TeaChat

gingkoseto wrote:
I remember the newspaper article mentions concern of fish that might potentially suffer from DLH's house project. And to quote somebody who has visited DLH's house (and who is also a seasoned tea drinker), "... I'm sure no fish would be unhappy living downstream of DLH's house..." (I paraphrased.)

Gingko-

I'm not sure a tea drinker however seasoned can speak for fish feeling happy about Hoffman's biowaste potentially leaching into the aquifers.

I'm a serious vermicomposter myself and had read all about humanures but have never tried it. Safety is dependent on the practice of the composter. I personally don't feel entirely comfortable having my tea vendor who has to package my tea be in frequent contact with human manure esp. when they are not anal about cleanliness.

But if Hoffman's open sewage ponds don't alarm you as being a public health hazard, we are on very different planes of thought.

Hster

hster wrote: I personally don't feel entirely comfortable having my tea vendor who has to package my tea be in frequent contact with human manure esp. when they are not anal about cleanliness.

I hope you are aware that human waste is still used in China as fertilizer, and chances are that the organic boutique tea you are drinking may have been fertilized with nightsoil...

jcov wrote:I think his puerh has been really good and have NEVER found any mold (whoever said this should provide proof at least, invoice and tea with mold?). .

I think they where speaking of someone else who buried there Puerh.
But I agree I would not be surprised to learn that there is not a single mold spore on any of his puerhs. That is the problem Puerh ages mainley from bioactivity In the climate( I am guessing from tasting his tea) that he has kept in his " cave" is not conducive to bioactivity. I am not saying he didn't have good tea I'm just saying he ruined it. I bought two well known ( to be good cakes from him one is twenty years (92 shi fu lu xi)old and tastes to be 7 years old (in kunming storage) , the other he says is a 99(simplified yun 7542) but could be between there and 01. Is still very much like a young rough 7542 with an added roughness from desert storage. I joke around about kunming cryostasis but this guys cakes really don't age.

hster wrote:

gingkoseto wrote:
I remember the newspaper article mentions concern of fish that might potentially suffer from DLH's house project. And to quote somebody who has visited DLH's house (and who is also a seasoned tea drinker), "... I'm sure no fish would be unhappy living downstream of DLH's house..." (I paraphrased.)

Gingko-

I'm not sure a tea drinker however seasoned can speak for fish feeling happy about Hoffman's biowaste potentially leaching into the aquifers.
Hster

Basically all (or most?) positive comments I previous heard about DLH's house were from tea drinkers, because, I guess, who else would care about another big mansion in California owned by some random person. I would naturally assume tea drinkers tend to give benefit of doubt to a tea person, when there is no more information other than a newspaper article (I feel some people in the discussion here don't know more about DLH than me, and I know very little about him to begin with)...

From this discussion and some previous discussion, I got an impression that not all the people appreciate what DLH has done to American tea world (or the film about him). I think that's ok. But after all, what he did is an addition to American tea culture. Even if one doesn't appreciate it and see it as zero benefit, it's not some damage or deduction. So that's why I was surprised at the comments here. I wish people saved their energy to attack some real public enemy.

If it is a scam, or overpriced bad tea, it is a deduction.

It is even more a deduction when he claims to be an expert, or at least, behaves as if he were one. It is one thing to preface stuff you say with "I'm not sure" or "I don't know", but to talk like an authority and sell yourself as one, and yet be factually false on many accounts, that is just sad.

the_economist wrote:If it is a scam, or overpriced bad tea, it is a deduction.

I agree with you, and I'm glad to see you didn't carelessly drop the "if" from the statement as some other people seemed to.

the_economist wrote: It is even more a deduction when he claims to be an expert, or at least, behaves as if he were one. It is one thing to preface stuff you say with "I'm not sure" or "I don't know", but to talk like an authority and sell yourself as one, and yet be factually false on many accounts, that is just sad.

We are living in an era when there are too many experts, authorities and masters in every field - no exception in the field of tea. But maybe DLH is in an retirement age and no longer talks as much, or maybe I didn't have as many opportunities to hear him talking as some other people. Overall I haven't experienced as many "giggling in my mind" and "gotcha" moments on DLH as on some other people or companies who fit your description very well. (Ok I admit I giggled once or twice upon seeing some business statement of DLH's... but I still respect him for his tea path... and I have to admit I giggled a lot more on other tea industry phenomena...)

I guess I was just puzzled by some discussion here. But I'm no less cynical than other people, and probably just cynical in a different way

Yeah, I don't know if he's actually scamming people particularly on puer (he claims to have 19th century pu), because there is no way I would ever fork out the money to test that hypothesis.

I judge vendors partly by the teas they sell, and maybe this is a terribly snobby thing to say, but vendors that carry sticky rice shu pu er mini tuos will have to work doubly hard to convince me they actually also carry worthwhile teas. Those things simply do not mix well with the idea of fine teas in my books.

It is particularly funny because he dissed Moroccan tea (gunpowder green tea + mint), which is hardly conceptually different from a good number of the teas he sells.

the_economist wrote:he claims to have 19th century pu

I didn't know that. Interesting.

TwoDog2 wrote:

the_economist wrote:he claims to have 19th century pu

I didn't know that. Interesting.

I once asked him about this. He uses it to 'label' teas that were produced in the late 80s early 90s but aren't properly labeled with specific year. If it helps we are in the 21st century... so last century would be 20th century... 21 - 1 = 20 not 19th.

jcov wrote: I once asked him about this. He uses it to 'label' teas that were produced in the late 80s early 90s but aren't properly labeled with specific year. If it helps we are in the 21st century... so last century would be 20th century... 21 - 1 = 20 not 19th.

Hah I see. Well, he also claims to have 1949 pu.

I enjoyed Hoffman's movie and then after everyone had seen it I traded it for a very nice beeng cha.

Getting out of Marin and leaving behind Biff and Muffin and their Zoning laws and such would be a very smart move for him, he probably started out thinking he was rural enough to do as he pleased on his own land but made a few miscalculations.

Sad to be pushed off of your own land but what is, is Californicated!

Hey I noticed a few comments about burying tea. Brought to mind an article I read in The Leaf from a bunch of Berkeley folks. According to this article, it is not widely practiced but some Bulang people have been known to pack tea leaves into bamboo tubes, bury them for fermentation, and later eat them.

http://the-leaf.org/Issue3/wp-content/u ... layout.pdf

beecrofter wrote: Sad to be pushed off of your own land but what is, is Californicated!

He's not "pushed off [his] own land" -- if he follows the laws of the community in which he lives, there will be no problem.

the_economist wrote:

jcov wrote: I once asked him about this. He uses it to 'label' teas that were produced in the late 80s early 90s but aren't properly labeled with specific year. If it helps we are in the 21st century... so last century would be 20th century... 21 - 1 = 20 not 19th.

Hah I see. Well, he also claims to have 1949 pu.

I haven't seen that one in his list. But then again, many people do. I've seen some links to 'aged tea specialists' and 'aged tea shops'. Frankly I've enjoyed his teas as well as from other people. As far as really old well, I don't feel like paying a small mortgage for tea.

David Lee and his wife, Jeannie, are wonderful people and their teas are certainly the best I have ever had in my long life and made me into a Teaist. The price for that kind of quality is quite fair in my opinion. I have bought their sample selections which include one of each of 5 types of tea for many years for myself and as gifts, and they are all excellent if brewed correctly. I think I have actually purchased about 4 of the samplers to share as gifts in the last month. All were well received !!

Somehow they continue to weather the storm over building permits. A true follower of Confucius would no doubt have paid the permit fees, but who hasn't run into misunderstanding with the law or rebelled in some small way. Some get caught in a bad situation with a changing world, and that is the case for them. These are true "Earth" people who know more than the average sanitation department about processing human waste and have simply run into trouble with a bureaucracy who conforms to the standard codes which in recent years have certainly been questioned and defied by many with composting setups that are not nearly as hygienic and expensive as DLH's. That situation has nothing to do with his tea selections and expertise and his helpful and compassionate nature. He is a good man and knows a lot about tea and has helped many discover the wonders of tea. Let's remember him for the good and the teas!!