|
25 Mar 20 - 12:04 PM (#4042018) Subject: BS: Whiskey, not whisky, webs From: Mrrzy Ok now *this* is interesting: https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/10/whiskey-webs-are-unique-fingerprints-for-different-kinds-of-american-whiskey/ |
|
25 Mar 20 - 12:06 PM (#4042021) Subject: RE: BS: Whiskey, not whisky, webs From: Nigel Parsons Here's the link for that site: Whisky Webs in a handier format. |
|
25 Mar 20 - 01:08 PM (#4042037) Subject: RE: BS: Whiskey, not whisky, webs From: Mrrzy Thanks. My phone doesn't seem to have the Greater/Lesser than symols to do the html. |
|
26 Mar 20 - 03:07 PM (#4042252) Subject: RE: BS: Whiskey, not whisky, webs From: Mrrzy Nobody thinks this is interesting? |
|
26 Mar 20 - 04:45 PM (#4042280) Subject: RE: BS: Whiskey, not whisky, webs From: An Buachaill Caol Dubh Well, if it produce a quick and easy way of detecting imitations of brand-names, I can see advantages, but for the most part my acquaintance with spirits is with what might be called "cooking whiskey". I was talking, years ago, with a man who had made Poteen in his youth, and among other things asked him if this liquor, like its legal relations, improved with time. He replied that, "I never saw that it got better at all, and sometimes I kept it for as long as a week or two." |
|
27 Mar 20 - 09:04 PM (#4042524) Subject: RE: BS: Whiskey, not whisky, webs From: Rapparee I'll drink it under either spelling. |