coffee-forum.net
Promoting coffee discussion.

Main
Date: 12 Apr 2007 19:06:13
From: Lloyd Parsons
Subject: New coffee roaster
Over on coffeegeek forums, there is an announcement and discussion of a
new 1 lb, smokeless roaster. It is worth reading about.




 
Date: 19 Apr 2007 11:23:55
From:
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On Apr 19, 10:48 am, jim schulman <jim_schul...@ameritech.net > wrote:
> On 18 Apr 2007 21:22:13 -0700, Jbe...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >On that note I will at anytime in the near future provide Jim with a
> >working unit for his review. I ask only that he give it a fair
> >appraisal without any hangover from this forum.
>
> I'd be happy to test it; and will even buy the unit from you if it
> passes -- a one pound roaster that works well is obviously a major
> achievement, and I sometimes do need to roast a lot of the same coffee
> in one session.
>
> Here's the format I propose: After I get comfortable with the machine,
> I'll roast 1 pound and 1/2 pound lots of several outstanding coffees
> on your roaster to cupping levels and to light espresso levels. I'll
> roast the same coffees on my set up, which I know produces roasts in
> line with shop roasts. All roasts will be done within a four hour
> window.
>
> I'll have friends over for a blind cupping & shot pulling session 24
> hours later, and will overnight samples to good cuppers who want to
> participate.
>
> You don't even need to send me the roaster; I can have the greens sent
> to you instead, and can send you some of my roasts for calibration
> purposes.

Jim..

Will you be at the SCAA Show in Long Beach...? if so swing by my booth
443 and we will figure this out... If you won't to be in attendance..
I'm having more units shipped in late next week for the show and to
provide as testers to people such as yourself.

Either way send me an email to tahoe_joe@yahoo.com and we'll get it
worked out..

Joe






  
Date: 12 May 2007 23:03:53
From: jim schulman
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On 19 Apr 2007 11:23:55 -0700, Jbehm2@gmail.com wrote:

>Will you be at the SCAA Show in Long Beach...? if so swing by my booth
>443 and we will figure this out..

I visited Joe at the SCAA and looked at the roaster. The testing will
come when the first production run arrives here around mid-June.

The roaster is a purpose designed oven heated by 1100 watt quartz
elements, using a mesh drum, and an exhaust fan that pulls the air
through a 600 watt smoke incinerator. In the roast I saw, it seemed to
eliminate the soot and smoke, but not the coffee aromas.

One cannot program exact profiles, but there are about six cycling
patterns available on the heaters. These automatically adjust
themselves to the set roast time. I cannot tell how effective these
are.

It has the same apparent build quality as table top convection ovens
or toasters, and is being manufactured under the Ronco label.
Apperently, Joe's blowup when I mentioned his earlier Ronco rotisserie
drum is that it happened before he was ready to announce this. From my
perspective, it's a good thing, since presumably Ronco has a better QC
presence at the Chinese manufacturing sites than a small company
contracting out of the US.

I didn't see enough to comment on the roast quality. If I get a test
unit; I'll send out roasted samples to other home roasters, along
with green for them to comparison roast, so they can report their
judgements.

If works as claimed; it will be a real contender.


   
Date: 13 May 2007 21:07:39
From: D. Ross
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster


    
Date: 14 May 2007 11:29:33
From: jim schulman
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On Sun, 13 May 2007 21:07:39 GMT, ross@math.hawaii.NOSPAM.edu (D.
Ross) wrote:

>Although there is a safety recall on right now for Ronco rotisseries.

That's rather better than the absence of a recall when Hearthware
roasters are 150F out of calibration


    
Date: 14 May 2007 11:28:11
From: jim schulman
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On Sun, 13 May 2007 21:07:39 GMT, ross@math.hawaii.NOSPAM.edu (D.
Ross) wrote:

>Are you saying that he was angry with you not because of any actual
>offensive content to your post, but because you inadvertantly made it
>possible for people to infer an impending deal?

Both, I think. But I'm focussing on the roaster.


  
Date: 19 Apr 2007 13:55:48
From: jim schulman
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On 19 Apr 2007 11:23:55 -0700, Jbehm2@gmail.com wrote:

>Will you be at the SCAA Show in Long Beach...? if so swing by my booth
>443 and we will figure this out... If you won't to be in attendance..
>I'm having more units shipped in late next week for the show and to
>provide as testers to people such as yourself.
>
>Either way send me an email to tahoe_joe@yahoo.com and we'll get it
>worked out..

I'll be there. Check you email.


 
Date: 18 Apr 2007 21:22:13
From:
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On Apr 18, 8:16 am, Randy G. <f...@DESPAMMOcncnet.com > wrote:
> Jbe...@gmail.com wrote:
> >On Apr 18, 3:25 am, jim schulman <jim_schul...@ameritech.net> wrote:
> >> On 17 Apr 2007 19:49:12 -0700, Jbe...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >> >> Q: What do you get when you instrument and add smoke handling to a bad
> >> >> one pound roaster?
>
> >> >> A: An easy and clean way to ruin a pound of green coffee.
>
> >> >You know what you get when people can post drawings that prove you
> >> >100% wrong on gen 1 as I just did at cofffegeek... and could as well
> >> >on gen 2
>
> >> >You get a loss of credibility....
>
> >> Perhaps you could hasten along the loss of my credibilty if you posted
> >> some details on roast and cood down times.
>
> >Perhaps you should slowly reread what was written on page 2 of the
> >thread.. cooling was discussed as were options on bringing the cooling
> >times down after Mark stated he felt the time tro cool in default was
> >too long... Further as stated above albeit brief... but in fact there
> >was data on roast times...
>
> >whats your excuse now for being inaccurate........yet again
>
> Joe,
>
> Regardless as to how you perceive the comments by Jim, your personal
> reputation as well as the value of the roaster would be far better
> served if you acted more like a salesman and less like a parent whose
> child was insulted in school by the teacher. Jim, as well as others
> here in this forum, are highly knowledgeable home roasters (and in
> some cases, pro roasters). Regardless of the level or approach of
> negative comments concerning your appliance, a positive, informative,
> and quantitative response from you would be a far wiser approach. I
> perceive that the market has a huge vacuum in the 1 pound capacity
> home roasting appliance that can be sold for anything under $500-600
> and if you can do that, more power to you.
>
> I e-mailed you nearly a week ago stating my interest in reviewing your
> roasting appliance on my website, but I never even received a reply
> from you.
>
> "Me thinks thou doest protest too much."
>
> Randy "didn't mean to shakes my speare" G.
> http://www.EspressoMyEspresso.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Randy,

Your points are well taken and do carry a great deal of weight. I just
found myself placed in a position having to defend my work from somone
who'd never seen my work, nor tasted the fruits of my labor. That or
sit idly by while this all went on.

Had the reverse been true and had I taken shots at Jim's work without
knowing Jim nor ever viewing his work. Had I misquoted Jim in ways to
shine a negative light on his labors, how would all of that been
viewed on this very board?

I'd like to believe he would have been defended and have every right
to defend himself.

If I wet a bit over the top in my defense... I then apologize to all
as that was not my intent.

On that note I will at anytime in the near future provide Jim with a
working unit for his review. I ask only that he give it a fair
appraisal without any hangover from this forum.

Joe

ps... Randy... I've received about 300 emails in the last 7 days that
I'm trying to pick through, while at the same time finish all
preparations for the show and insure everything goes as planned for
the show... along with finalize offices and customer service issues.
You'' have a response within the next 2 days...



  
Date: 19 Apr 2007 12:48:34
From: jim schulman
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On 18 Apr 2007 21:22:13 -0700, Jbehm2@gmail.com wrote:

>On that note I will at anytime in the near future provide Jim with a
>working unit for his review. I ask only that he give it a fair
>appraisal without any hangover from this forum.

I'd be happy to test it; and will even buy the unit from you if it
passes -- a one pound roaster that works well is obviously a major
achievement, and I sometimes do need to roast a lot of the same coffee
in one session.

Here's the format I propose: After I get comfortable with the machine,
I'll roast 1 pound and 1/2 pound lots of several outstanding coffees
on your roaster to cupping levels and to light espresso levels. I'll
roast the same coffees on my set up, which I know produces roasts in
line with shop roasts. All roasts will be done within a four hour
window.

I'll have friends over for a blind cupping & shot pulling session 24
hours later, and will overnight samples to good cuppers who want to
participate.

You don't even need to send me the roaster; I can have the greens sent
to you instead, and can send you some of my roasts for calibration
purposes.


   
Date: 20 Apr 2007 09:55:48
From: Dan Bollinger
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
> You don't even need to send me the roaster; I can have the greens sent
> to you instead, and can send you some of my roasts for calibration
> purposes.

Jim, For the sake a clarity and accuracy, doing a cupping without seeing or
using the machine would be a review of its roasts, but not of the machine.

Dan



    
Date: 21 Apr 2007 15:11:03
From:
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
In alt.coffee, Dan Bollinger <danNObollinger@insightspambb.com > wrote:
> > You don't even need to send me the roaster; I can have the greens sent
> > to you instead, and can send you some of my roasts for calibration
> > purposes.

> Jim, For the sake a clarity and accuracy, doing a cupping without seeing or
> using the machine would be a review of its roasts, but not of the machine.

The proof is in the pudding...

--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel



    
Date: 20 Apr 2007 11:48:08
From: jim schulman
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:55:48 -0500, "Dan Bollinger"
<danNObollinger@insightSPAMbb.com > wrote:

>> You don't even need to send me the roaster; I can have the greens sent
>> to you instead, and can send you some of my roasts for calibration
>> purposes.
>
>Jim, For the sake a clarity and accuracy, doing a cupping without seeing or
>using the machine would be a review of its roasts, but not of the machine.

True. But that is where my skepticism lies.

In terms of usability, a drum roaster with some form of smoke ducting,
seems to be well ahead of the curve in terms of the major irritations:
noise and soot. If quick cooling needs to be done externally, it
remains to be seen how easily the drum contents can be transferred to
the usual sieve & fan or bucket & shopvac setups.


     
Date: 20 Apr 2007 15:54:30
From: Lloyd Parsons
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
In article <g7rh23h2g8dktapp2e38ptt0gbs9nd7ool@4ax.com >,
jim schulman <jim_schulman@ameritech.net > wrote:

> On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:55:48 -0500, "Dan Bollinger"
> <danNObollinger@insightSPAMbb.com> wrote:
>
> >> You don't even need to send me the roaster; I can have the greens sent
> >> to you instead, and can send you some of my roasts for calibration
> >> purposes.
> >
> >Jim, For the sake a clarity and accuracy, doing a cupping without seeing or
> >using the machine would be a review of its roasts, but not of the machine.
>
> True. But that is where my skepticism lies.
>
> In terms of usability, a drum roaster with some form of smoke ducting,
> seems to be well ahead of the curve in terms of the major irritations:
> noise and soot. If quick cooling needs to be done externally, it
> remains to be seen how easily the drum contents can be transferred to
> the usual sieve & fan or bucket & shopvac setups.

While removing the beans from the Gene roaster is easy enough to do to
allow external cooling, I generally let the Gene do the cooling. In the
tests that I did (admittedly not blind nor scientific), I couldn't tell
the difference.


  
Date: 18 Apr 2007 22:23:14
From: Randy G.
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
Jbehm2@gmail.com wrote:
>Randy,
>
>Your points are well taken and do carry a great deal of weight. I just
>found myself placed in a position having to defend my work from somone
>who'd never seen my work, nor tasted the fruits of my labor. That or
>sit idly by while this all went on.
>
The greatest skill of a salesman (and that is what you are at this
point- trying to sell your product) is to convince a person that they
were wrong and you were right but 'selling' your product. I use to do
it and it is not always easy.

Step 1 - believe in what you are selling. If you can do that, no
attack or negative comment from anyone can sway you from your belief.
Step 2- make others believe in what you are selling.

The best way to accomplish number 2, IMO, is by using facts to
educate. Maybe that is just the best way for me, having taught for 20
years. When you become defensive and negative you have lost the sale.
Not being critical, just trying to help.

>Had the reverse been true and had I taken shots at Jim's work without
>knowing Jim nor ever viewing his work. Had I misquoted Jim in ways to
>shine a negative light on his labors, how would all of that been
>viewed on this very board?
>
>I'd like to believe he would have been defended and have every right
>to defend himself.
>
There are folks here who may have defended you if they had some facts,
details, ad copy, testing results from independent sources, graphs,
charts, or anything else to go on that could be used as evidence. Your
negative response to the perceived attacks with so little hard facts
or data available just added 'evidence' to the rumors of "vaporware,"
overly-long cool-down times, and other such (mis?)conceptions.

>If I wet a bit over the top in my defense... I then apologize to all
>as that was not my intent.
>
I hate to see what happens when you get REALLY pissed! ;-)

>ps... Randy... I've received about 300 emails in the last 7 days that
>I'm trying to pick through, while at the same time finish all
>preparations for the show and insure everything goes as planned for
>the show... along with finalize offices and customer service issues.
>You'' have a response within the next 2 days...
>
I will definitely be dropping by your booth for a talk about your
roaster. And if I may suggest, put an auto reply on your E-Mail
program to send an "I received your message" reply to all with that
explanation.


Randy "Sure, if you WANT me to piss you off, I can do that" G.
http://www.EspressoMyEspresso.com




 
Date: 18 Apr 2007 05:59:25
From:
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On Apr 18, 3:25 am, jim schulman <jim_schul...@ameritech.net > wrote:
> On 17 Apr 2007 19:49:12 -0700, Jbe...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> >> Q: What do you get when you instrument and add smoke handling to a bad
> >> one pound roaster?
>
> >> A: An easy and clean way to ruin a pound of green coffee.
>
> >You know what you get when people can post drawings that prove you
> >100% wrong on gen 1 as I just did at cofffegeek... and could as well
> >on gen 2
>
> >You get a loss of credibility....
>
> Perhaps you could hasten along the loss of my credibilty if you posted
> some details on roast and cood down times.

Perhaps you should slowly reread what was written on page 2 of the
thread.. cooling was discussed as were options on bringing the cooling
times down after Mark stated he felt the time tro cool in default was
too long... Further as stated above albeit brief... but in fact there
was data on roast times...

whats your excuse now for being inaccurate........yet again



  
Date: 18 Apr 2007 08:16:35
From: Randy G.
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
Jbehm2@gmail.com wrote:

>On Apr 18, 3:25 am, jim schulman <jim_schul...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>> On 17 Apr 2007 19:49:12 -0700, Jbe...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >> Q: What do you get when you instrument and add smoke handling to a bad
>> >> one pound roaster?
>>
>> >> A: An easy and clean way to ruin a pound of green coffee.
>>
>> >You know what you get when people can post drawings that prove you
>> >100% wrong on gen 1 as I just did at cofffegeek... and could as well
>> >on gen 2
>>
>> >You get a loss of credibility....
>>
>> Perhaps you could hasten along the loss of my credibilty if you posted
>> some details on roast and cood down times.
>
>Perhaps you should slowly reread what was written on page 2 of the
>thread.. cooling was discussed as were options on bringing the cooling
>times down after Mark stated he felt the time tro cool in default was
>too long... Further as stated above albeit brief... but in fact there
>was data on roast times...
>
>whats your excuse now for being inaccurate........yet again
>

Joe,

Regardless as to how you perceive the comments by Jim, your personal
reputation as well as the value of the roaster would be far better
served if you acted more like a salesman and less like a parent whose
child was insulted in school by the teacher. Jim, as well as others
here in this forum, are highly knowledgeable home roasters (and in
some cases, pro roasters). Regardless of the level or approach of
negative comments concerning your appliance, a positive, informative,
and quantitative response from you would be a far wiser approach. I
perceive that the market has a huge vacuum in the 1 pound capacity
home roasting appliance that can be sold for anything under $500-600
and if you can do that, more power to you.

I e-mailed you nearly a week ago stating my interest in reviewing your
roasting appliance on my website, but I never even received a reply
from you.

"Me thinks thou doest protest too much."


Randy "didn't mean to shakes my speare" G.
http://www.EspressoMyEspresso.com




 
Date: 18 Apr 2007 05:25:40
From:
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On Apr 18, 3:23 am, jim schulman <jim_schul...@ameritech.net > wrote:
> On 17 Apr 2007 17:38:18 -0700, Jbe...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >I have no problems with people making any statement as long as they
> >are accurate and considering 150+ people including the San Diego Home
> >Roasters saw the unit of which Jim you weren't one at any demo I did,
> >the statements you've made are in fact less than accurate.
>
> My apologies.
>
> I had your roaster confused with the add on rotisserie drums and
> modified Ronco roasters on sale at
>
> >http://www.coffeeroastersclub.com/index.php
>
> Put it down to incipient senility. It's easy to get confused because
> these roasters are based on a patent filed by someone named Joe Behm:
>
> >http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6497175.html
>
> The roaster being discussed here has a patent too:
>
> >http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?wo=2003031893
>
> It's these entirely coincidental resemblences that threw me off.


You know excuses are interesting when trying to justify poor data
collection and research..

As to cool down... did yu read what was written ... obviously not...
because in the early pages of the "post" I in fact did address the
cool down in several ways explaining option etc... And I in fact
posted albeit brief info on roast times.....

Either way it is still no excuse for having made comments as if they
were statements of facts about roast times, unit design, copying Ronco
etc... when you never have seen the untits demonstrated or for that
matter seen the units...

And that does say something about an individuals credibility when they
can make ascertations as though they were facts then find more excuses
to cover the excuses for why the facts in fact aren't factual.

Face it.... you are wrong.... no excuses....




  
Date: 18 Apr 2007 09:14:14
From: jim schulman
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On 18 Apr 2007 05:25:40 -0700, Jbehm2@gmail.com wrote:

>As to cool down... did yu read what was written ... obviously not...
>because in the early pages of the "post" I in fact did address the
>cool down in several ways explaining option etc... And I in fact
>posted albeit brief info on roast times.....
>
Found it!
http://coffeegeek.com/forums/coffee/homeroast/291225
11th post down

18 minutes to roast 1 pound, 13 minutes to cool it.

>
>Face it.... you are wrong.... no excuses....
>
I wasn't making excuses; I was being sarcastic. So let me be direct
about what I'm saying:

You are the designer of the rotisserie roaster, and this roaster is
derivative of that one. The roasting and cooling times are in the same
underperforming ballpark; and the added electronic controls and smoke
handling cannot change that.

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But nothing you've dog and ponied out in
these threads contradicts this.

I would welcome you actually speaking instead.

For instance, the roaster might work within normal drum roast
guidelines, that is, 10 to 15 minute roasts, and 3 minutes or less to
cool, when loaded with fewer beans. If so, you might consider that
you're addressing an audience of experienced home roasters and tell us
at what weight we would get to this standard profile.

Instead, you proclaim that an 18 minute roast, 13 minute cooldown is,
according to an unnamed cupper, "less bakey" than a home drum. If
you're talking about the Hottop, I find the statement incredible.

It could be true neverthelss, but if so, you'd have to give some
evidence. A shop or sample roaster, operated to these parameters,
would produce a very flat cup indeed. If yours does not, you need to
explain how your design differs in its roasting and cooling process
from a conventional drum.


   
Date: 18 Apr 2007 14:42:26
From: Randall Nortman
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On 2007-04-18, jim schulman <jim_schulman@ameritech.net > wrote:
> On 18 Apr 2007 05:25:40 -0700, Jbehm2@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>As to cool down... did yu read what was written ... obviously not...
>>because in the early pages of the "post" I in fact did address the
>>cool down in several ways explaining option etc... And I in fact
>>posted albeit brief info on roast times.....
>>
> Found it!
> http://coffeegeek.com/forums/coffee/homeroast/291225
> 11th post down
>
> 18 minutes to roast 1 pound, 13 minutes to cool it.

He also says, later in that thread, that if you want faster cooling
you can open the door to speed it up, or even reach in and pull out
the cylinder and dump it (presumably wearing gloves). Seems to me
that it's unreasonable to expect any roaster to have decent cool-down
withing the roasting chamber itself. Professional drum roasters, as I
understand it, all dump the beans for cooling. So if you want to be
lazy, let the machine do its best at cooling them in the chamber. If
you want to be slightly less lazy, open the door when roasting is done
and you'll speed it up. If you want really good coffee, pull out the
cylinder, dump the beans, and cool them yourself.

Here is the comment where he talks about this:
http://coffeegeek.com/forums/coffee/homeroast/291302#291302

DISCLAIMER: I've never seen this roaster or any of its predecessors,
don't know the inventor, and have no idea whether it's a decent
roaster or not. I'm just pointing out what he's already said on the
subject, and frankly it seems pretty reasonable to me. I'm not sure
what all the acrimony is about -- either this will be a decent
roaster, or it's hype. We will only know once uninterested third
parties get their hands on an actual production version and tell us
what they think.

--
Randall


    
Date: 18 Apr 2007 21:39:48
From: Mike Garner
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
In article <m7qVh.22900$PL.8341@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net >,
usenet8189@wonderclown.com says...

> He also says, later in that thread, that if you want faster cooling
> you can open the door to speed it up, or even reach in and pull out
> the cylinder and dump it (presumably wearing gloves). Seems to me
> that it's unreasonable to expect any roaster to have decent cool-down
> withing the roasting chamber itself. Professional drum roasters, as I
> understand it, all dump the beans for cooling. So if you want to be
> lazy, let the machine do its best at cooling them in the chamber. If
> you want to be slightly less lazy, open the door when roasting is done
> and you'll speed it up. If you want really good coffee, pull out the
> cylinder, dump the beans, and cool them yourself.
>
> Here is the comment where he talks about this:
> http://coffeegeek.com/forums/coffee/homeroast/291302#291302


If I'm paying $399 for a roaster, I expect it to cool the beans in a
reasonable amount of time. Considering that for $399 I could *buy* a
drum and gas grill and still have about $100 left and a superior
roaster, I don't see the value.

Mike


     
Date: 18 Apr 2007 15:01:41
From: I->Ian
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 21:39:48 GMT, Mike Garner <coffee@quar.net > wrote:

>In article <m7qVh.22900$PL.8341@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
>usenet8189@wonderclown.com says...
>
>> He also says, later in that thread, that if you want faster cooling
>> you can open the door to speed it up, or even reach in and pull out
>> the cylinder and dump it (presumably wearing gloves). Seems to me
>> that it's unreasonable to expect any roaster to have decent cool-down
>> withing the roasting chamber itself. Professional drum roasters, as I
>> understand it, all dump the beans for cooling. So if you want to be
>> lazy, let the machine do its best at cooling them in the chamber. If
>> you want to be slightly less lazy, open the door when roasting is done
>> and you'll speed it up. If you want really good coffee, pull out the
>> cylinder, dump the beans, and cool them yourself.
>>
>> Here is the comment where he talks about this:
>> http://coffeegeek.com/forums/coffee/homeroast/291302#291302
>
>
>If I'm paying $399 for a roaster, I expect it to cool the beans in a
>reasonable amount of time. Considering that for $399 I could *buy* a
>drum and gas grill and still have about $100 left and a superior
>roaster, I don't see the value.
>
>Mike

Staying indoors?


 
Date: 17 Apr 2007 19:49:12
From:
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster

>
> Q: What do you get when you instrument and add smoke handling to a bad
> one pound roaster?
>
> A: An easy and clean way to ruin a pound of green coffee.

You know what you get when people can post drawings that prove you
100% wrong on gen 1 as I just did at cofffegeek... and could as well
on gen 2

You get a loss of credibility....




  
Date: 18 Apr 2007 05:25:32
From: jim schulman
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On 17 Apr 2007 19:49:12 -0700, Jbehm2@gmail.com wrote:

>
>>
>> Q: What do you get when you instrument and add smoke handling to a bad
>> one pound roaster?
>>
>> A: An easy and clean way to ruin a pound of green coffee.
>
>You know what you get when people can post drawings that prove you
>100% wrong on gen 1 as I just did at cofffegeek... and could as well
>on gen 2
>
>You get a loss of credibility....
>

Perhaps you could hasten along the loss of my credibilty if you posted
some details on roast and cood down times.


 
Date: 17 Apr 2007 17:38:18
From:
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
I have no problems with people making any statement as long as they
are accurate and considering 150+ people including the San Diego Home
Roasters saw the unit of which Jim you weren't one at any demo I did,
the statements you've made are in fact less than accurate.

Demos of Gen1 took place at Royal Coffee(Aug 2003), SDHR, SCAA Long
Beach(Aug 2003) and a group demo to the Del Cerro Kiwanis(Aug 2003) at
which a full survey was taken for marketing purposes..Need a copy?

Hell, the editor of Espresso Newspaper in SD... did a write up and had
a picture in the paper..."Yours truly was pretty impressed with the
contraption-imagine being able to completely one up the smartass wine
snob in your building with one of these babies...foodies break out your
wallets"..... SD Espresso Newspaper

Gen 1 was an original design from the ground up....... it was also
designed to be a mini-oven but upon reflection I felt it too large. It
had smoke removal and built in cooling fans COOLING FAN... Several
notables in the coffee industry in fact HAD seen the unit and reviewed
it as did Scott Reed, and Alex Mason of Royal Coffee. Kenneth Davids
accepted an invite but never showed.

It was NEVER a modified rotisserie... to state it was or is a modified
rotisserie is in FACT 100% hhhhmmmm inaccurate..and terribly odd you
state as such given ... you never saw it.

Would you like me to post 2 pages of reviews by people who in fact did
see it? Including their reviews on cupping... from Alex, Scott, MAS
and the notables?

Onto Gen2...

The newest version has been digitized, includes onboard cooling, 5 pre-
programmed profiles, pre-programmed time settings, smoke/aroma
abatement and more. It too has been seen by the SDHR, James at the
Coffee Project and tested by Scott Reed, and others......and oh
yeah... an OSHA approved test house.

Next, I did in fact post quotes by some on the cup...

Given the fact I own the patent rights to an adaptor for a rotisserie
I could have easily done as others have done...... but instead I chose
to build a complete unit as stated from the ground up.

Here again send me an email at: tahoe_joe@yahoo.com I'll gladly
forward you about 50-100 mb of engineered drawings( in native dwg
formating) and patents write ups showing the designs are completely
100% original... or even better send me your address and I'll send you
a disc... nothing to hide here...

Or you can trot on down to San Diego to see both gen1 and gen2... and
I'll prove to you..it was not nor ever was a rotisserie... as is
neither the newest unit........

ps.. the other remark about too famous is as above..a tad off the
truth... I specifically stated I didn't have their permission to use
their names...and honor things such as that...

almost forgot..even your 35 minutes statement is inaccurate... then
again like before hard to be accurate... if you've never seen it...

I greatly respect the fact you know your coffee and mean that with all
sincerity.. but you know little if anything about the work I've done,
the designs, the patents, the tests, the reviews, the demos or for the
most part anything else with regards to the roasters...and should have
displayed the same respect until you in fact saw any of the units
rather than passing on in accurate rumors/falsehoods.



  
Date: 20 Apr 2007 22:40:58
From:
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
In alt.coffee, Jbehm2@gmail.com wrote:

> Would you like me to post 2 pages of reviews by people who in fact did
> see it? Including their reviews on cupping... from Alex, Scott, MAS
> and the notables?

Yes. Please do.



--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel



  
Date: 18 Apr 2007 05:23:35
From: jim schulman
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On 17 Apr 2007 17:38:18 -0700, Jbehm2@gmail.com wrote:

>I have no problems with people making any statement as long as they
>are accurate and considering 150+ people including the San Diego Home
>Roasters saw the unit of which Jim you weren't one at any demo I did,
>the statements you've made are in fact less than accurate.

My apologies.

I had your roaster confused with the add on rotisserie drums and
modified Ronco roasters on sale at
>http://www.coffeeroastersclub.com/index.php

Put it down to incipient senility. It's easy to get confused because
these roasters are based on a patent filed by someone named Joe Behm:
>http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6497175.html

The roaster being discussed here has a patent too:
>http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?wo=2003031893

It's these entirely coincidental resemblences that threw me off.


  
Date: 17 Apr 2007 20:33:49
From: notbob
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On 2007-04-18, Jbehm2@gmail.com <Jbehm2@gmail.com > wrote:

> their names...and honor things such as that...
>
> almost forgot..even your 35 minutes statement is inaccurate... then
> again like before hard to be accurate... if you've never seen it...

OK, gotchya. Carry on and good luck in marketing your roaster. In
the meantime, see if you can't get that sticking period key on you
keyboard repaired.

nb


 
Date: 16 Apr 2007 06:00:11
From: daveb
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On Apr 12, 9:56 pm, Steve <n...@use.net > wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:55:28 -0400, "Craig Andrews"
>
> <alt.cof...@deletethis.rogers.com> wrote:
> >Guess yer blind too, look below your post, 9 mins before you posted the
> >link...
> >Craig.
>
> Uh, you need to check your date...you posted about 24 hours after
> Lloyd. ;-)
> From: "Craig Andrews" <alt.cof...@deletethis.rogers.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.coffee
> Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
> Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:55:28 -0400
> Organization: Andrews Green Bean's
> Lines: 24
> Message-ID: <5882o4F2fpqkpU1@mid.individual.net>

very helpful, "steve"



 
Date: 14 Apr 2007 21:00:05
From: IMAWriterRobJ
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On Apr 12, 8:35 pm, jim schulman <jim_schul...@ameritech.net > wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:06:13 -0500, Lloyd Parsons
>
> <lloydpars...@mac.com> wrote:
> >Over on coffeegeek forums, there is an announcement and discussion of a
> >new 1 lb, smokeless roaster. It is worth reading about.
>
> It sounds good, as does all vaporware. Joe Behm's, the builder's,
> contribution to the thread was not particularly encouraging; instead
> of goving roast and cool down times, he cited rave reviews by people
> too famous to mention.
>
> This is the V2. The original was a modded ronco rotisserie, which ran
> around 35 minutes and had no easy way to do cool down. So far he says
> he's added electornic profile controls and a smoke handling system, no
> word on upping the speed or cool down.
>
> Q: What do you get when you instrument and add smoke handling to a bad
> one pound roaster?
>
> A: An easy and clean way to ruin a pound of green coffee.

Jim...I had posted a comment on CG as to "where Is Jim Schulman on
this topic"
(the Behmor 1600)
The smoke issue is not a big thing to me, as I'm quite happy to roast
in the garage...though I don't believe the general public, those folks
to which the inventor wishes to market to would want to be in the
garage.
My concerns/questions would also be power/or lack thereof...baked
beans I can get from a can. I truly hope Joe Behm is on to
something.....time will tell.



  
Date: 15 Apr 2007 12:51:39
From: D. Ross
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster


 
Date: 14 Apr 2007 20:53:49
From: IMAWriterRobJ
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On Apr 13, 8:45 pm, "Craig Andrews" <alt.cof...@deletethis.rogers.com >
wrote:
> "Lloyd Parsons" <lloydpars...@mac.com> wrote in message
>
> news:lloydparsons-401574.20172412042007@individual.net...
>
> > In article <%QATh.67380$aG1.56819@pd7urf3no>,
> > "Brian Colwell" <bmcolw...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
> >> "Lloyd Parsons" <lloydpars...@mac.com> wrote in message
> >>news:lloydparsons-A8D336.19061312042007@individual.net...
> >> > Over on coffeegeek forums, there is an announcement and discussion
> >> > of a
> >> > new 1 lb, smokeless roaster. It is worth reading about.
>
> >> Sounds impressive !!
>
> >> BMC
>
> > Yes it does, and did you notice the suggested retail? $399!!
>
> Yeah, & started out @ $299!..
> Craig.

I sent you an email a couple of days ago regarding tha tprice
"increase" and other stuff....didja get a chance to read it...??



  
Date: 15 Apr 2007 14:02:49
From: Craig Andrews
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster

"IMAWriterRobJ" <jasongs4ever@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1176609229.806061.311180@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 13, 8:45 pm, "Craig Andrews" <alt.cof...@deletethis.rogers.com>
> wrote:
>> "Lloyd Parsons" <lloydpars...@mac.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:lloydparsons-401574.20172412042007@individual.net...
>>
>> > In article <%QATh.67380$aG1.56819@pd7urf3no>,
>> > "Brian Colwell" <bmcolw...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>>
>> >> "Lloyd Parsons" <lloydpars...@mac.com> wrote in message
>> >>news:lloydparsons-A8D336.19061312042007@individual.net...
>> >> > Over on coffeegeek forums, there is an announcement and
>> >> > discussion
>> >> > of a
>> >> > new 1 lb, smokeless roaster. It is worth reading about.
>>
>> >> Sounds impressive !!
>>
>> >> BMC
>>
>> > Yes it does, and did you notice the suggested retail? $399!!
>>
>> Yeah, & started out @ $299!..
>> Craig.
>
> I sent you an email a couple of days ago regarding tha tprice
> "increase" and other stuff....didja get a chance to read it...??
>

Yes, I read it Rob..
Craig.



 
Date: 14 Apr 2007 20:51:15
From: IMAWriterRobJ
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On Apr 13, 7:40 pm, "Craig Andrews" <alt.cof...@deletethis.rogers.com >
wrote:
> "I->Ian" <some...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ltjt135boim4hb875i7aig348qa8mlpi1r@4ax.com...
>
> > On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:06:13 -0500, Lloyd Parsons
> > <lloydpars...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> >>Over on coffeegeek forums, there is an announcement and discussion of
> >>a
> >>new 1 lb, smokeless roaster. It is worth reading about.
>
> > REAL computer users include links
>
> REAL alt.coffee aficianados would check it out & fine the link in a
> minute or 2.. lol..http://www.coffeegeek.com/forums/coffee/homeroast/291225
> Craig.

ROTFLMAO2



 
Date: 13 Apr 2007 00:53:34
From: CrackAddict
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
I hope the build quality is better than the grammar on the blurb...



 
Date: 12 Apr 2007 20:35:40
From: jim schulman
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:06:13 -0500, Lloyd Parsons
<lloydparsons@mac.com > wrote:

>Over on coffeegeek forums, there is an announcement and discussion of a
>new 1 lb, smokeless roaster. It is worth reading about.

It sounds good, as does all vaporware. Joe Behm's, the builder's,
contribution to the thread was not particularly encouraging; instead
of goving roast and cool down times, he cited rave reviews by people
too famous to mention.

This is the V2. The original was a modded ronco rotisserie, which ran
around 35 minutes and had no easy way to do cool down. So far he says
he's added electornic profile controls and a smoke handling system, no
word on upping the speed or cool down.

Q: What do you get when you instrument and add smoke handling to a bad
one pound roaster?

A: An easy and clean way to ruin a pound of green coffee.


  
Date: 13 Apr 2007 12:33:13
From: North Sullivan
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 20:35:40 -0500, jim schulman
<jim_schulman@ameritech.net > wrote:


>
>Q: What do you get when you instrument and add smoke handling to a bad
>one pound roaster?
>
>A: An easy and clean way to ruin a pound of green coffee.

Any word on how the smoke is "handled"? For a pound of coffee, there
is considerable odor/smoke. Where is it supposed to go?

North Sullivan



   
Date: 13 Apr 2007 12:16:25
From: I->Ian
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 12:33:13 -0500, North Sullivan
<northwrites@bluebottle.com > wrote:

>On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 20:35:40 -0500, jim schulman
><jim_schulman@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Q: What do you get when you instrument and add smoke handling to a bad
>>one pound roaster?
>>
>>A: An easy and clean way to ruin a pound of green coffee.
>
>Any word on how the smoke is "handled"? For a pound of coffee, there
>is considerable odor/smoke. Where is it supposed to go?
>
>North Sullivan

It's recycled into the electronics.

As any engineer knows, smoke is what electronics use to do the magic.

If "you let the smoke out" they quit working.


    
Date:
From:
Subject:


 
Date: 13 Apr 2007 01:15:39
From: Brian Colwell
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster

"Lloyd Parsons" <lloydparsons@mac.com > wrote in message
news:lloydparsons-A8D336.19061312042007@individual.net...
> Over on coffeegeek forums, there is an announcement and discussion of a
> new 1 lb, smokeless roaster. It is worth reading about.

Sounds impressive !!

BMC




  
Date: 12 Apr 2007 20:17:24
From: Lloyd Parsons
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
In article <%QATh.67380$aG1.56819@pd7urf3no >,
"Brian Colwell" <bmcolwell@shaw.ca > wrote:

> "Lloyd Parsons" <lloydparsons@mac.com> wrote in message
> news:lloydparsons-A8D336.19061312042007@individual.net...
> > Over on coffeegeek forums, there is an announcement and discussion of a
> > new 1 lb, smokeless roaster. It is worth reading about.
>
> Sounds impressive !!
>
> BMC

Yes it does, and did you notice the suggested retail? $399!!


   
Date: 13 Apr 2007 21:45:46
From: Craig Andrews
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster

"Lloyd Parsons" <lloydparsons@mac.com > wrote in message
news:lloydparsons-401574.20172412042007@individual.net...
> In article <%QATh.67380$aG1.56819@pd7urf3no>,
> "Brian Colwell" <bmcolwell@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>> "Lloyd Parsons" <lloydparsons@mac.com> wrote in message
>> news:lloydparsons-A8D336.19061312042007@individual.net...
>> > Over on coffeegeek forums, there is an announcement and discussion
>> > of a
>> > new 1 lb, smokeless roaster. It is worth reading about.
>>
>> Sounds impressive !!
>>
>> BMC
>
> Yes it does, and did you notice the suggested retail? $399!!


Yeah, & started out @ $299!..
Craig.



 
Date: 12 Apr 2007 17:36:28
From: I->Ian
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:06:13 -0500, Lloyd Parsons
<lloydparsons@mac.com > wrote:

>Over on coffeegeek forums, there is an announcement and discussion of a
>new 1 lb, smokeless roaster. It is worth reading about.

REAL computer users include links


  
Date: 12 Apr 2007 19:47:55
From: Lloyd Parsons
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
In article <ltjt135boim4hb875i7aig348qa8mlpi1r@4ax.com >,
"I- >Ian" <someone@nowhere.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:06:13 -0500, Lloyd Parsons
> <lloydparsons@mac.com> wrote:
>
> >Over on coffeegeek forums, there is an announcement and discussion of a
> >new 1 lb, smokeless roaster. It is worth reading about.
>
> REAL computer users include links

Yeah, but I'm a mac user! ;-)

But here 'tis : http://www.coffeegeek.com/forums/coffee/homeroast/291225


   
Date: 13 Apr 2007 20:55:28
From: Craig Andrews
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster

"Lloyd Parsons" <lloydparsons@mac.com > wrote in message
news:lloydparsons-CC20F3.19475512042007@individual.net...
> In article <ltjt135boim4hb875i7aig348qa8mlpi1r@4ax.com>,
> "I->Ian" <someone@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:06:13 -0500, Lloyd Parsons
>> <lloydparsons@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Over on coffeegeek forums, there is an announcement and discussion
>> >of a
>> >new 1 lb, smokeless roaster. It is worth reading about.
>>
>> REAL computer users include links
>
> Yeah, but I'm a mac user! ;-)
>
> But here 'tis :
> http://www.coffeegeek.com/forums/coffee/homeroast/291225

Guess yer blind too, look below your post, 9 mins before you posted the
link...
Craig.



    
Date: 13 Apr 2007 01:56:29
From: Steve
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:55:28 -0400, "Craig Andrews"
<alt.coffee@deletethis.rogers.com > wrote:

>Guess yer blind too, look below your post, 9 mins before you posted the
>link...
>Craig.

Uh, you need to check your date...you posted about 24 hours after
Lloyd. ;-)
From: "Craig Andrews" <alt.coffee@deletethis.rogers.com >
Newsgroups: alt.coffee
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:55:28 -0400
Organization: Andrews Green Bean's
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <5882o4F2fpqkpU1@mid.individual.net >


     
Date: 13 Apr 2007 22:04:05
From: Craig Andrews
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster

"Steve" <not@use.net > wrote in message
news:mjot139j3u1pqb50lf83ohph1kgo9cvfok@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:55:28 -0400, "Craig Andrews"
> <alt.coffee@deletethis.rogers.com> wrote:
>
>>Guess yer blind too, look below your post, 9 mins before you posted
>>the
>>link...
>>Craig.
>
> Uh, you need to check your date...you posted about 24 hours after
> Lloyd. ;-)
> From: "Craig Andrews" <alt.coffee@deletethis.rogers.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.coffee
> Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
> Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:55:28 -0400
> Organization: Andrews Green Bean's
> Lines: 24
> Message-ID: <5882o4F2fpqkpU1@mid.individual.net>

Sorry, you're right., my eyes only went to the time @ 8 minutes apart &
not the date.
Craig.



      
Date: 12 Apr 2007 22:09:33
From: Craig Andrews
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster

"Craig Andrews" <alt.coffee@deletethis.rogers.com > wrote in message
news:5886ooF2f2moaU1@mid.individual.net...
>
> "Steve" <not@use.net> wrote in message
> news:mjot139j3u1pqb50lf83ohph1kgo9cvfok@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:55:28 -0400, "Craig Andrews"
>> <alt.coffee@deletethis.rogers.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Guess yer blind too, look below your post, 9 mins before you posted
>>>the
>>>link...
>>>Craig.
>>
>> Uh, you need to check your date...you posted about 24 hours after
>> Lloyd. ;-)
>> From: "Craig Andrews" <alt.coffee@deletethis.rogers.com>
>> Newsgroups: alt.coffee
>> Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
>> Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:55:28 -0400
>> Organization: Andrews Green Bean's
>> Lines: 24
>> Message-ID: <5882o4F2fpqkpU1@mid.individual.net>
>
> Sorry, you're right., my eyes only went to the time @ 8 minutes apart
> & not the date.
> Craig.

I was doing some computer memory upgrades last night, & I synced my
Windows time clock wrong..
Craig.



       
Date: 12 Apr 2007 22:13:41
From: Craig Andrews
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster

"Craig Andrews" <alt.coffee@deletethis.rogers.com > wrote in message
news:588732F2fqprgU1@mid.individual.net...
>
> "Craig Andrews" <alt.coffee@deletethis.rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:5886ooF2f2moaU1@mid.individual.net...
>>
>> "Steve" <not@use.net> wrote in message
>> news:mjot139j3u1pqb50lf83ohph1kgo9cvfok@4ax.com...
>>> On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:55:28 -0400, "Craig Andrews"
>>> <alt.coffee@deletethis.rogers.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Guess yer blind too, look below your post, 9 mins before you posted
>>>>the
>>>>link...
>>>>Craig.
>>>
>>> Uh, you need to check your date...you posted about 24 hours after
>>> Lloyd. ;-)
>>> From: "Craig Andrews" <alt.coffee@deletethis.rogers.com>
>>> Newsgroups: alt.coffee
>>> Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
>>> Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:55:28 -0400
>>> Organization: Andrews Green Bean's
>>> Lines: 24
>>> Message-ID: <5882o4F2fpqkpU1@mid.individual.net>
>>
>> Sorry, you're right., my eyes only went to the time @ 8 minutes apart
>> & not the date.
>> Craig.
>
> I was doing some computer memory upgrades last night, & I synced my
> Windows time clock wrong..
> Craig.

I was out a day, but I SAW when Lloyds post popped in to the thread, 8
mins after mine. I recalibrated a few posts ago.
Craig.



    
Date: 12 Apr 2007 20:07:31
From: Lloyd Parsons
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
In article <5882o4F2fpqkpU1@mid.individual.net >,
"Craig Andrews" <alt.coffee@deletethis.rogers.com > wrote:

> "Lloyd Parsons" <lloydparsons@mac.com> wrote in message
> news:lloydparsons-CC20F3.19475512042007@individual.net...
> > In article <ltjt135boim4hb875i7aig348qa8mlpi1r@4ax.com>,
> > "I->Ian" <someone@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:06:13 -0500, Lloyd Parsons
> >> <lloydparsons@mac.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Over on coffeegeek forums, there is an announcement and discussion
> >> >of a
> >> >new 1 lb, smokeless roaster. It is worth reading about.
> >>
> >> REAL computer users include links
> >
> > Yeah, but I'm a mac user! ;-)
> >
> > But here 'tis :
> > http://www.coffeegeek.com/forums/coffee/homeroast/291225
>
> Guess yer blind too, look below your post, 9 mins before you posted the
> link...
> Craig.

Bitch, bitch, bitch! ;-)

Hard to make you guys happy...


  
Date: 13 Apr 2007 20:40:06
From: Craig Andrews
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster

"I- >Ian" <someone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:ltjt135boim4hb875i7aig348qa8mlpi1r@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:06:13 -0500, Lloyd Parsons
> <lloydparsons@mac.com> wrote:
>
>>Over on coffeegeek forums, there is an announcement and discussion of
>>a
>>new 1 lb, smokeless roaster. It is worth reading about.
>
> REAL computer users include links


REAL alt.coffee aficianados would check it out & fine the link in a
minute or 2.. lol..
http://www.coffeegeek.com/forums/coffee/homeroast/291225
Craig.



   
Date: 12 Apr 2007 18:48:26
From: I->Ian
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:40:06 -0400, "Craig Andrews"
<alt.coffee@deletethis.rogers.com > wrote:

>
>"I->Ian" <someone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>news:ltjt135boim4hb875i7aig348qa8mlpi1r@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:06:13 -0500, Lloyd Parsons
>> <lloydparsons@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Over on coffeegeek forums, there is an announcement and discussion of
>>>a
>>>new 1 lb, smokeless roaster. It is worth reading about.
>>
>> REAL computer users include links
>
>
>REAL alt.coffee aficianados would check it out & fine the link in a
>minute or 2.. lol..
>http://www.coffeegeek.com/forums/coffee/homeroast/291225
>Craig.
CoffeeGeek...
A minute or 2...
ROTFLMFAO!!!


    
Date: 12 Apr 2007 22:11:03
From: Craig Andrews
Subject: Re: New coffee roaster

"I- >Ian" <someone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:89ot13h4ki6pit9aj89d4qt18c91b1323e@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:40:06 -0400, "Craig Andrews"
> <alt.coffee@deletethis.rogers.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"I->Ian" <someone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>>news:ltjt135boim4hb875i7aig348qa8mlpi1r@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:06:13 -0500, Lloyd Parsons
>>> <lloydparsons@mac.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Over on coffeegeek forums, there is an announcement and discussion
>>>>of
>>>>a
>>>>new 1 lb, smokeless roaster. It is worth reading about.
>>>
>>> REAL computer users include links
>>
>>
>>REAL alt.coffee aficianados would check it out & fine the link in a
>>minute or 2.. lol..
>>http://www.coffeegeek.com/forums/coffee/homeroast/291225
>>Craig.
> CoffeeGeek...
> A minute or 2...
> ROTFLMFAO!!!

Well, that's how long it took me Ian!
Craig.