Stay calm, Marsha, I didn't mean to imply you're on the DG marketing team, or anything, but although their section on use of material is much less lengthy than the one in the new iVillage TOS (as are their sections in pretty much ALL of their TOS, which is about the size of GW's OLD TOS when Spike still owned it), it DOES have the same gist to it, i.e., that they're saying they can use whatever you contribute however they see fit. It's kind of like some magazines that accept a lot of submissions from readers... For instance, I subscribe to "Birds & Blooms," and I LOVE the magazine... Each issue is FULL of plenty of beautiful pictures and occasionally a useful article or two, as well :) MANY of those photographs happen to be user-contributed, however, through various sections of the magazine where they tell you how you can contribute and in most cases they say something to the effect that "photographs cannot be returned and become the property of 'Birds & Blooms,'" thereby getting a lot of content for free -- or they sometimes will say they'll send you a free "suncatcher" or something similar if they use your photograph (token payment). That sort of thing is quite common among smaller PAPER publications. The INTERNET, on the other hand, is still a rather young and evolving area, and I think this idea of forums laying claim to perpetual use of all material posted on them might be a growing trend, since I now see it on both Dave's Garden and in the new iVillage TOS... Prior to this development, the internet, still being very much a sort of "wild west editorial environment," has had forums like these with sometimes experts and even famous people posting on them as just "regular Joes," sharing their knowledge and expertise, perhaps in some cases even relieved to finally be able to have something resembling "public conversations" without having to worry about being swamped by fans, and so forth, or repeatedly asked for free professional advice because people know they actually happen to be Dr. Phil, or Steven King, or whoever. And NO, I'm definitely NOT one of THOSE people... At one point a few years ago, I had a bit of "local celebrity" status as a weekly newspaper editor, but the biggest thing I've ever published was the cover story for a state-wide public policy journal read by all the lawmakers and public officials in SC... And I'm not aware of any such folks on the Carolina Gardening forum, but I DO know of at least one Professor of Environmental Sciences at the University of Vermont who is a sometimes (used to be regular) poster on the Ponds forum and wrote that forum's FAQs. He's been featured in pond programs on national programs on Public Television, too. I seriously doubt HE'D appreciate having HIS contributions -- many of which he doubtless gained through years of research and study both in his pond and at the university -- appropriated by iVillage to use for THEIR advertising, without attribution, for free. As for the photographs, Yeah, I've done a bit of "professional photography." I shot many of the photographs for several of the papers I worked for, and I also shot weddings for a while, and got some really good shots... And today, with digital cameras and the ability to see what you have and keep shooting until you get what you want, I can get even better shots (My theory on professional photographers has long been that the biggest difference between most pros and serious amateurs was how many shots they could afford to take)... So nowadays, I'm getting some garden shots I think are of publishable quality, although since I lost my paper I'm too blocked to get up the gumption to go back to free-lancing again... BUT I'd still like that option. And I'm sure I'm not the only one... If you want another example, go to the Ponds and Aquatic Plants forum, click on the Gallery and look for the Fall Ponds Photos (10-17, I believe), posted by Cliff_and_Joann. That lady (Joann seems to do all the posting) takes GREAT pictures and has some of the most beautiful ponds with some of the most beautiful koi I've ever seen... and she usually posts them fairly large. She doesn't deserve to have those "appropriated." No, Dianne. I won't leave (although they may kick me off with all I've been writing, lol). But I may be more selective with what I post and shy away from some of the more humorous or creative posts, or anything I think might look "attractive" to someone looking for something to "appropriate." And Marsha, I think your efforts on this front are admirable, so please don't think I was slamming you. I'm not really all that concerned about the cookies and partners and ads and so forth. I just don't like them laying claim to all our "intellectual property." By the way, it's not just me. I think all of YOU have a lot of "intellectual property" to protect, as well, even if you don't. Take care, Jeff

2 weeks and going strong for my 30" RNB. Just had the WGS yesterday and everything checked out. I had thought the oven was running low to the knob setting. He went through a checkout routine at 250, 350, 450deg using a thermocouple and it tracked very well. Apparently the $5 oven thermo I picked up at walmart wasn't as accurate as I had assumed. I think, from a thermodynamic standpoint, the only way to get a half cooked, half bloody turkey would be to either use the broiler (only top would be cooked) or if the bird was not fully thawed (likely). Even if the oven burner was plugged on one side (difficult to envision how that could happen), the big steel plate that is the oven floor would even the temps out to some extend. Not an ideal cooking situation, by any means, but would not lead to the results previously stated.

Oh my!!! I WISH you would've come to my Paint Dept.!!! To correct a couple things.... 1) Stores calibrate their Scanner(s), not the tinters. Although computerized tinters usually have to be calibrated yearly. 2) Competitive-brand fandeck software can cost a bundle, and some stores may not want to buy this kinda stuff. All these REALLY are...are just lab-scans of different fandecks, and converted to formulas for a certain stores'/brands colorant-databases. 3) I do two things....I'll look at the "Stored formula" in our competitive library, and compare it to a couple of scans. Then I "back off" of a couple colorants, and shoot the color. This way, I can always add more to tweak a color. >>> There's no way to know if a stores' "Scan-Library" (Competitive Fandecks) will match a chip until the paints actually made. >>> Ask me how I know this....;-) From now on people: * Specify in your painters' contracts that you DO NOT want a color matched into "their favorite" brand...UNLESS you're OK with it. Possibly something like "No color matching". * Or, like I deal with every day...."I want -color x- matched into C2 paint". No problem there! It's usually quite a step up from the color-chip/brand they have! * Inquire with painters if they have favorite brands, and find out specifics. If you have a firm preference, see if your painter is OK with it too. Many will apply what you like. Others are pretty set in their ways!! Sorry for being "Mr. Wordy" there! Faron

Yes, mine has opinions, often strong ones, and I really appreciate them. He has pretty good taste, quite compatible with my own, and a fantastic eye for color. He gets overwhelmed and shuts down if presented with too many options - normally more than about five - so I usually do all the research/legwork and bring him the final three options I've whittled all the possibilities down to, and then we choose from them together (or he says "I hate all of them and this is why", we discuss it, and I start over with that input). I always feel very bad for the husbands who get "steamrollered", who would care about how the house is decorated if they were allowed to, and end up living in a home that has absolutely nothing whatsoever to reflect them - the poor bugger ends up camping out in what amounts to being HER house. I'm not saying that every room has to have taxidermy critters and hockey jerseys in it if he's into hunting and sports, but it's his house too (and it's rather sad how he's so often expected to pay for all this decorating that doesn't take him into consideration at all). He may want something as minor as not having a zillion pillows on the couch, or preferring landscape photography to antique floral prints. There are several men on this forum who prove that men can and often do have excellent taste in decor when they don't buy into the bullpuckey that the presence of XY chromosomes means they automatically have no clue about decorating.