GreatWhiteNorth

Yes, you're right about that. The context of my discussion was about trying to make long smokes in a Traeger more like long smokes in a dedicated traditional smoker. Which - we agree - the smoking tubes won't do. I used to have a cast iron smoker box for my gas grill. Same concept, same result - added some smoke. Not a lot.

Doesn't really matter... the smoking tube will never reach the level of a good quality smoker like a Bradley.

Pellets in tube on top of grill - Looks like a super weak idea to me. I've been BBQ'ing for years. I wouldn't ever consider burning wood pellets there.

Yes - that lone flag swinging guy represents about what's left of the Trump wacko army. There are more. But following Trump off a cliff is where the smarter group of supporters draw the line.

Not cool, not cute, it's just a pathetic post - and you're a shitbag for posting that garbage.

If you were seeing two of me when you posted this - then, sure, I'm those guys.

My mistake - you posted that you had "done only two long smokes"... didn't realize you actually meant that you are "only" using your Traeger for long smokes. In that case, you are probably right. Maybe should have kept the Bradley. Then again - maybe the smoking tubes will get the job done. Looking forward to hearing how that goes.

Ex-hawks, just like ex-presidents are still not above the law.

I'm sure, headshuck, if you want to find "news" about it online hard enough ... you'll find the exact "news" you're looking for. And other, seemingly like-minded types, will undoubtedly assist you in your search. Best of luck to you.

You are 100% right. I've found that although the Traeger can "smoke" meat, it isn't really anywhere near the level of the 'refrigerator-style' smokers that really smoke-the-heck out of meat. I bought my Traeger with the 3-speed thermostat (before I upgraded it.) Bbq/bake/roast. It seemed limited, but it really wasn't. Those (3) did everything the Traeger was actually really good at. Smoking was below the 'Bbq' level (~225), and Searing was above the 'Roast' level. Not that the Traeger couldn't emulate the other tasks - it kind of could - it just was never very good at them. Newer Traeger's provide 'super smoke', etc. but still aren't all that good at it. I sear steaks and do burgers on my gas grill. I've got a buddy with a smoker if I want to make jerky. Everything else I do is on the Traeger. I even smoke salmon on the traeger (there's a really good vodka recipe online.) It isn't anywhere near what a hard smoke would do on a real smoker... but I've found I like the lighter smoke better with salmon. But that's just me. If you like a heavier smoke, you'll want to use a real smoker.

"The wrong one"? Pffff... That's like saying that baseball is the wrong sport, or apple is the wrong pie. "what grade is that?" - c'mon, what kind of question is that in a meat smoking thread? BBQ isn't and has never been about any grade. You cook what you got. What? "Next time pick the other side"? Ffs, are you a 5th grader? Maybe, next time, it may be better if you just don't post.

You two are a mash up between Abbot and Costello and Spy vs Spy... you crack me up!

It simply does not.

I am - and I am middle-of-the-road. Neither liberal nor conservative. If you can understand that.

No, no, that was not what was said. Offthemat is a dopey poster trying to cause trouble with no basis. Political troll. (Maybe worse.)

What Trump is in hot water over is what he did after he was president. The fact is that a has-been president is no longer an actual president. So, your entire post is founded on misinformation - at best. At worst, you seem to be attempting to spread misinformation. Which is something the f'ing Russians are trying to do on social media in the US. (Be better, the bar set by the f'ing Russians is very, very low.)

And, no it isn't liberals' rejecting the rebranding... it is people of both parties. Including yourself. Right here Rebranded as 'X' - we still all call it Twitter... because about a month into it, nobody is buying in. It is simply an enormous rebranding failure. (Which is 100% on topic with the OP.) Deflect by bringing up the vaccine, or any of the many dumb Fox News topics designed specifically for dummies to repeat when they have nothing important or legitimate to say. Twitter hasn't gotten better - and the changes we've seen (like the logo) have only taken it backward. It's not political. Maybe best to get off that high horse. It's just people rejecting unhelpful change. (That used up R vs D bent is getting old.)

None of us are, brother... and that's probably for the best.

The USA, as we Americans call it, will be fine. But if you insist on continuing the conversation... we can go on, there are more. Those f'ing Russians are messing up a whole lot of what this global economy runs on. Smaller countries will hurt, and poor countries are going to suffer. The hell of the thing is that the f'ing Russians don't have ANY good reason to do it. NONE. ZERO. Aside from stealing Ukranians stuff, of course. Which isn't a GOOD reason, it's an evil one.

A war that is destabilizing eastern Europe as well as the global food supply, and also threatens NATO involvement and potential nuclear weapons use. (Which is all, a much bigger deal than the notion that charity money won't be used 100% as it should be. A risk that exists and is true for all charity money.)

"That" X logo from 2000 was actually better. But... Elmo and Peter both look like pervs here - which probably didn't help the push for an "X" logo.

Ditto.com became luna.io and Luna's logo is better. Swing and a miss... keep trying.

Blah, blah... don't try to misdirect and get us off topic. My opinion is clear - Twitter logo was good. The 'X' logo is shite. (As Elmo has ~admitted to, also.) C'mon - let's see some substance here. Someone post a tech company logo that is worse. Let's stick with Silicon Valley level companies, not the 16 year old down the street. (For those inclined to cheat.) No worse logo's posted = you have no argument. That is the way I expect this to go down, and I'll win.

Ban is back. I like the sound of it.

... and I can't image that logo is worth more than about $2. It may be the worst logo in the history of tech companies. Truly awful thing to behold. That being said, ol' Musky did admit that the logo will be evolving (which is quirky billionaire speak for "I know, it does suck.") But that wasn't the worst thing. The "rebranding" of Twitter might have been the laziest rebranding of any online service since the dawn of the internet, much less a $13B internet presence... almost nothing changed. Which does speak to the idea that it is "temporary"... maybe ol' Musky wants to make a big splash with an actually cool name and cool rebranding. It just took longer than he anticipated (like basically, everything he's ever done.) My money is on the awful 'X' logo being replaced 'soon'-ish. But I wouldn't bet on anything further. That ship seems to be directed toward the Bermuda Triangle.