[LMB] Kay Carrasco RIP

alayne at twobikes.ottawa.on.ca alayne at twobikes.ottawa.on.ca
Tue May 4 21:51:25 BST 2021

I'm really sorry to hear of Ksy's death. Thanks to James for informing 

I checked and it seems as though Kay stopped posting after some health 
issues in 2008.

I found a whole bunch of great posts from her in my archives from 2003 to 
2007. Here's a few examples:

From: "Kay Carrasco" <koolbeans at dfn.com>
Subject: Re: [LMB] Yuck (OT:)
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 07:47:07 -0600

Nicholas Rosen

> I still wonder how much money these [p*rn] spammers are actually
making, and whether there's any way of making  their business
unprofitable. <

     Shoot them. Just shoot them. As far as I know, other than for some
artists, being dead is not profitable.

~ Kay, who doesn't mean "Die, spammer, die" *literally*... except for
that stuff.
From: "Kay Carrasco" <koolbeans at dfn.com>
Subject: [LMB] Scottish Reddi-Meals
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 14:18:23 -0600

Christopher Gwyn [1] notes:

> I'm not fond of The Scottish Restaurant, and that was the focus
of the parody. Their food is tasty if eaten every three or four
years, but more often than that just doesn't work. <

     They actually had something on their non-breakfast menu that
was more than merely edible, it was <gasp!> GOOD--the grilled
chicken flatbread. (If you left off the pickle-ey sauce, that
is.) So, naturally, they discontinued it. <wail!> I would not
only happily eat the things, but I'd also sometimes grab a couple
of them on the way home, saute up some diced potatoes, and dump
and mix the filling over that, eating the flatbread (rather like
a thick flour tortilla) separately. Yum! We loved 'em fixed that

    But just as your favorite tv show is invariably something too
low-rated to survive, and as soon as you're devoted to it, it's
cancelled, so it was with the late, lamented chicken flatbreads.
Sigh. I shoulda knowed.....

~ Kay, who just made herself hungry. Drat. But.....

[1]  Lookee!!!! *Christopher's back*!!! <bounce, poing, bounce,
grin, cheer, smiiiiile> My whole day just got a whole lot
brighter! Back to work now, though... :(
From: "Kay Carrasco" <koolbeans at dfn.com>
Subject: [LMB] All Things Scottish...?
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 16:41:49 -0600

Alayne McGregor observed:

> And, frankly, to call it a "Scottish" restaurant could be
termed an insult to Scots and those of Scots descent everywhere.

     Heh. It's an insult to the term "restaurant," for that
matter! <giggle> (Just my opinion! Just my opinion! Heck, I *do*
eat their breakfast stuff, sometimes....)

> I mean ... it doesn't even serve deep-fried chocolate bars or
Scotch eggs or haggis :-) :-) :-) <

     Have you ever seen, or heard of, *canned* haggis? I swear,
after a recent food drive, one of my colleagues was helping to
sort the donated stuff, and found a can labelled thus. She called
my boss--our local all-things-Scots expert--to ask him what the
stuff *was*. After getting the explanation, I think she quietly
removed the can from the other foodstuffs. Hee.

     There are really all *sorts* of things the Scottish are held
to be responsible for (some of which, actually, they *are*),
among them: Kilts. Bagpipes. Calvinism. Golf. Whiskey. Blue face
paint. Tartans.  Kurgans.  Haggis.  Dourness. Nessie.

     I'm sure there's more, but that should get us started. How
many of you can spot the "imposters" in that list? ;D

~ Kay Carrasco, nee McCowan. <G>
From: "Kay Carrasco" <koolbeans at dfn.com>
Subject: Re: [LMB] ot: "want" vs "would buy"
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 08:18:19 -0600

Pouncer queries Christopher:

>>   However they have not made money by selling people what they
wanted, they made it by selling people what they would buy - and
the difference is crucial. <<

> I don't understand that, would you offer a couple more
examples? <

     Chistopher will be able to offer a better clarification of
what he meant, but I have some idea of it myself, so I'll offer

     Scenario A:  The merchant discovers an unfulfilled desire--a
niche, if you will, or a gap which the market is not presenting
covering. The merchant then develops a product to fill that
niche, and it is successful. This is the category of "people
want" the product (or service).

     Scenario B:  The merchant has a product.  In order to sell
it, he must -create a demand- for it.  By marketing it in ways
that make people wish to have it, he succeeds. This would come
under the category of "people would buy."

     The Scottish Restaurant, in these examples, has actually
employed both methods.  "People want" came first, in their case.
They discovered the desire for food that was served quickly and
conveniently, at reasonable quality, at low prices. By
franchising the restaurants, they happened upon a second desire:
the appeal of utter reliability--the food may not have been
wildly exciting stuff, but hey... whether you were in LA or
Newark or Oklahoma City or Podunkville, Kentucky, if you went to
TSR, you knew exactly what you'd get.

     (As an aside, and another good example, both Holiday Inns and
Howard Johnson's did the same thing with hotels. For the
traveller, it was comforting to know that you could make a
reservation at one of these franchises anywhere in the country,
and you could rely on what you would find when you got there.)

     Back to TSR. Once established, they switched to the
above-described method B: creating demand. The rollout of new
products is constant--as it must be, really, to keep a brand
growing in market share--and the advertising is, as you know, a
bombardment. Sell, sell, sell! First develop the product, *then*
create the demand (if you can).

     Some TSR products, such as Egg McMuffins, were instant,
enormous successes, and earned their permanent place on the menu.
Others, such as the late, lamented <sniffle> Chicken Flatbreads,
apparently didn't cut it. They couldn't convince enough people
(create enough demand) for the product to be sufficiently
profitable, so out it goes.  And then it's "Next...?"

     Every entepreneur dreams of discovering one of those natural
unfilled niches, the product that, when you see it, it's a total
forehead-slapper: Why didn't *I* think of that?! There's a lot
more business failures out there, by people who were trying to
*force* niches, than for people who actually *found* them. That's
the difference.

     Make more sense now? (And Christopher, was this *at all* what
*you* meant? Or did I just answer a question that wasn't even
asked....? <G>)

~ Kay
From: "Kay Carrasco" <koolbeans at dfn.com>
Subject: Re: [LMB] OT: Crepes on the go, technical pointers
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 19:43:16 -0600

Agnes Charrel-Berthillier advised:

> If the crepe is folded properly (quarter-disc, or, better
1/6th) nothing can escape from the bottom or the sides. You just
have to be careful that nothing overflows from the top <...>
Honestly it is no more difficult than eating an ice-cream cone in
really hot weather  <

     Oooohhhh. *That's* what we were doing wrong. <G> I shall have
to remember this method next time Guido makes crepes. We were
folding them like burritos, though we didn't attempt eating them
hand-held--it was plate and fork--but even that was a touch
messy. I was attempting to imagine trying to... oh, never mind.
If we'd've done that, I'd still be bleaching the blueberry
filling stains....

> Burritos are way messier. <

     They shouldn't be, actually. A properly tucked & rolled
burrito is quite neat, providing you're not trying to fill it
with something overly runny. Even then, it's a two-step process:
1.) Assemble it properly, and 2.) hold it correctly.

     About the assembly: Put the filling in the center (do not
overfill), leaving 1 to 2" at the bottom edge clear; turn up that
edge; pull one side over, tucking it beneath the filling; either
pull the last edge over or roll the burrito over; you may need to
push the filling at the top edge down a bit so that it doesn't
overflow, but that end shouldn't be closed--it's where you start

     About the proper grip: you hold a burrito with only three
fingers and your thumb; your pinky finger should be crooked
beneath the bottom edge, supporting the tucked end.

     In general: Tortillas that are too thin just don't support
any filling very well. Use them for butter and cinnamon & sugar,
or butter and honey, and fold them per the crepe instructions.
Too thick tortillas don't work well either, because they're not
pliable enough to tuck n' roll right.  Tear off pieces and use
them as "scoops." (Which sounds like tacky table manners, I know,
but it's actually not if you do it neatly! Just takes a bit of
practice. <G>)

~ Kay, done with today's Helpful Hints About Ethnic Food.... and
now back to work-brought-home... *again*...!
From: "Kay Carrasco" <koolbeans at dfn.com>
Subject: Re: [LMB] OT: Laughing Gas and Ether frolics
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 08:19:52 -0600

    And now, for a completely different perspective on nitrous....
(Well, someone touched on it briefly, but I didn't have a chance
to expand upon it at the time.)

     Engines. Racing engines. Drag racing engines. Which one would
think, logically, would be pretty stout power plants, considering
the energy they must be able to produce. But non, non. I'm here
to tell ya that racing motors are the most persnickity, delicate,
fragile (never mind expensive, heh!) machines as ever was. And
adding nitrous to them simply exacerbates said fragility. Trust
me. ;)

     We had one nitrous-boosted motor that near-miraculously ran
without serious breakdown for something like eight years. Had
another which blew *four times in a row* on nitrous, mostly by
head gasket failure, before being shipped to Albuquerque for some
beautifully (and $!$!$) precise machine-work. This was in 1996,
and it is with us still, and still turning 10.60's runs. But
*without nitrous*.  Because "we" (heh, *I*) made a pact that if
it ran 10's without the boost, that that was by-golly fast
enough, and we would not risk all that expensive work by trying
to squeeze a few more hundreths out of it. Bargain kept.

     So yeah, NOS is fun to play with for its enhancing
factor--*if* it's properly set up *and* compatible with the
engine *and* your machine shop can give you precise and
consistent enough clearances *and* the driver knows exactly when
and where and how to "hit the button." Otherwise... save it for
the parties. (And no, never have. I promise. It was for the
*motors*. <G>)

~ Kay
From: "Kay Carrasco" <koolbeans at dfn.com>
Subject: [LMB] MCF or The Accidental Acronym
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 13:48:22 -0600

Brian Hurt declares:

> For the record, I was the one who made the original MCF
comment.  And my point was not to ban them <...> but that
screamingly off-topic posts were not considered "bad". <

     Point taken. To some, indeed they can be "tiresome," as
Kirsten said (in the post I just snipped, which useage you were
addressing); to others, they're quite enriching (and I'm at that
end of the spectrum, myself). For anyone, though, I'd venture to
say, it's the *subject matter* of any post, rather than merely or
strictly its *category*-- on topic, off topic, screamingly <G>
off topic, TMI, MCF, or whatever -- that's going to determine its
delete-ability. So, what it all boils down to is:

     Interested? Read. Not? Don't. Bored? Delete. Offended?
Ignore. Engaged? Reply. Inspired? Post. Angered? Chill. Amused?
Applaud. Now, see how simple it really is?

>  And I wish people  would stop misrepresenting my position. <

     Aw, now now now, Brian. <struggles to smother a smile> You
seem to be a little, ummm, twitchy about this. <snuffle, giggle,
snort> Just because someone uses the acronym MCF, that really,
truly, honestly, does *not* necessarily equate to a *p'tui!*
connotation. Really, it doesn't. <gasp, choke, guffaw> No, no,
*really*! ;)  ;)  ;)  <grinnnnnn>

     It's just that it was your luck--good luck, bad luck,
whatever luck (hee!)--to have coined a phrase so evocative, so
winsome, so, so, so.... eminently acronymical, in this case....
that it just instantaneously fell into List Lexiconism--even Lois
used it, and not negatively, as I recall. Like "Bryant [of
books]" or "Pizza" or "Yeltar" or "YMMV" or "curried peasants" or
any number of other words or phrases that have been adopted into
the list-culture hereabouts, it's become a part of what makes
us.... us.

     So don't fight it, ne? Maybe it did mutate from your original
intent, but... so...??? There are surely worse claims to fame
than an accidental acronym....

> We now return you to your regularly scheduled off-topic thread.

     Which this isn't, being in the nature of list biz. <G>

~ Kay

Alayne McGregor
alayne at twobikes.ottawa.on.ca

What we need is a tough new kind of feminism with no illusions. ... We
need a kind of feminism that aims not just to assimilate into the
institutions that men have created over the centuries, but to infiltrate
and subvert them. -- Barbara Ehrenreich

More information about the Lois-Bujold mailing list