Sunday, January 22, 2006


mailing it in. . .

aarrrgh! another day when blogger thinks i don't have cookies enabled --
but i do, i do! -- and won't let me log in. i have no idea why this
issue sporadically happens with them.

i love you blogger, but please hire a better beagle, because your
current sniffer ain't working so well. . .

as a result, i'm mailing this puppy in, which means the formatting will
be spindled, folded, and mutilated. sigh.

also it means i can't moderate comments right now, so if you have a
comment waiting, let me thank you for your patience and support.

as devoted readers may recall, i have recently repaired my dishwasher,
acquired a new fancy fridge, and believed my kitchen troubles were over.
no dice.

the aged delta swivel faucet now leaks perpetually, despite the best
attempts to fix the gasket or reseat and clean the little ball-thing
inside. double sigh.

so i went internet shopping for a new faucet and nearly flipped out when
i discovered a decent one to equal what i have now would be US$350!
yikes.

a nice kohler would of course cost more, much more. . .and would include
features such a computer setting to ensure the water remains at a set
temperature. so if get the faucet to lukewarm water, turn it off, and
then turn it back on, this little computer chip would remember that and
give me water at exactly the same temp.

is this a feature i really need? do i have to worry about crashing my
faucet?

"sorry, i can't you a glass of water now, i have to reboot the faucet."

on the chocolate front, today's nytimes magazine contains 3 recipes for
chocolate chip cookies, which serve as a nice comparison study on how
different ingredients produce different results.

baking soda alone vs. baking soda and baking powder together. how many
eggs. what kind of flour.

studying these recipes would be very enlightening to those of you who,
like myself, think the perfect chocolate chip cookie is an ultimate food
group in and of itself.

so i recommend you all check that out.

finally, you may recall i've set up a trial account with spam arrest.
apparently one of things this software does (or did) was go through my
entire address book and send out whitemail reply queries for some really
ancient email.

if you get or got one of these, i'm sorry. i don't think it was supposed
to do that.

posted by fortune | 3:24 PM | top | link to this | email this: | links to this post | | 3 comments

Links to this post:

Create a Link