Just a few moments ago I posted this in regards to the serious nature of chow hound, and its demise to posters who would like a more cerebral experience: a poster stated they didn't come here for silliness or to be entertained.
This was my reply:
""" Bellachefa 32 minutes ago
Did you grow up in a home when children were to be seen but not heard at the dinner table. I grew up where food was hospitality, a celebration, entertainment. To not be silly, to not be entertaining, to not answer once again a question about lobster because it has been discussed already and we should just move on. . . well that way of thinking just doesn't click with me. Who decided that discussion of things on chow hound need be cerebral and serious? Certainly not the people that are rocking the food industry.
I will try to not entertain you or be silly. But alas, I will fail, because it is a most important part of all things chowish. Sitting down together, communicating, sharing ideas and dishes, and laughing, while entertaining and being entertained by others."""
So chowhounders. Is this a sequestered institution like an old new england boarding school for the brahmins to discuss food with seriousness and solemnity? Or is it a place to have a discussion, have some fun, and learn about the current food scene, trends, and ingredient based cooking ideas, with a bit of silliness added to the sauce?
There have also been comments about only helping hounders that help themselves. That doesn't sound very chowish to me.
There was a time I took timeouts because of over moderating and too many deletions. I think at this point the mods on board are doing ok and trying to balance fun with cerebral. I'm more likely to leave the boards now because of passive aggressive snakiness and cronyism that falls under the radar of the guidelines.
Why can't we have fun?