I have a pet peeve about recipes,

01. Ingredients that aren't commonly known and

02. ingredients that are local commercial brands that are more than a
single spice or herb and an

03. ingredient without quantity or to taste .

If one posts a recipe they should
help by clarifying these short comings in notes at the start.

mike (piedmont)
the practical bbq'r

"piedmont" > wrote in message
...
> I have a pet peeve about recipes,
>
> 01. Ingredients that aren't commonly known and
>
> 02. ingredients that are local commercial brands that are more than a
> single spice or herb and an
>
> 03. ingredient without quantity or to taste .
>
> If one posts a recipe they should
> help by clarifying these short comings in notes at the start.
>
> mike (piedmont)
> the practical bbq'r

I have a pet peeve about pet peeves. They are a personal thing with no
relevance to the rest of the world.

01. What is an ingredient that is not commonly known? I'd bet that every
one you'd list is a very common ingredient for many others. While we may be
a genius at one thing we are all ignorant about others.

02. You do have a point on that one. Listing "Bob's Magic Dust" is not so
good if it is a local store only.

03. "To taste" is pretty self explanatory. If it is an ingredient I
don't like, I omit or use a tiny pinch, but ones I like I tend to add more
and adjust if needed. It just does not seem to be a problem for anyone that
has tasted a particular ingredient.

On Sat, 1 May 2010 10:17:43 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> "piedmont" > wrote in message
> ...
>> I have a pet peeve about recipes,
>>
>> 01. Ingredients that aren't commonly known and
>>
>> 02. ingredients that are local commercial brands that are more than a
>> single spice or herb and an
>>
>> 03. ingredient without quantity or to taste .
>>
>> If one posts a recipe they should
>> help by clarifying these short comings in notes at the start.
>>
>> mike (piedmont)
>> the practical bbq'r

> 03. "To taste" is pretty self explanatory. If it is an ingredient I
> don't like, I omit or use a tiny pinch, but ones I like I tend to add more
> and adjust if needed. It just does not seem to be a problem for anyone that
> has tasted a particular ingredient.

i would still like an indication of the amount the recipe poster usually
uses. quarter teaspoon? teaspoon? what?

your pal,
blake

>
> 03. *"To taste" is pretty self explanatory. * *If it is an ingredient I
> don't like, I omit or use a tiny pinch, but ones I like I tend to add more
> and adjust if needed. *It just does not seem to be a problem for anyone that
> has tasted a particular ingredient.

Personally, I think it would be nice to give a range or starting
portion. It could be a tiny pinch or a tablespoon, or more, depending
on what the recipe is, and what ingredient is being discussed.

For example, when I give my recipe for smoked salmon dip, I list a
smaller amount of liquid smoke with a note, add more if you prefer it
stronger (as I usually do).

On Sat, 1 May 2010 23:54:06 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

>>
>> 03. *"To taste" is pretty self explanatory. * *If it is an ingredient I
>> don't like, I omit or use a tiny pinch, but ones I like I tend to add more
>> and adjust if needed. *It just does not seem to be a problem for anyone that
>> has tasted a particular ingredient.
>
> Personally, I think it would be nice to give a range or starting
> portion. It could be a tiny pinch or a tablespoon, or more, depending
> on what the recipe is, and what ingredient is being discussed.
>
> For example, when I give my recipe for smoked salmon dip, I list a
> smaller amount of liquid smoke with a note, add more if you prefer it
> stronger (as I usually do).

that's the sort of thing i was referring to as preferring.

your pal,
blake

On 5/2/2010 9:19 AM, Janet Baraclough wrote:
> The >
> from "<friesian@zoocrewphoto. com> contains
> these words:
>
>> Personally, I think it would be nice to give a range or starting
>> portion. It could be a tiny pinch or a tablespoon, or more, depending
>> on what the recipe is, and what ingredient is being discussed.
>
>> For example, when I give my recipe for smoked salmon dip, I list a
>> smaller amount of liquid smoke with a note, add more if you prefer it
>> stronger (as I usually do).
>
> Holy cow. If I saw a recipe for smoked salmon dip that included liquid
> smoke, I'd know to avoid it completely.
>
> Janet

I would substitute an envelope of onion soup mix...

George wrote:
> On 5/2/2010 9:19 AM, Janet Baraclough wrote:
>> The
>> >
>> from "<friesian@zoocrewphoto. com> contains
>> these words:
>>
>>> Personally, I think it would be nice to give a range or starting
>>> portion. It could be a tiny pinch or a tablespoon, or more, depending
>>> on what the recipe is, and what ingredient is being discussed.
>>
>>> For example, when I give my recipe for smoked salmon dip, I list a
>>> smaller amount of liquid smoke with a note, add more if you prefer it
>>> stronger (as I usually do).
>>
>> Holy cow. If I saw a recipe for smoked salmon dip that included liquid
>> smoke, I'd know to avoid it completely.
>>
>> Janet
>
> I would substitute an envelope of onion soup mix...


Don't forget the tbsp of MSG.

gloria p

On May 2, 3:50*pm, "gloria.p" > wrote:
> George wrote:
> > On 5/2/2010 9:19 AM, Janet Baraclough wrote:
> >> The
> >> >
> >> from "<fries...@zoocrewphoto. com> *contains
> >> these words:
>
> >>> Personally, I think it would be nice to give a range or starting
> >>> portion. It could be a tiny pinch or a tablespoon, or more, depending
> >>> on what the recipe is, and what ingredient is being discussed.
>
> >>> For example, when I give my recipe for smoked salmon dip, I list a
> >>> smaller amount of liquid smoke with a note, add more if you prefer it
> >>> stronger (as I usually do).
>
> >> * Holy cow. If I saw a recipe for smoked salmon dip that *included liquid
> >> smoke, I'd know *to avoid it completely.
>
> >> * * *Janet
>
> > I would substitute an envelope of onion soup mix...
>
> Don't forget the tbsp of MSG.
>

Is that a joke, or would you actually use MSG in salmon dip? I have
never used it as an ingredient in anything.

On Sun, 2 May 2010 14:19:52 +0100, Janet Baraclough wrote:

> The message >
> from " > contains
> these words:
>
>> Personally, I think it would be nice to give a range or starting
>> portion. It could be a tiny pinch or a tablespoon, or more, depending
>> on what the recipe is, and what ingredient is being discussed.
>
>> For example, when I give my recipe for smoked salmon dip, I list a
>> smaller amount of liquid smoke with a note, add more if you prefer it
>> stronger (as I usually do).
>
> Holy cow. If I saw a recipe for smoked salmon dip that included liquid
> smoke, I'd know to avoid it completely.
>
> Janet

but at least you'd have an idea as to the amount of liquid smoke you're
avoiding.

your pal,
blake

On May 2, 6:19*am, Janet Baraclough >
wrote:
> The message >
> from " > contains
> these words:
>
> > Personally, I think it would be nice to give a range or starting
> > portion. It could be a tiny pinch or a tablespoon, or more, depending
> > on what the recipe is, and what ingredient is being discussed.
> > For example, when I give my recipe for smoked salmon dip, I list a
> > smaller amount of liquid smoke with a note, add more if you prefer it
> > stronger (as I usually do).
>
> *Holy cow. If I saw a recipe for smoked salmon dip that *included liquid
> smoke, I'd know *to avoid it completely. *
>
> * * Janet

So you either have a source of very strong smoked salmon, or you like
it bland. I like mine stronger than just the smoked salmon. The cream
cheese tames it too much.

"Janet Baraclough" > wrote in message
...
> The message
> >
> from " > contains
> these words:
>
>> On May 2, 6:19 am, Janet Baraclough >
>> wrote:
>> > The message
>> > >
>> > from " > contains
>> > these words:
>> >
>> > > Personally, I think it would be nice to give a range or starting
>> > > portion. It could be a tiny pinch or a tablespoon, or more, depending
>> > > on what the recipe is, and what ingredient is being discussed.
>> > > For example, when I give my recipe for smoked salmon dip, I list a
>> > > smaller amount of liquid smoke with a note, add more if you prefer it
>> > > stronger (as I usually do).
>> >
>> > Holy cow. If I saw a recipe for smoked salmon dip that included liquid
>> > smoke, I'd know to avoid it completely.
>> >
>> > Janet
>
>> So you either have a source of very strong smoked salmon, or you like
>> it bland.
>
> I just nip along the road to the salmon smokehouse. I like it to taste
> of salmon.

How is the condition of your nipples relevant to the conversation?

On May 2, 4:22*pm, Andy > wrote:
> " > wrote:
>
> >> 03. *"To taste" is pretty self explanatory. * *If it is an ingredie
> > nt I
> >> don't like, I omit or use a tiny pinch, but ones I like I tend to add
> >> mor
> > e
> >> and adjust if needed. *It just does not seem to be a problem for
> >> anyone
> > *that
> >> has tasted a particular ingredient.
>
> > Personally, I think it would be nice to give a range or starting
> > portion. It could be a tiny pinch or a tablespoon, or more, depending
> > on what the recipe is, and what ingredient is being discussed.
>
> > For example, when I give my recipe for smoked salmon dip, I list a
> > smaller amount of liquid smoke with a note, add more if you prefer it
> > stronger (as I usually do).
>
> Do you make mention of hickory or mesquite liquid smoke?
>
> Hickory only needs a few drops. Potent stuff.
>
> Mesquite can pretty much be used by the tablespoon or more.
>


Most stores around here only carry the hickory. I do make my dip in
large quantity as I sell it during the holiday season. I usually make
30- 40 lbs for a weekend event. I don't make small batches.

On 5/1/2010 9:12 AM, piedmont wrote:
> I have a pet peeve about recipes,
>
> 01. Ingredients that aren't commonly known and
>
> 02. ingredients that are local commercial brands that are more than a
> single spice or herb and an
>
> 03. ingredient without quantity or to taste .
>
> If one posts a recipe they should
> help by clarifying these short comings in notes at the start.
>
> mike (piedmont)
> the practical bbq'r

So don't use those recipes.

How would someone writing a recipe know if an ingredient was known to
you? If you choose not to do the research then pass.

I view recipes as a very loose framework and most dishes I prepare are
to taste. That certainly isn't a shortcoming. You may like more or less
garlic than me for example. Few recipes are proportion critical which
means there is a lot of latitude to adjust per your preference.

On Sat, 01 May 2010 10:51:17 -0400, George wrote:

> On 5/1/2010 9:12 AM, piedmont wrote:
>> I have a pet peeve about recipes,
>>
>> 01. Ingredients that aren't commonly known and
>>
>> 02. ingredients that are local commercial brands that are more than a
>> single spice or herb and an
>>
>> 03. ingredient without quantity or to taste .
>>
>> If one posts a recipe they should
>> help by clarifying these short comings in notes at the start.
>>
>> mike (piedmont)
>> the practical bbq'r
>
> So don't use those recipes.
>
> How would someone writing a recipe know if an ingredient was known to
> you? If you choose not to do the research then pass.
>
> I view recipes as a very loose framework and most dishes I prepare are
> to taste. That certainly isn't a shortcoming. You may like more or less
> garlic than me for example. Few recipes are proportion critical which
> means there is a lot of latitude to adjust per your preference.

all of us are not a comfortable with improvisation as you appear to be, at
least the first time through.

readers of any kind of instructions you write are likely to be in trouble
from time to time. be kind to them and be as explicit as possible.

your pal,
blake

On 5/1/2010 5:15 AM, blake murphy wrote:
> all of us are not a comfortable with improvisation as you appear to be, at
> least the first time through.
>
> readers of any kind of instructions you write are likely to be in trouble
> from time to time. be kind to them and be as explicit as possible.

The problem is that experienced cooks don't think of "to taste" items in
discrete units of measurement but more as a varying intensity of flavor.

I could give estimated measurements but I have no idea how close to
actual quantities it would be. My guess is that it would be off by a bit
or a lot. Learning to season to taste is probably the first lessons a
beginning cook should learn. In the end, our seasoning style is how we
leave our mark on what we create and it is how we will be known as cooks.

Effectively, this means that beginning cooks are mostly screwed as far
as getting useful info on seasoning to taste from most experienced
cooks. My advice is to get yourself educated pronto.

>
> your pal,
> blake

In article >,
dsi1 > wrote:

> On 5/1/2010 5:15 AM, blake murphy wrote:
> > all of us are not a comfortable with improvisation as you appear to be, at
> > least the first time through.
> >
> > readers of any kind of instructions you write are likely to be in trouble
> > from time to time. be kind to them and be as explicit as possible.
>
> The problem is that experienced cooks don't think of "to taste" items in
> discrete units of measurement but more as a varying intensity of flavor.
>
> I could give estimated measurements but I have no idea how close to
> actual quantities it would be.

I know what you're saying. I seldom measure. I just throw stuff in. I
seldom bake, which helps. Still, why bother posting a recipe then? If
I'm following a recipe, I'll just post the URL, if it is online. If
it's my recipe, then I'll make it once, and write everything down, in
much more detail than *I* need.

It's good for people to learn how to alter recipes to suit themselves.
But, before they can do that, they need some exact recipes to follow,
and if they like one, they can then start to alter it. For an
inexperienced cook to just throw stuff together will likely result in
bad food.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On 5/1/2010 9:49 AM, Dan Abel wrote:
> In >,
> > wrote:
>
>> On 5/1/2010 5:15 AM, blake murphy wrote:
>>> all of us are not a comfortable with improvisation as you appear to be, at
>>> least the first time through.
>>>
>>> readers of any kind of instructions you write are likely to be in trouble
>>> from time to time. be kind to them and be as explicit as possible.
>>
>> The problem is that experienced cooks don't think of "to taste" items in
>> discrete units of measurement but more as a varying intensity of flavor.
>>
>> I could give estimated measurements but I have no idea how close to
>> actual quantities it would be.
>
> I know what you're saying. I seldom measure. I just throw stuff in. I
> seldom bake, which helps. Still, why bother posting a recipe then? If
> I'm following a recipe, I'll just post the URL, if it is online. If
> it's my recipe, then I'll make it once, and write everything down, in
> much more detail than *I* need.
>
> It's good for people to learn how to alter recipes to suit themselves.
> But, before they can do that, they need some exact recipes to follow,
> and if they like one, they can then start to alter it. For an
> inexperienced cook to just throw stuff together will likely result in
> bad food.
>

The best bet for beginning cooks is to get recipes from test kitchens
that have done R&D on recipes. They preform a valuable service. That's
pretty much what it takes since a lot of recipes are just plain messed
up and off-the-wall goofy/wrong. I still look at recipes to get general
proportions, baking temperatures, methods of preparation and new ideas.
The internet is a great help for experienced cooks in getting this info
fast.

On 5/1/2010 2:52 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> On 5/1/2010 5:15 AM, blake murphy wrote:
>> all of us are not a comfortable with improvisation as you appear to
>> be, at
>> least the first time through.
>>
>> readers of any kind of instructions you write are likely to be in trouble
>> from time to time. be kind to them and be as explicit as possible.
>
> The problem is that experienced cooks don't think of "to taste" items in
> discrete units of measurement but more as a varying intensity of flavor.
>
> I could give estimated measurements but I have no idea how close to
> actual quantities it would be. My guess is that it would be off by a bit
> or a lot. Learning to season to taste is probably the first lessons a
> beginning cook should learn. In the end, our seasoning style is how we
> leave our mark on what we create and it is how we will be known as cooks.
>
> Effectively, this means that beginning cooks are mostly screwed as far
> as getting useful info on seasoning to taste from most experienced
> cooks. My advice is to get yourself educated pronto.


I couldn't have said it better.

>
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>

On 5/1/2010 11:07 AM, George wrote:
> On 5/1/2010 2:52 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>> On 5/1/2010 5:15 AM, blake murphy wrote:
>>> all of us are not a comfortable with improvisation as you appear to
>>> be, at
>>> least the first time through.
>>>
>>> readers of any kind of instructions you write are likely to be in
>>> trouble
>>> from time to time. be kind to them and be as explicit as possible.
>>
>> The problem is that experienced cooks don't think of "to taste" items in
>> discrete units of measurement but more as a varying intensity of flavor.
>>
>> I could give estimated measurements but I have no idea how close to
>> actual quantities it would be. My guess is that it would be off by a bit
>> or a lot. Learning to season to taste is probably the first lessons a
>> beginning cook should learn. In the end, our seasoning style is how we
>> leave our mark on what we create and it is how we will be known as cooks.
>>
>> Effectively, this means that beginning cooks are mostly screwed as far
>> as getting useful info on seasoning to taste from most experienced
>> cooks. My advice is to get yourself educated pronto.
>
>
> I couldn't have said it better.

Oddly enough, neither could I. :-)

>
>>
>>>
>>> your pal,
>>> blake
>>
>

On 5/1/2010 11:07 AM, l, not -l wrote:
> On 1-May-2010, > wrote:
>
>> Effectively, this means that beginning cooks are mostly screwed as far
>> as getting useful info on seasoning to taste from most experienced
>> cooks. My advice is to get yourself educated pronto.
>
> I don't see how beginning cooks are screwed, nor do I see any difficulty in
> getting educated on seasoning "to taste". Put in some
> salt/pepper/garlic/whatever-the-recipe-says-to-taste, taste the result.
> Does it suit your taste? No - does it need more of xxxx; if so, add more
> xxxx 8-P . Does it have too much xxxx&-( ? Ok, now you're screwed -
> next time, add xxxx in smaller increments. How hard is that? 8-)

Hopefully, beginners will study your algorithms & methods. :-)

Learning to place trust in yourself and your taste may take a long time
for a few. I can tell that you're not one of those! For most if us, it
takes a while to learn to get a flavor target solidly in our minds. For
beginners it's quite fuzzy and well, you can't reliably hit a fuzzy target!

Your pal,

Not Blake

On 5/2/2010 3:07 AM, Janet Baraclough wrote:
> The >
> from > contains these words:
>
>
>> Learning to place trust in yourself and your taste may take a long time
>> for a few. I can tell that you're not one of those! For most if us, it
>> takes a while to learn to get a flavor target solidly in our minds. For
>> beginners it's quite fuzzy and well, you can't reliably hit a fuzzy target!
>
> That might be true for any droid who landed on earth from planet Zog
> disguised as a fully grown adult humanoid.*
> Real humans, have had a decade or two of eating food cooked by
> others; quite enough experience of mastication
> to "consolidate a flavor target" in even the tiniest brain.

Evidently, it's easy enough to judge someone's cooking, but put a salt
shaker in the hands of a real human who doesn't know how to use it and
they'll tank. Obviously, you've forgotten what it was like when you
started cooking. You've probably also forgot what it's like to be unsure
of yourself. :-)

>
> * Those who have not had opportunity to solidly consolidate a flavour
> target should enter the following useful phrases into their speech
> synthesiser.
> "Blech, tastes like shit"
> "Yummy, that's just like Mother made it".
>
> Janet.

Janet Baraclough wrote:
>
> The message >
> from dsi1 > contains these words:
>
> > Learning to place trust in yourself and your taste may take a long time
> > for a few. I can tell that you're not one of those! For most if us, it
> > takes a while to learn to get a flavor target solidly in our minds. For
> > beginners it's quite fuzzy and well, you can't reliably hit a fuzzy target!
>
> That might be true for any droid who landed on earth from planet Zog
> disguised as a fully grown adult humanoid.*
> Real humans, have had a decade or two of eating food cooked by
> others; quite enough experience of mastication
> to "consolidate a flavor target" in even the tiniest brain.
>
> * Those who have not had opportunity to solidly consolidate a flavour
> target should enter the following useful phrases into their speech
> synthesiser.
> "Blech, tastes like shit"
> "Yummy, that's just like Mother made it".
>
> Janet.

ROTFL! But it's true

l, not -l wrote:
> On 1-May-2010, dsi1 > wrote:
>
>> Effectively, this means that beginning cooks are mostly screwed as far
>> as getting useful info on seasoning to taste from most experienced
>> cooks. My advice is to get yourself educated pronto.
>
> I don't see how beginning cooks are screwed, nor do I see any difficulty in
> getting educated on seasoning "to taste". Put in some
> salt/pepper/garlic/whatever-the-recipe-says-to-taste, taste the result.
> Does it suit your taste? No - does it need more of xxxx; if so, add more
> xxxx 8-P . Does it have too much xxxx &-( ? Ok, now you're screwed -
> next time, add xxxx in smaller increments. How hard is that? 8-)


Spice and Herb Lesson #1:

You can always add more if there's not enough;
you can't take any out if there's too much.


gloria p

Janet Baraclough wrote:
>
> The message >
> from "gloria.p" > contains these words:
>
> > Spice and Herb Lesson #1:
>
> > You can always add more if there's not enough;
> > you can't take any out if there's too much.
>
> Hey Gloria, slow down. That comes from the rfc advanced study module.
> It's hardly suitable advice for beginner cooks who can't even hold a
> spoon yet.
>
> Janet

Did I miss those lectures? <vbg>

On Sat, 1 May 2010 21:07:53 GMT, l, not -l wrote:

> On 1-May-2010, dsi1 > wrote:
>
>> Effectively, this means that beginning cooks are mostly screwed as far
>> as getting useful info on seasoning to taste from most experienced
>> cooks. My advice is to get yourself educated pronto.
>
> I don't see how beginning cooks are screwed, nor do I see any difficulty in
> getting educated on seasoning "to taste". Put in some
> salt/pepper/garlic/whatever-the-recipe-says-to-taste, taste the result.
> Does it suit your taste? No - does it need more of xxxx; if so, add more
> xxxx 8-P . Does it have too much xxxx &-( ? Ok, now you're screwed -
> next time, add xxxx in smaller increments. How hard is that? 8-)

but some spice ingredients aren't added toward the end, but rather toward
the beginning. sort of difficult to 'adjust' those.

your pal,
blake

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Sat, 1 May 2010 21:07:53 GMT, l, not -l wrote:
>
> > On 1-May-2010, dsi1 > wrote:
> >
> >> Effectively, this means that beginning cooks are mostly screwed as far
> >> as getting useful info on seasoning to taste from most experienced
> >> cooks. My advice is to get yourself educated pronto.
> >
> > I don't see how beginning cooks are screwed, nor do I see any difficulty in
> > getting educated on seasoning "to taste". Put in some
> > salt/pepper/garlic/whatever-the-recipe-says-to-taste, taste the result.
> > Does it suit your taste? No - does it need more of xxxx; if so, add more
> > xxxx 8-P . Does it have too much xxxx &-( ? Ok, now you're screwed -
> > next time, add xxxx in smaller increments. How hard is that? 8-)
>
> but some spice ingredients aren't added toward the end, but rather toward
> the beginning. sort of difficult to 'adjust' those.

Well, you started it, I'll add some more. I'm sure there are an almost
unlimited number, though:

2. sausage from scratch, pretty frustrating to have to fry up a patty
every time you make a small change, better to start off with an idea

3. meatloaf, I can't imagine tasting any time except afterwards

4. cake, or pretty much any kind of baking, will end up in the trash if
very far off, can't adjust after it goes in the oven

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

"blake murphy" > ha scritto nel messaggio
George wrote:
>> On 5/1/2010 9:12 AM, piedmont wrote:
>>> I have a pet peeve about recipes,
>>> 01. Ingredients that aren't commonly known and
>>> 02. ingredients that are local commercial brands that are more than a>>>
>>> single spice or herb and an
>>> 03. ingredient without quantity or to taste .
>>> If one posts a recipe they should
>>> help by clarifying these short comings in notes at the start.

>> I view recipes as a very loose framework and most dishes I prepare are >>
>> to taste. That certainly isn't a shortcoming. You may like more or less
>> >> garlic than me for example. Few recipes are proportion critical
>> which>> means there is a lot of latitude to adjust per your preference.
>
> all of us are not a comfortable with improvisation as you appear to be,
> at> least the first time through.
>
> readers of any kind of instructions you write are likely to be in trouble>
> from time to time. be kind to them and be as explicit as possible.

People who really don't know about cooking probably should look things up as
they run into them and ask intelligent questions when Googling doesn't
explain it. This is a cooking group and presupposes that one understands
cooking. If I went to a nuclear power plant building group I'd keep my
browser open to a search page, at least for a while. It happens that I do
know quite a lot about what people do not know about cookery, but I also
don't want to bore everyone to tears explaining what finely minced means
versus chopped or diced. If someone needed to ask, I'd answer... wouldn't
you?

On Sun, 2 May 2010 10:46:20 +0200, Giusi wrote:

> "blake murphy" > ha scritto nel messaggio
> George wrote:
>>> On 5/1/2010 9:12 AM, piedmont wrote:
>>>> I have a pet peeve about recipes,
>>>> 01. Ingredients that aren't commonly known and
>>>> 02. ingredients that are local commercial brands that are more than a>>>
>>>> single spice or herb and an
>>>> 03. ingredient without quantity or to taste .
>>>> If one posts a recipe they should
>>>> help by clarifying these short comings in notes at the start.
>
>>> I view recipes as a very loose framework and most dishes I prepare are >>
>>> to taste. That certainly isn't a shortcoming. You may like more or less
>>> >> garlic than me for example. Few recipes are proportion critical
>>> which>> means there is a lot of latitude to adjust per your preference.
>>
>> all of us are not a comfortable with improvisation as you appear to be,
>> at> least the first time through.
>>
>> readers of any kind of instructions you write are likely to be in trouble>
>> from time to time. be kind to them and be as explicit as possible.
>
> People who really don't know about cooking probably should look things up as
> they run into them and ask intelligent questions when Googling doesn't
> explain it. This is a cooking group and presupposes that one understands
> cooking. If I went to a nuclear power plant building group I'd keep my
> browser open to a search page, at least for a while. It happens that I do
> know quite a lot about what people do not know about cookery, but I also
> don't want to bore everyone to tears explaining what finely minced means
> versus chopped or diced. If someone needed to ask, I'd answer... wouldn't
> you?

sure, of course. but what about all the poor shlubs reading r.f.c. from an
aggregation site? they're up doo-doo creek.

your pal,
blake

"blake murphy" > ha scritto nel messaggio
Giusi wrote:
If someone needed to ask, I'd answer... wouldn't
>> you?
>
> sure, of course. but what about all the poor shlubs reading r.f.c. from
> an> aggregation site? they're up doo-doo creek.

Then clearly they need to frequent other cookery sites and blogs. like mine.

"Janet Baraclough" > wrote in message
...
> The message >
> from blake murphy > contains these words:
>
>> On Sat, 01 May 2010 10:51:17 -0400, George wrote:
>
>> > I view recipes as a very loose framework and most dishes I prepare are
>> > to taste. That certainly isn't a shortcoming. You may like more or less
>> > garlic than me for example. Few recipes are proportion critical which
>> > means there is a lot of latitude to adjust per your preference.
>
>> all of us are not a comfortable with improvisation as you appear to be,
>> at
>> least the first time through.
>
>> readers of any kind of instructions you write are likely to be in trouble
>> from time to time. be kind to them and be as explicit as possible.
>
> Why not start with a drawing of all saucepans and tools required, and
> some printy-out-sticky labels.
>
> Janet


ROFL! That's too funny! And pretty much accurate

Jill

On 2010-05-01 08:53:46 -0700, Janet Baraclough said:
> Why not start with a drawing of all saucepans and tools required, and
> some printy-out-sticky labels.

I don't like to have to google stuff out of a recipe. For the most part
I don't have to. Generally I want to be able to print a recipe, tote it
to the kitchen and go for it, with returning to the office and hunting
down mysteries.

Admittedly everything that's unknown in a recipe is not a mystery. I
think recipes should attempt to avoid what will be a mystery to
"general readers". That's all. Neither ingredients specified in Gaelic,
nor hand-holding from the beginning to end.
--
If you limit your actions in life to things that nobody can possibly
find fault with, you will not do much. -- Lewis Carroll

> If one of the ingredients is "a mystery" to you, you're unlikely to
>already have it in your home kitchen, ready to cook with..

Unless it's a different name for something you DO have in your kitchen.

Not an ingredient, but... When I first came to the Twin Cities, I had
difficulty in ordering tea in restaurants. The waitronette would ask
what kind of tea I wanted, and would not understand "regular tea."
Eventually, I learned that I needed to ask for "black tea."

--
Dan Goodman
"I have always depended on the kindness of stranglers."
Tennessee Williams, A Streetcar Named Expire
Journal dsgood.dreamwidth.org (livejournal.com, insanejournal.com)

On Sat, 1 May 2010 16:53:46 +0100, Janet Baraclough wrote:

> The message >
> from blake murphy > contains these words:
>
>> On Sat, 01 May 2010 10:51:17 -0400, George wrote:
>
>>> I view recipes as a very loose framework and most dishes I prepare are
>>> to taste. That certainly isn't a shortcoming. You may like more or less
>>> garlic than me for example. Few recipes are proportion critical which
>>> means there is a lot of latitude to adjust per your preference.
>
>> all of us are not a comfortable with improvisation as you appear to be, at
>> least the first time through.
>
>> readers of any kind of instructions you write are likely to be in trouble
>> from time to time. be kind to them and be as explicit as possible.
>
> Why not start with a drawing of all saucepans and tools required, and
> some printy-out-sticky labels.
>
> Janet

well, sure. i'm not going to tell you how to chop your onions (although i
do know a dandy method if anyone's curious). there's a happy medium to be
struck here is all i'm saying.

your pal,
blake

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:


> well, sure. i'm not going to tell you how to chop your onions (although i
> do know a dandy method if anyone's curious).

My mother tried to teach me how to chop onions. It was the most amazing
thing, but it didn't seem too practical, so I've never done it. She
used no big knife or cutting board, just a paring knife and her two
hands. After peeling the onion, she'd hold it in her left hand and
crosshatch it with the knife. Then she'd cut slices off of it, which
produced perfectly uniform, chopped onion pieces. So far, so good. But
then at the end, she'd hack away at the remaining onion, making even
more perfectly shaped pieces. The whole process took mere seconds.
Nothing to clean up except the knife and her hands, since she'd just cut
it right into where it was going. I'm sure it was 90% skill.

You?

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

"Dan Abel" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>
>> well, sure. i'm not going to tell you how to chop your onions (although
>> i
>> do know a dandy method if anyone's curious).
>
> My mother tried to teach me how to chop onions. It was the most amazing
> thing, but it didn't seem too practical, so I've never done it. She
> used no big knife or cutting board, just a paring knife and her two
> hands. After peeling the onion, she'd hold it in her left hand and
> crosshatch it with the knife. Then she'd cut slices off of it, which
> produced perfectly uniform, chopped onion pieces. So far, so good. But
> then at the end, she'd hack away at the remaining onion, making even
> more perfectly shaped pieces. The whole process took mere seconds.
> Nothing to clean up except the knife and her hands, since she'd just cut
> it right into where it was going. I'm sure it was 90% skill.
>
> You?
>
> --
> Dan Abel
That's how I learned to cut an onion.
Janet

On Sun, 02 May 2010 16:00:03 -0700, Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >,
> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>> well, sure. i'm not going to tell you how to chop your onions (although i
>> do know a dandy method if anyone's curious).
>
> My mother tried to teach me how to chop onions. It was the most amazing
> thing, but it didn't seem too practical, so I've never done it. She
> used no big knife or cutting board, just a paring knife and her two
> hands. After peeling the onion, she'd hold it in her left hand and
> crosshatch it with the knife. Then she'd cut slices off of it, which
> produced perfectly uniform, chopped onion pieces. So far, so good. But
> then at the end, she'd hack away at the remaining onion, making even
> more perfectly shaped pieces. The whole process took mere seconds.
> Nothing to clean up except the knife and her hands, since she'd just cut
> it right into where it was going. I'm sure it was 90% skill.
>
> You?

i looked at some videos from google, but my method is slightly different.
cut in half, pole to pole; for each hemisphere, peel back skin towards the
root end (root is left on); trim stem end; cut pie-shaped wedges along the
the root-to-stem axis; make vertical cuts. the onion's layers will then
separate (with a little help) into a dice.

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 2 May 2010 16:39:40 -0400 in rec.food.cooking, blake murphy
> wrote,
>well, sure. i'm not going to tell you how to chop your onions (although i
>do know a dandy method if anyone's curious). there's a happy medium to be
>struck here is all i'm saying.

My food processor came with a "french fry" blade (useless for french
fries) that is great for chopping onions. You can drop large chunks of
onion into it and all the spray of onion juice is confined to the
chopping chamber, so no tears. It might be best to take it outside to
open it, though.

Janet Baraclough wrote:
>
> The message >
> from blake murphy > contains these words:
>
> > On Sat, 01 May 2010 10:51:17 -0400, George wrote:
>
> > > I view recipes as a very loose framework and most dishes I prepare are
> > > to taste. That certainly isn't a shortcoming. You may like more or less
> > > garlic than me for example. Few recipes are proportion critical which
> > > means there is a lot of latitude to adjust per your preference.
>
> > all of us are not a comfortable with improvisation as you appear to be, at
> > least the first time through.
>
> > readers of any kind of instructions you write are likely to be in trouble
> > from time to time. be kind to them and be as explicit as possible.
>
> Why not start with a drawing of all saucepans and tools required, and
> some printy-out-sticky labels.
>
> Janet

Don't laugh! I did that for a friend who had recently converted to
Judaism. Rearranged her kitchen and bought labels for meat and dairy.
Stuck them on her cupboard doors, shelves and fridge shelves. She didn't
have enough dosh for two fridges or freezers, so that was second best.
But it worked until that separation became second nature.

On Sat, 01 May 2010 10:51:17 -0400, George >
wrote:

>I view recipes as a very loose framework and most dishes I prepare are
>to taste. That certainly isn't a shortcoming. You may like more or less
>garlic than me for example. Few recipes are proportion critical which
>means there is a lot of latitude to adjust per your preference.

Blake has a point. It's nice to know a baseline amount when it's an
unfamiliar recipe.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Sat, 01 May 2010 10:51:17 -0400, George >
wrote:

>On 5/1/2010 9:12 AM, piedmont wrote:
>> I have a pet peeve about recipes,
>>
>> 01. Ingredients that aren't commonly known and
>>
>> 02. ingredients that are local commercial brands that are more than a
>> single spice or herb and an
>>
>> 03. ingredient without quantity or to taste .
>>
>> If one posts a recipe they should
>> help by clarifying these short comings in notes at the start.
>>
>> mike (piedmont)
>> the practical bbq'r
>
>So don't use those recipes.
>
>How would someone writing a recipe know if an ingredient was known to
>you? If you choose not to do the research then pass.
>
>I view recipes as a very loose framework and most dishes I prepare are
>to taste. That certainly isn't a shortcoming. You may like more or less
>garlic than me for example. Few recipes are proportion critical which
>means there is a lot of latitude to adjust per your preference.

To Taste, To Schmaste... that doesn't help all the TIADers.

All I know is that if I pump an ingredient I don't recognize into
Google and it doesn't come up I'm not eating it.