[conspire] Housekeeping, again

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Edward Cherlin (echerlin at gmail.com):

> I was thinking of a sign put up on meeting days only with just a few
> things that newcomers might not know, like leaving bags outside. And
> something put up on the Net for reference. All the rest to be taken
> care of by people who are sufficiently enclued to tell others what the
> house rules are as needed. As long as you don't mind the guests
> pointing out to other guests, quietly, that they are being yabanjin.

I not only don't mind but also have repeatedly _pleaded_ with the
regulars to do exactly that.  This has been one of my prime areas of
dissatisfaction. 

> As I have learned your expectations, I have endeavored to communicate
> them to others. 

Thank you, sincerely.

> As to the not-yet-garlic bread, their choice, their loss, nicht wahr?

Well, it _does_ deprive me and everyone else of the loaf -- or at least
of the portion of it they take.  Above and beyond that, I'm just utterly
amazed at people missing that (1) it's food I'm _working on_ (i.e., just
got through slicing five seconds before, and (2) is right in the middle
of the food-prep area, not the serving area.

And what the fsck happened to _asking_, in situations where there's
reason for doubt?  I'm led to suspect that the prevailing logic was "I'm
hungry and that looks delicious; the hell with courtesy.  I'll just
assume it's for me."  As a cook, I'm flattered.  As host, not so much.

> But now that I know that food on that counter should be treated as not
> yet served, or not yet done, I can observe it. The cake and a few
> other things confused me. 

Granted that those one or two items were confusingly misplaced.  (As I
said, Deirdre tells me the convention about proper use of counterspace
is too subtle.)  FWIW, I was looking at the cakes, frowning, and
thinking "Who put that _there_?"

> On eating your food: I endeavor to bring more than I consume, and to
> eat only what is set out for eating. My apologies if I have made a
> mistake.

You've personally been a delight in that department, and generous.

> On raiding your freezer: the only things that I am aware are fair game
> are donated sherbets. But that could confuse people, too.

A good point.

> I like the Buddhist version better--base behavior on an understanding
> of its consequences, not on somebody else's opinion.

Me, I think I labour from a horrible mish-mosh[1] of Taoism, Veblen,
Stanley Milgram, the Eddas, dad's horribly unfashionable Existentialism,
mum's Midwestern sense of duty, Ambrose Bierce, and way too much I.F.
Stone, Kurt Vonnegut, and Paul Krassner.  No wonder I turned out wrong.


[1] Leo Roston reports that Groucho Marx offered this word of advice to
a visiting Congressman on "You Bet Your Life":  "You'll never get votes
in the Bronx if you go on saying 'mish-mash' instead of 'mish-mosh'."  
(I may be goyish, but I'm not _that_ goyish.)