snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > SLC Central > SLC

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #701  
Old 19 February 2019, 04:59 AM
Roadsterboy's Avatar
Roadsterboy Roadsterboy is offline
 
Join Date: 13 September 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,160
Default

I've noticed that when we order pizza that's got just a meat side (say, just sausage and cheese, or even just cheese) and one with lots of veggies. I imagine it's the water in the veggies, or the fact that cooking them takes some heat away from the cheese - it's always crisper on the "dark side".

*not a scientist or chef.
**definitely a pizza aficionado
Reply With Quote
  #702  
Old 19 February 2019, 05:29 AM
Roadsterboy's Avatar
Roadsterboy Roadsterboy is offline
 
Join Date: 13 September 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,160
Default

My own question (it's kind of long, sorry): How serious do you think it is when a supervisor starts telling a "regular" employee inside info, things that really should be management only?

Backstory: I've got a new supervisor (I work in a store), A. He started as a supervisor back in October or so, and has consistently told me things that I absolutely should not know - an investigation into another manager, when people are getting fired, and a few other situations that hadn't been made public (including a couple about himself). In all of these instances A was a "temporary" supervisor, kind of a training position. My understanding (through information he has given me, not an official announcement) is that he will be my supervisor permanently.

Now, I have to admit, that I was a candidate for his position, something I do not believe A actually knows. And I feel that I have been treated rather poorly over the last few years, not just over this but some other issues. I do not go around complaining about it or having an attitude or anything - but I do feel that way and have expressed this to a couple of people in private.

In any event, today I went to B, the person who has been his direct supervisor during this "temp" period, and told her that A had been feeding me this info for some months now. I've known B for some time, and trust her more than our GM (who doesn't take these things very seriously). B asked what I might want her to do, and I said I didn't care if she did anything - I really just didn't want her to get caught up when A blabs something she tells him in confidence. I'm currently job hunting, and if I go I imagine A will just find someone else to tell things to, if he doesn't already. (I have no idea why he does this - I don't know if he feels he's just trying to keep me in the loop, or if he's showing off that he has inside knowledge, or if he's just really inexperienced and doesn't actually understand how serious this is).

I guess I'm just wondering if I was making too much out of this. At a previous company, this would've been punishable by termination, both for A, but probably for the GM (for telling someone without official management status about management issues). An example of what he told me: a manager was caught giving themselves extra discounts, and A was involved somehow, which he told me almost immediately after he had to fill out a report on it. A few weeks later (right after the first of the year) he warned me that our GM would be coming in to "fire some people", and he inferred that it was our seasonal temps, but of course it ended up being the suspected manager (and he confirmed why she was let go).

This, to me, is pretty serious. Is it? I'm not particularly interested in punishing A, mostly protecting B and a few others from his indiscretion (or maybe B will just tell him to STFU, I don't know). The whole situation has been bothering me for some time now.

Phew, that was long!
Reply With Quote
  #703  
Old 19 February 2019, 02:00 PM
Seaboe Muffinchucker's Avatar
Seaboe Muffinchucker Seaboe Muffinchucker is offline
 
Join Date: 30 June 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 19,035
Glasses

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadsterboy View Post
This, to me, is pretty serious. Is it?
I think so. This person could get the entire company into trouble by sharing confidential business information.

Seaboe
Reply With Quote
  #704  
Old 19 February 2019, 05:53 PM
dfresh dfresh is offline
 
Join Date: 11 November 2005
Location: Oxford, PA
Posts: 4,448
Default

Yeah, that is pretty much a total violation, and A would get fired at most places I have worked...unless A is in good with upper management, in which case those pesky rule things don't really matter.
Reply With Quote
  #705  
Old 19 February 2019, 06:42 PM
Roadsterboy's Avatar
Roadsterboy Roadsterboy is offline
 
Join Date: 13 September 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,160
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaboe Muffinchucker View Post
I think so. This person could get the entire company into trouble by sharing confidential business information.
It’s not like we’d find out anything super confidential about major business dealings - nothing about home office shakeups or major changes. But he would have access to confidential employee files. And obviously he knows when people are going to be let go (he told me what days our seasonals were done, before they were told).


Quote:
Originally Posted by dfresh View Post
Yeah, that is pretty much a total violation, and A would get fired at most places I have worked...unless A is in good with upper management, in which case those pesky rule things don't really matter.
If it goes any further than B, he won’t. Our GM has shown a reluctance/refusal to deal with any complaints or issues with the managers - the person who was recently let go had a number of complaints against her, and it took an intervention from HR to get him to do something.

I made it clear to B that I neither wanted nor expected her to do anything about this. I told her solely because she’s one of the few managers who has treated me well the last couple of years, and I didn’t want her to say something to A, have him blab it, and catch the fallout. I’m currently job hunting and Wong be there to keep A’s secrets for too much longer, I imagine.
Reply With Quote
  #706  
Old 20 February 2019, 05:09 PM
landmammal landmammal is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2006
Location: California
Posts: 972
Default

I know in the UK "jelly" refers to what we'd call jello in the US. So what do they call what we in the US call jelly? Is it all just called jam? Do they not have jelly as we know it?
Reply With Quote
  #707  
Old 20 February 2019, 10:23 PM
Richard W's Avatar
Richard W Richard W is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2000
Location: High Wycombe, UK
Posts: 26,443
Icon24

Quote:
Originally Posted by landmammal View Post
I know in the UK "jelly" refers to what we'd call jello in the US. So what do they call what we in the US call jelly? Is it all just called jam? Do they not have jelly as we know it?
Good question, and we do have "jelly" in the sense you mean it, but it's different from both jam and the other form of jelly. (It's closer to the other form of jelly, perhaps).

My case study is my grandmother on my dad's side, who used to make both blackberry and apple jelly, and blackberry and apple jam. The jelly in this case wasn't what you call jello, although you're correct that we would usually call "jello" jelly.

Both of the conserves that my grandmother made were designed to be spread on toast.

The "jelly" was clear, and had (I think) gelatine in it. It did look similar and had a similar consistency to jello. (I might as well use jello for your meaning here, because it avoids an ambiguity that doesn't usually come up). But it was more concentrated, far sweeter, and you certainly wouldn't have wanted to eat a bowl full of it. As I said, it was designed to be spread on toast.

The difference between her jelly and her jam was that the jelly had been strained to remove seeds, and I think she'd added gelatine (although not entirely sure - she was a bit coy about her recipes). The jam still had seeds in it, didn't have a gelatinous texture, and possibly also had less sugar - it was sharper in taste, anyway.

I used to prefer her jelly, because it was unusual. It's still more unusual than jam now, and (in contrast to your own versions of "jelly" and "jello") both of them would more likely be called jams as a generic name. But this form of jelly - which may or may not be what you call jelly - also exists. There may or may not also be a north / south divide here. I suspect some people would just call her jelly "jam" anyway.

Between them, the names "jello", "jelly" and "jam" would unambiguously categorise all three of these things. The trouble is, each of us use only two of them. And I don't know where the divide is. I don't know whether you have jam, and whether you draw a distinction between that and jelly.

In my terms, "jelly" has been strained and clarified, and involves gelatine. If it's dilute enough to eat in a bowl with a spoon, it's what you'd call jello but we would call jelly. If you'd spread it on toast, it's jelly to both of us, I assume.

Jam is only spread on toast, has no gelatine, and hasn't been strained (so it contains pips and other bits of texture). I don't know whether you have this as a thing at all, or whether you have it but still call it "jelly".

(And of course, "jello" was originally a brand name for some sort of gelatine product, but I don't know exactly how that relates to all this).
Reply With Quote
  #708  
Old 20 February 2019, 10:36 PM
erwins's Avatar
erwins erwins is offline
 
Join Date: 04 April 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,368
Default

We use all three terms, to mean distinct things, but I'm not sure if we have an equivalent to the spreadable jelly you describe. If you're wrong about it containing gelatin, and it is actually thickened with pectin, then we do have it. I've never heard of a spreadable conserve thickened with gelatin before, but I've been surprised before, so I can't say it doesn't exist here.

Here, my experience suggests,
Jello or gelatin refers to a jiggly (usually dessert) dish made with gelatin and juice or flavoring and sweetener.
Jelly is a kind of (typically) sweet fruit preserve that has been strained to contain no seeds or chunks of fruit, usually thickened with naturally occurring or added pectin.
Jam is a kind of (typically) sweet fruit preserve containing the fruit itself, and often has seeds in it, usually thickened with naturally occurring or added pectin.

Last edited by erwins; 20 February 2019 at 10:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #709  
Old 20 February 2019, 10:54 PM
Beachlife!'s Avatar
Beachlife! Beachlife! is offline
 
Join Date: 22 June 2001
Location: Lansing, MI
Posts: 28,671
Default

It sounds like what you (in the UK) call Jelly is a mixture of jelly and gelatin. For Americans Jello is just flavored gelatin.

I'm starting to understand the jelly on ice-cream thing if I have that right,
Reply With Quote
  #710  
Old 20 February 2019, 11:51 PM
landmammal landmammal is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2006
Location: California
Posts: 972
Default

This link is in line with my understanding:
Quote:
Jelly, jam and preserves are all made from fruit mixed with sugar and pectin. The difference between them comes in the form that the fruit takes.

In jelly, the fruit comes in the form of fruit juice.
In jam, the fruit comes in the form of fruit pulp or crushed fruit (and is less stiff than jelly as a result).
In preserves, the fruit comes in the form of chunks in a syrup or a jam.
So jelly is fruit-flavored but clear, jam is like jelly but has bits of fruit suspended in it, and preserves is like mashed fruit. I think marmalade is jam with peel/pith? It sounds like what USians call jelly just isn't very common over there. Fair enough; jam is much better anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #711  
Old 21 February 2019, 12:59 AM
Crius of CoH's Avatar
Crius of CoH Crius of CoH is offline
 
Join Date: 13 February 2006
Location: Paragon City (Cranston), RI
Posts: 1,983
Default

Ah, after the initial confusion, this is finally beginning to gel. Definitions firmly set! The various aspics of the case properly molded.
Reply With Quote
  #712  
Old 21 February 2019, 01:34 AM
thorny locust's Avatar
thorny locust thorny locust is online now
 
Join Date: 27 April 2007
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 9,915
Default

More or less as landmammal said in the later post:

To make jelly, you start by heating and then straining the fruit (for a home kitchen, there's a thing called a jelly bag, which is a kind of tight weave cheesecloth bag that hangs from a tripod over a bowl; fill the bag up with cooked fruit and go away for a while. Or you can put the fruit through a Mehu-Maija type juicer -- not a crushing type juicer, that'll give you jam instead.)

To make jam, you crush the fruit; all the fruit pulp is in there (though in some cases seeds and/or skins are removed) but there aren't any whole pieces of fruit.

To make preserves, you cut the fruit up, but there are whole pieces of fruit that stay as identifiable pieces in the result.

In all three cases, you then heat up the juice or mash or chunked fruit; usually but not always in combination with sugar, and usually but not always in combination with added pectin. There are pectins that will jell with no added sugar, and some fruits -- especially apples -- have enough pectin to jell on their own. Adding more sugar and cooking longer to remove more of the water will encourage jelling; versions made without added pectin may be more concentrated, and have probably been cooked a lot longer. Versions with added pectin, with or without added sugar, may need only very brief cooking. Versions that rely heavily on the sugar for the jell may have more sugar than fruit in them. Some types of pectins will only work with a lot of sugar.

Jello, to my mind, is a different creature entirely. Jello is made with gelatin. It may or may not also contain fruit juice, or artificial fruit flavor for that matter. I wouldn't want to guarantee that nobody anywhere is adding gelatin instead of pectin to fruit in order to get what's basically a way of preserving fruit to jell; but I haven't heard of anybody doing it that way, and I think it would give a weird texture. I suspect that what Richard W's grandmother added, if anything, was pectin.
Reply With Quote
  #713  
Old 21 February 2019, 05:57 PM
Richard W's Avatar
Richard W Richard W is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2000
Location: High Wycombe, UK
Posts: 26,443
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by erwins View Post
If you're wrong about it containing gelatin, and it is actually thickened with pectin, then we do have it.
It might well be thickened with pectin rather than gelatine now that you mention it.
Reply With Quote
  #714  
Old 21 February 2019, 10:36 PM
Hans Off's Avatar
Hans Off Hans Off is offline
 
Join Date: 14 May 2004
Location: West Sussex, UK
Posts: 4,662
Default

Ok so now I have seen the word “Jelly” more times on a single page than anywhere else in my entire life.

So now the word just looks weird to me.

“Jelly”

ugh.
Reply With Quote
  #715  
Old 22 February 2019, 01:24 AM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 23,789
Default

Are there really "so many songs about rainbows and what's on the other side"? I know of only one.
Reply With Quote
  #716  
Old 22 February 2019, 02:02 AM
ASL's Avatar
ASL ASL is offline
 
Join Date: 04 July 2003
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 5,985
Icon106

Two if you count the Sad Kermit version, which manages to turn the song on its head by changing the intonation.

https://sadkermit.bandcamp.com/track...-disconnection
Reply With Quote
  #717  
Old 22 February 2019, 07:00 AM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 23,789
Default

I didn't count the song itself because it's not really about "what's on the other side".
Reply With Quote
  #718  
Old 22 February 2019, 11:37 AM
ASL's Avatar
ASL ASL is offline
 
Join Date: 04 July 2003
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 5,985
Teacher

I think it (the Sad Kermit song) implies it’s some sort of trap, like a spider's web or a siren song that "calls the young sailors" to a premature end.

I guess you were referring to somewhere over the rainbow...?
Reply With Quote
  #719  
Old 22 February 2019, 01:31 PM
musicgeek's Avatar
musicgeek musicgeek is offline
 
Join Date: 01 August 2005
Location: Fairfield, CT
Posts: 5,778
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganzfeld View Post
Are there really "so many songs about rainbows and what's on the other side"? I know of only one.
Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Look to the Rainbow
I'm Always Chasing Rainbows
Sing a Rainbow

Now, if we take "rainbows and what's on the other side" as one complete idea, some of these don't fit. If we're willing to fudge, and allow the songs to just be about rainbows, we can probably find even more.
Reply With Quote
  #720  
Old 22 February 2019, 04:34 PM
Cervus's Avatar
Cervus Cervus is offline
 
Join Date: 21 October 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 21,206
Default

Don't forget, The Rainbow Connection is from 1979, so any relevant rainbow songs have to pre-date it.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Stupid questions MisterGrey SLC 1002 05 October 2014 06:25 AM
Stupid questions Sue SLC 1062 25 June 2014 05:59 PM
Stupid questions Mr. Billion SLC 1034 14 April 2014 11:20 PM
Stupid questions Mouse SLC 1088 12 February 2014 09:21 PM
Stupid pet questions CenTex Wild Kingdom 46 11 June 2013 02:01 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.