a very large difference between newsgroups and email.
John.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 25 May 2006 16:59:03
From: Joel
Subject: Re: netiquette (was: revisiting fermentation)
|
Dave Smith <dave@nowhere.com > wrote:
> Scott Sellers <scottsellers@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> Finally, not beer related, but if you can figure out how not to
>> top-post (I know some software makes this harder than others), it
>> will be easier for everyone to carry on a coherent discussion.
>>
>I'm kind of hijacking the thread, but why is top posting more difficult
>to read? I like the response at the top as I do not have to scroll to
>read it. Are you getting some kind of daily digest that makes bottom
>posting more convenient? Just curious,
A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
Q: Why is top-posting frowned upon?
--
Joel Plutchak
"...illiterate Abyssinians did it for 5000 years, you can do it too."
- Guy Gregory on brewing beer
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 27 May 2006 01:46:43
From: two bob
Subject: Re: netiquette (was: revisiting fermentation)
|
> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
> Q: Why is top-posting frowned upon?
Q: Why can top posting be OK sometimes?
A: Because some people dont want to scroll down half a mile to get to the
new additions.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 26 May 2006 16:09:22
From: Jason
Subject: Re: netiquette
|
two bob wrote:
>>A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>Q: Why is top-posting frowned upon?
>
>
> Q: Why can top posting be OK sometimes?
> A: Because some people dont want to scroll down half a mile to get to the
> new additions.
>
>
Then one does what is known as editing to remove unneeded/unwanted text.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 26 May 2006 15:49:11
From: Joel
Subject: Re: netiquette (was: revisiting fermentation)
|
two bob <tb@department9.com.au > wrote:
>> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>> Q: Why is top-posting frowned upon?
>
>Q: Why can top posting be OK sometimes?
>A: Because some people dont want to scroll down half a mile to get to the
>new additions.
Including "half a mile" of old text is also a violation
of netiquette in most cases.
--
Joel Plutchak
"...illiterate Abyssinians did it for 5000 years, you can do it too."
- Guy Gregory on brewing beer
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 30 May 2006 09:54:04
From: Bob
Subject: Re: netiquette (was: revisiting fermentation)
|
"two bob" <tb@department9.com.au > wrote in message news:447722e9$1_1@news.iprimus.com.au...
> > A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
> > Q: Why is top-posting frowned upon?
>
> Q: Why can top posting be OK sometimes?
> A: Because some people dont want to scroll down half a mile to get to the
> new additions.
And, of course, because they've already read all the earlier postings. I gave up on top
posting, even though I prefer reading it that way, because there are a lot of jerks out
there that will flame you mercilessly for top posting. They can't understand the operation
of threaded conversations, and think everyone should operate by their rules. The people
that prefer top posting are not so vehement in their opinions.
When responding to previous posts, I will usually follow the method used by the person I
am responding to.
Bob
|
| | | |
Date: 25 May 2006 08:38:28
From: Denny Conn
Subject: Re: revisiting fermentation
|
Gerard Eberlein wrote:
>
> I just checked the temp in the lower room again. When the A/C is running it
> gets as low as 57 F. Too low?
On the low side, but I don't think it's TOO low, especially given your
other options.
------------- >Denny
--
Life begins at 60...1.060, that is.
|
|
