Kat's right, that IS a great box, gals! But....I'm envious over the Amaryllis! :O) I've been eyeballing them for a few weeks now. I found a gorgeous striped one, and a double red that I am hankering for. Just haven't gotten around to buying any plants for myself lately, it's all going for the swaps & Christmas gifts! LOL Kat, just what DID you put in Dan's box to make you so excited??? You've got ME excited, now! Well, with you, I KNOW it will be something awesome. You ALWAYS pack a great box! :O)

Sharon, I'm glad your pot roast turned out so well. I agree, leftovers are perfect "hot beef sandwiches", with some mashed potatoes and gravy over everything. As I've mentioned before, I'm also one of those poeple who doesn't put the carrots and clery in the pot roast because the vegetables flavor the gravy. I like potatoes in pot roast, but I'd prefer them mashed and so they get cooked separately too, usually. The only difference of opinion we have is on the use of sirloin. Sirloin is one of my favorite pieces of beef, not fork tender but juicy and flavorful, so I like it rare and sliced very thinly, I'd never "waste" good sirloin on pot roast, LOL. round? Now round is imminently suited to braising. Annie

I've tried a number of methods from essentially boiling it when you add a bottle of something or too much liquid and you wind up fishing around in this sludge to find the shrunken tough meat to sauces to other methods. Less liquid is better. The key, as Jim said is the proper meat. I like a chuck roast or a pork shoulder roast. They'll give off plenty of fluid. I like to put some onion on the bottom so it's not all gray on the bottom and it gets some flavor. Some put sacrificial veggies in there as a rack thinking it flavors the gravy, OK, maybe it does. But I like the taters on top in a drier atmosphere so it'll brown those babies and they're delicious. They'll give off moisture too so again, adding liquid is a recipe for soup. I definitely vote to brown the meat. Onions & garlic should be sautéed too if you want it better. People think a "slow cooker" is a magical chef that can make a lousy cook a good cook and eliminate basic cooking techniques a thought with which I don't agree but I digress. If you want it simple, put a can of mushroom soup on top of a piece of roadkill, sprinkle it with onion soup mix, make up some instant mashed potatoes and open a can of gravy. Serve with leftover green bean gasserole. (shudder) And of course if this is what you like, go for it and enjoy it, no need to bother bellyaching about it. I also firmly believe that you can easily overcook things in a slow cooker. You can easily boil/steam all the moisture out of meat, turn the vegetables into mush and I really think it's important to realize it's an appliance that needs to be properly used to achieve best results. I've had delicious meals from slow cookers and I've had what I wouldn't feed as dog food that was made in a slow cooker. Cook's Country this weekend did a show about using a pork roast in a slow cooker. Their emphasis was what I've found. Less moisture is better. Here's an adaptation using a beef roast

The "new" crock pots may be safer, (I have never got sick on the original ones), but they don't cook the same. My new one I only use on high and only for about 4 hours. After that I just go to warm to hold. I have found that I just like to be home and use the stove top. Brown in a dutch oven and add water or broth and cook. Probably about 3 hours. Then I add the vegetables and cook for a hour. If I need more time to supper, I just put on low and keep warm. The new ones are not as good and I for sure don't like the electronic ones. I would not have bought a new one, but my almost original one died (my original you couldn't remove the crock). I need to hit the estate sales and pick up some real Crock Pots! The new one even has a weird lid that gets water in the handle, so you can't soak it. Why? there was a perfectly good glass lid, that worked!