sf wrote:

> The OP didn't ask how your commercial kitchen works and
> frankly nobody cares except the tax collector.

<LOL> Nice job. This is what you will find under "non sequitur" if you
look in the dictionary.

Pastorio


> ``````````````````````````````````
>
> On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 01:57:34 -0400, "Bob (this one)"
> > wrote:
>
>
>> sf wrote:
>>
>> > On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 01:47:31 -0400, "Bob (this one)"
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> >> > still in use, unlike your "Lodge" skillets.
>> >>
>> >> This is astonishing.
>> >
>> > Not really.
>> >
>> >> What do you want? Shall I say your ideas about
>> >> cast iron are infinitely superior to mine? Shall I say that your
>> >> infallible understanding far exceeds anything I've ever been able to
>> >> see? Your brilliance borders on, um, brilliant? I only say this
>> >> because you seem to know what has become of my "Lodge" skillets. I
>> >> really like those "quotes" around "Lodge" as though they imply some
>> >> flaw or something.
>> >
>> >
>> > I put those quotes around "Lodge" because you felt you had
>> > to proclaim a brand which I think is... silly, stupid <your
>> > choice> to proclaim unless you're hawking the brand.
>>
>> Could you be more dense? Hawking? I mentioned the kind we used. It was
>> data for the purpose of identification. Lodge is the most commonly
>> sold brand in the US and is thus a benchmark for anyone else reading
>> this. What brand are the ones you use? Oh, wait. If you said it would
>> be "hawking" them. Right.
>>
>> But it certainly is instructive to watch you construct this sort of
>> crap logic and gas-based opinions merely to be taking shots. I find
>> your effort to inject this smarmy bit of snottiness "silly, stupid
>> <your choice>."
>>
>> Hawking...
>>
>> Here, hawk this...
>>
>> >> We used skillets. Some warped and some cracked. Most did just fine. We
>> >> used *hundreds* of skillets over the years. You've used what, four?
>> >
>> >
>> > Yean, my 5 have lasted. In fact 3 of the 5 were inherited
>> > and came via my mother from my grandmother, probably my
>> > greatgrandmother. You, on the other hand, kill 10 out of 60
>> > pans per year.... that's not a good track record for you or
>> > a plus in the Lodge column.
>>
>> And your bullshit-based opinions ring through the halls. Do you think
>> it's likely that *all* your pans haven't been used as much as any one
>> of ours?
>>
>> We used each pan probably a thousand times in each year (we used them
>> for all 3 meals in the restaurant, 2 meals in the bar and for some of
>> our 6 or so banquets every day). On commercial stoves that likely turn
>> out more heat from one burner than your entire stove does. That 10 out
>> of 60 means that each pan on average was used more than 5,000 times.
>> Cold to hot very quickly, onto a pewter liner to sizzle while being
>> delivered, to table, to dishwasher back to kitchen for reuse - 365
>> days a year.
>>
>> Given the amount of use and the uses to which they were put, I'd say
>> they did a fine job. Cheap, attractive, effective, replaceable. No one
>> with a grain of sense judges restaurant conditions and effects by
>> home-cooking criteria.
>>
>> >> I'm sure you must be very proud of your skillets. They braved the
>> >> fierce heat of the oven to press on for truth, beauty, motherhood and
>> >> corn bread. Never deterred from their appointed rounds and striding
>> >> purposefully into the future in spite of your bizarre treatment of
>> >> them. Clinging to their mission to cook and provide for the masses. A
>> >> part of the family to be cherished and stuck in a very hot oven for
>> >> some strange reason.
>> >
>> > Yours fall apart and mine don't.
>>
>> <LOL> Fall apart...
>>
>> Like your opinions...
>>
>> Pastorio
>
>
>
> sf
> Practice safe eating - always use condiments