On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:34:24 -0400, Bob Muncie wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>> fOn Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:39:11 -0400, Bob Muncie wrote:
>>
>>> blake murphy wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 15:32:45 -0400, Bob Muncie wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You also point out something that bothers me at times. Why the packaged
>>>>> anything other than the individual product? When I see add a package of
>>>>> Lipton Onion soup mix, etc. in a recipe, I cringe a little bit. I'd much
>>>>> rather see, "and add 2 Tbs of minced onion, and salt to taste".
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Bob
>>>> why? if people use lipton soup in their recipe, that's what they should
>>>> say. how could they vouch for the results if they listed the ingredients
>>>> in what they actually used in the recipe instead, guessing at the
>>>> propartions, etc.?
>>>>
>>>> if you want to do such a translation, no one's stopping you. sheesh.
>>>>
>>>> your pal,
>>>> blake
>>> Wrong Blake... the listing of ingredients (at least in the US) are
>>> directly proportional to what is in the product, so if the first word on
>>> the list is water, I tend to just put it back on the shelf.
>>>
>>> Bob
>>
>> well, that's your privilege.
>>
>> and i'm well aware of the fact that the ingredient with the greatest amount
>> is listed first and so on, but you will still have to guess the exact
>> proportions. is it eighty percent salt, or sixty percent? what about the
>> next ingredient - is it fifteen percent or ten? and so on.
>>
>> unless you're cooking every single recipe that comes down the r.f.c. pike,
>> i don't see what the issue is. if it looks appealing cook it. if not,
>> don't. sheesh.
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
> How about taking a chill pill blake?
>
> If you can't itemize what is in a recipe, why post it? And you always
> season (in proportion) to taste.
>
> <sheesh>...
>
> Bob

because people are posting the recipes they cook. i don't think they have
to go out of their way to 'itemize' what's in a blend to please your ass.

your pal,
blake