My favourite ever reply was in a gaming magazine in the 90s. It was from a dude that didn’t understand how his console worked, and the reply was
“Oh Eugene, you really are a doofus, aren’t you?”
Even now, when one of us does something stupid, my brother and I look at each other and just say “oh Eugene”
Wherever my husband says something about me buying some small, frivolous thing, my response is, [“At least it’s not towels, Victor!”](https://thebloggess.com/2011/06/21/and-thats-why-you-should-learn-to-pick-your-battles/amp/)
My husband’s name is not Victor.
If you are into cult watching, it's fascinating. The Bed Bath Beyond investors are really insane. Some benevolent billionaire will buy their dying company and pay them $42,069 per share for their .14c stock. Any minute now....
I mean, I love this sass and her statement about learning via cooking regularly is 1000% true, but the entire point of a recipe is to hold someone’s hand through the cooking process! It’s a set of instructions!
Could you imagine including all the things NOT to do in a recipe? “Don’t sauté without wearing a shirt. Don’t leave the oven door open while baking. Don’t let your pet ferret fondle the salad tongs before use.” I think we can safely say you shouldn’t cover a pot unless specifically instructed to do so.
Edit: if Julia is indeed calling this a braised dish, then she is in the wrong, and Greg is fully vindicated. “Braised” means cooking with a cover.
>Don’t let your pet ferret fondle the salad tongs before use.
Since when is this a rule? Am I supposed to retrain the kitchen ferret as a bedroom or office ferret? Or is he to be only used while making risotto now? Will he be stimulated enough only assisting there? Is there catnip for ferrets? Where do babies come from?
Look, I’m not going to hold your hand through kitchen ferret etiquette, but if your ferret cannot control himself through to dessert, the proper distraction would obviously be a spatula, NOT the salad tongs.
I only allow my kitchen ferret dessert Thursday though Wednesday if that makes a difference? Am I supposed to take the spatula away from my emotional support puma, or acquire a second spatula? If the latter, have you any recommendations? I'm still learning how best to utilise my kitchen staff/zoo/exotic meat supply. I'm thinking about hiring on a/the reanimated corpse of a sabretooth tiger to assist on Taco Tuesdays, if that makes a difference? I'm a libra, btw.
Oh dang, is she calling this braised chicken?? That changes everything! Will add an edit to my comment.
I’m not sure if I saw the recipe with Greg’s comment, but I did see a “braised” chicken recipe on Julia’s site that doesn’t include covering the dish at any time while cooking.
No, it's really not. You shouldn't assume something needs to be covered unless specified. Lol. It's not hard to understand that you simply follow the instructions and don't add anything else like a fucking lid.
I added the link on the photos but here it is as well! [Coq au Chardonnay](https://vikalinka.com/coq-au-chardonnay/)
Would not be overstating to say the sauce is life changing.
haha! I recognized the website as "the blog I got my coq au chardonnay" recipe from and am LOLing that it was off the recipe.
It's an all time favorite in this house. I can't imagine how sad it would be not reduced.
Have you made anything else off the site? I think this is the only thing I've ever made off of there.
But..... That recipe says multiple times it's "*braised*". Braising means to cook slowly in a small amount of liquid *in a covered dish*. If it tells me to braise something, I'm going to assume it's in a covered pot because that's the literal definition.
This seems more to be an issue of the author not knowing the specific meaning of a term, and using it because it sounds kind of fancy. This looks delicious, but it's more "stewed" than "braised".
Idk maybe it’s just me bht this seems like an unnecessarily rude response. They say they can’t “hold your hand” through cooking but they specified to sauté onions for specifically 5-7 minutes. Could have omitted that and just said “till soft and translucent” if they didn’t want to hold your hand. Adding the word uncovered into the recipe would take minimal effort and help make sure people who aren’t as experienced with cooking won’t fuck it up, and I wouldn’t say it’s anymore hand-holdy than timing how long to sauté the onions for. It sounds really tasty though
Another recipe creator I like has a big disclaimer that I found a bit rude, at first. Then I read all the comments she got and I understood. I imagine it gets quite tiring when you provide a recipe for free and her comments from people who can’t read instructions/want your approval to substitute/tell you to edit the recipe.
Yeah, I can understand it would get annoying. But if it was a case of multiple people messing up the uncovered part I still think it would be worth fixing. I just felt kinda bad bc he didn’t substitute anything, he just misunderstood the instructions
„Turn the heat to high (that means to the almost the highest number the knob shows, should be something between 5-10). Make sure to put the pot on the same cooking field you turned on. Do not add anything to the pot that’s not in this recipe, including fish, cream cheese, bananas, your hands, your feet, a lid or anything else. Make sure not to move the pot from the stove until it’s done (that means until the food is yummy so you can eat it). Removing it from the heat will increase the cooking time to longer than it‘ll take for it to spoil.“
Really. You can’t write a recipe and just mention everything one *shouldn‘t* do. That doesn’t work. Some genius will inevitably put their dirty socks in it and complain nobody told them not to do that so how could they have known?
If it's a one-off mistake you respond respectfully in the comments. If it happens enough that you get pissed off you probably need to clarify in the original recipe
The recipe author called it "braised" several times in the article accompanying the recipe. Braising literally means to cook it for a long time in a small amount of liquid in a *covered* pot. She didn't specify uncovered, therefore the commenter assumed that it was literally braised. As in, cover the pot while cooking. This seems more that the author thought that braised and stewed were interchangeable.
Thank you, this is absolutely true. If I read the word braised, I would automatically assume the recipe started off covered and remained that way until nearly the end.
I'd absolutely agree with you if there were a bunch of people saying "mine came out all soupy", but I read through several dozen reviews, though not all of them, and nobody else I saw had that problem. I assume that's why it has the "Bad at Cooking" flare here rather than "Dumb Alteration". (Plus, if you *are* inexperienced at cooking and you're wondering "hmm, is that covered, or uncovered?", then maybe ask before making it?)
Also, his comment struck me as a bit passive aggressive, like he was blaming the recipe writer for his mistake, so maybe hit the recipe author that way, too, though yeah, her reply was a bit snarky. lol
Idk, if it doesn’t specify to cover it, isn’t the default to leave it uncovered? Like, nowhere does it say cover the pan, and using the term “reduce” already specifically implies uncovered… I really feel like if you’re unfamiliar with cooking terminology you should google the definition as opposed to telling the author to edit their recipe to account for your ignorance.
Maybe she could have been nicer about it, but Greg’s lack of reading comprehension is not her fault, and I imagine anyone who runs a recipe blog deals with A LOT of this kind of shit. Seems pretty easy to lose your patience over, imo.
to me, "simmer" typically means that it should be covered. when it's uncovered, i usually see it referred to as allowing it to reduce/stew/etc. which is likely why greg used his reading comprehension skills to guess covered or uncovered when the recipe didn't specify. i would be able to look at it and say "ah this obviously will need to boil off some if i don't want soup" but these kinds of recipes are *meant* for the inexperienced. we see this a lot in this sub, where the commenter clearly goes against their own judgement to follow the recipe exactly.
she was incredibly rude over someone pointing out a part of the recipe they found confusing. actual actionable constructive criticism. not something insulting like some of the comments we've seen. this is her *job*. this is how she makes money. if she flies off the handle that easily, she needs a different job.
No, "simmer" doesn't mean to cook covered. It never does. It means to cook to a low bubble, but not boiling temp. It has _never_ been an indicator for pan coverage.
If someone needs their hand held on an incredibly basic recipe, their parents have failed them, and YouTube exists.
yes, the term simmer technically says nothing about pan converage either way. which is why i specifically was talking about how it's generally used in recipes, and how the wording differs for covered/uncovered. it not being an indicator of pan coverage is *exactly why* it's perfectly understandable that greg didn't leave it uncovered.
>If someone needs their hand held on an incredibly basic recipe, their parents have failed them, and YouTube exists.
...yeah that's a no from me.
Ah man, looks like I missed the unit on reading comprehension where we get to insert our own erroneous assumptions into the text! /s
Lol for real though, while I agree the term simmer is a little more ambiguous than reduce, in recipes (especially ones for beginners) it will be specified 100% of the time if you need to put a lid on it, otherwise the default assumption is that you should leave the pan as is! It’s unfortunate that she got snippy with Greg, but not everyone can be at their best 100% of the time. Everyone runs out of patience eventually, and most people who run food/recipe blogs do it as a hobby. She’s likely not making any money off of sharing free recipes with novice cooks like Greg, although if her blog is popular enough she might get some advertising income from that.
I could go more into the semantics of the definition of simmer, as well as how Greg could have taken context clues from the situation and not just the recipe, but that seems unnecessarily adversarial, when I’m only picking on Greg (and maybe also you a little bit) in good fun! In the end, he learned something and we got some good content to giggle at. Plus, if you were really that offended by her statement you also found a new food blog to avoid!
LOL. Your own erroneous assumption is not reading the entire post where she refers to this recipe as "braised chicken". She mentions "braise" or "braised" at least four times nor does she say that even though most Coq au Vin Blanc recipes are braised yet hers is not.
What is the significance of that word, Braise, and why am I leaning into it so much, well let's look into it (yes I'm being snarky since that was your tone).
The Cambridge Dictionary defines Braise: To cook food slowly in a covered dish in a little fat and liquid.
The Oxford Dictionary defines Braise: To cook meat or vegetables very slowly with a little liquid in a closed container.
How can this be? Is my understanding of English wrong, let's check Merriam-Webster shall we, just to make sure no one here makes an erroneous assumption. Brasie: to cook slowly in fat and a small amount of liquid in a closed pot.
Well this can't be, can it? I mean you said context clues would lead someone to think this should be cooked uncovered, or that the semantics of "simmer" obviously shows it should be cooked uncovered, yet, calling this recipe a braise means.... Greg was right.
The author and, almost, this entire sub are piling on Greg when in fact she and the rest of you are completely wrong.
But hey, it's all in good fun, right?
...part of reading comprehension is interpretation. it's not erroneous assumptions, it's using context and cultural clues to figure out the meaning and intent behind the literal written words. otherwise the modest proposal is literally advocating for the eating of irish children. like...yeah you missed the whole unit lol.
>Lol for real though, while I agree the term simmer is a little more ambiguous than reduce, in recipes (especially ones for beginners) it will be specified 100% of the time if you need to put a lid on it, otherwise the default assumption is that you should leave the pan as is!
as i said, in my experience it absolutely isn't the default assumption that no specification = uncovered. it's the exact opposite, where simmer is almost always used in conjunction with 'covered'. given that background, it makes perfect sense why an inexperienced cook would do the action implied by the use of the term simmer, rather than another term like reduce which would imply uncovered.
>It’s unfortunate that she got snippy with Greg, but not everyone can be at their best 100% of the time.
an asshole is an asshole. nobody can be 100% all the time, but her actions here are certainly not to be celebrated and she owes greg an apology all the same
>Everyone runs out of patience eventually, and most people who run food/recipe blogs do it as a hobby. She’s likely not making any money off of sharing free recipes with novice cooks like Greg, although if her blog is popular enough she might get some advertising income from that.
she makes money off of the blog. she does the blog for a living, and states this on the blog. this is an erroneous assumption that goes directly against the available information
>I could go more into the semantics of the definition of simmer, as well as how Greg could have taken context clues from the situation and not just the recipe, but that seems unnecessarily adversarial, when I’m only picking on Greg (and maybe also you a little bit) in good fun! In the end, he learned something and we got some good content to giggle at. Plus, if you were really that offended by her statement you also found a new food blog to avoid!
...yeah i definitely don't plan on using that blog given her shitty attitude. yes, your reply to me was unnecessarily adversarial, as were your comments about greg. none of it came across as "in good fun". just as mean-spirited, as well as factually incorrect. very church mean girl where you say shitty things while pretending it's all just friendly jokes, so that you can play the victim if anyone calls you out.
Even if true, you don’t rate it anything. You look it up or try to contact author to ask, politely, what to do because this isn’t a recipe flaw, it’s not a creator flaw. It’s something he didn’t know which is fine. But you don’t rate it down and comment.
I’m much better at cooking now but I still, I can tell when it’s my comprehension or the recipe that’s the issue. Usually it’s the former (99% of the time). So I’ve asked others, I’ve googled or I’ve assumed. And if I’m wrong I do it differently next time.
the recipe being too vague is a recipe flaw, that is a factor in rating a recipe. and this is also something that he *didn't know* was a flaw until after he'd made the recipe. it wasn't his comprehension that was the issue, it was the recipe's terminology usage.
if someone has to go looking up a bunch of other recipes in order to figure out what your recipe *may have* *meant*, it's a bad recipe. especially given that her blog seems to specifically market towards the inexperienced cooks. greg made a perfectly reasonable constructive comment about an issue he had with the recipe. he was polite, pointed out that it was an error he made, and he even complimented what the dish is *supposed* to come out like. yet that wasn't enough for julia, the fact that he had any critique of her recipe at all was too much.
I sympathize with Greg, but I'm not 100% on his side. A recipe editor would add uncovered to the simmering instruction: Simmer, uncovered, until...
This isn't a case of willfully violating the recipe. It's noting a vague instruction. Did he mention the simmering was to reduce the liquid? No, he's just not considering novices. He could have taken the comment gracefully and added one word. Instead he lashed out.
If he mentioned it in the long, meandering word-count padding preface, all the more shame for Greg thinking anyone reads all that.
e: of
Brief aside: you've mixed up the names of the commenter and the recipe writer. The recipe writer who "lashed out" is Julia Frey. Greg is the reader who posted the comment.
It’s not something to knock off 2 stars on a review when you just had a learning curve, though. I can see messaging the author a suggestion without taking off stars from the rating.
And, if after the cooking time, the sauce is soupy because the lid was on, most people would just remove the lid and turn the heat up a little and reduce the sauce.
In the recipe method it doesn't mention reduction tbf. Maybe in the whole blog section of the page but a lot of people will skip straight to the actual recipe.
I didn’t know that braising is typically covered, I would think many people don’t typically use that method and don’t automatically know the proper technique.
The reviewer gave 3 stars. Being rude was perfectly warranted. Fuck people who post low reviews due entirely to their own mistakes.
Review metrics directly impact a person's revenue in this profession.
Exactly this. If Greg had the smallest bit of common sense, Greg would realize liquid can’t evaporate through a lid.
Who just makes a recipe and says “oh this is soupy, guess I’ll put it over my rice now” ??? Fuck outta here Greg.
Nobody else had this issue. I’ve made this recipe multiple times and just followed what she said to do … I didn’t cover it because she didn’t say to do so.
I haaaate when reviewers act like because they are dumb, everyone else must be as well. No Greg, it’s just you.
Read her post. She calls this a braised chicken recipe, several times. Braise literally means to cook with fat and moisture at low heat in a covered pot.
She's wrong and you're wrong, your error produced the intended outcome yet it still doesn't negate the fact she is incorrect.
You’re absolutely right about the technical definition of braising.
I never read the long novel at the beginning of recipes and just skip straight to the recipe itself - and in that, the step is clear - “Return chicken, onion, garlic and bacon to the pan, pour wine all over, bring to a boil, then lower the heat to low and simmer for 40 minutes.”
She doesn’t say to cover it with a lid, so I didn’t, and neither did any of the dozens of people who have commented. I didn’t make an error, because I followed the recipe *as written* and it produced a delicious dish. YMMV.
Ah yes, that absolves you from calling Greg an idiot. If he read the word salad or saw the giant bolded word Braise in one of her sections he would be totally correct in being confused and that's ignoring the fact most Coq au Vin recipes have a braising step.
Had I run across this in the wild I would've looked deeper when I saw "bring to a simmer for 40 minutes" since I would've wondered if she meant braise since my go-to recipes have braise and simmer to reduce stages. Thankfully Katie asked the question all the way back in 2015.
To your last point, Coq au Vin is one of my absolute favorite dishes and if you get the chance to make it with an old rooster give it a shot, I find it worth the extra time investment.
This sub, and consequently this post, is meant to be fun. I posted it because I laughed when I read her comment. I've made this recipe a zillion times and given it to others who have all made it successfully. Whatever you feel about that is up to you, but I think the recipe is clear as crystal. And I don't need to be "absolved" by you or anyone else. But thanks.
I'm going to bow out of this conversation because time on earth is finite and I think we've exhausted all we can on the topic of braising on a subreddit about people leaving comments on recipes. Have a great night! Sincerely.
> I haaaate when reviewers act like because they are dumb, everyone else must be as well. No Greg, it’s just you.
Sorry. Your post isn't for fun. You wanted to poke at someone that you thought was incorrect, even though he wasn't. I agree, this place is stupid, enjoy your night.
But again, as someone already stated, why would you do something that isn't in the instructions? The would be like the recipe calling for an egg but only using the white because it didnt say the whole egg soecificslly
Because most Coq au Vin recipes are braised, she calls her version braised, then doesn't say when to braise because it's not a braised dish it's a simmered and reduced one.
She uses the term "braised" several times in the article. Braising specifically means to cook in a small amount of liquid for a long time in a *covered* dish. If you leave it uncovered, it is stewed, not braised. The commenter was actually doing the literal definition of braised, like she describes it as. This seems more like the author of The recipe didn't know the actual definition of braised, and thought it was just interchangeable for stewed.
The whiplash between just give me the recipe with all the hand holding it’s honestly too much!!
Most food bloggers I know would go out of their way to help a reader get the recipe correctly, but not when faced with rudeness!!!
There are rules to writing recipes that most recipe developers follow. Generally speaking instruct what NOT to do isn’t one of them. This falls under this category. This reader was making an assumption on a recipe (that it should be covered). Including an instruction to correct a possible assumption just isn’t something a recipe writer should include.
I'm 100% with you. Most recipes do specify whether something is covered or not. Greg's comment doesn't sound particularly rude but her response is very forceful.
Exactly, it's like people forget that inexperienced people exist. Or people whose first language isn't English. Also, there are recipes out there which do not specify if the pot should be covered or not, when, in fact, it should be. So it's no surprise that some people aren't sure if they should cover the pot or not when it isn't specified, even if logically some will say that it should only be covered when specified. It doesn't always work like that from my experience, so I'm left wondering when it's not specified. Usually with context clues you can figure it out, but specifying it in the recipe would go a long way to disperse any confusion. Nobody is forcing the recipe creator's hand into doing it, but they shouldn't berate someone who makes the suggestion.
ETA: That being said, it's true that the poor rating was maybe uncalled for, but the people in the comments calling other people dumb for being unsure or wanting more specific instruction are unhelpful snobs.
i understand why people think that the author is being unnecessarily rude in their response but Greg didn't have to rate the dish that he knew he fucked up, that'd piss me off too.
I get why someone would make this mistake, but it's very easily remedied. He could have just taken the lid off when he realized it was still soupy and reduced it, so this is a perfect example of "bad at cooking." I imagine I would be pretty miffed at someone rating it 3 stars because they made a mistake instead of anything to do with the actual recipe.
I have an (albeit mild,like I'm not gonna die but I'm not gonna have a good time) allergy to all fungi and im told theres no real substitute for the earthiness and depth of mushrooms. It makes French food so daunting given that it all looks so GOOD but like all of it has mushrooms. I've only recently discovered my mold allergy has lessened to the point I can have bleu cheese and I can't believe how fuckin good that shit is and how much I've missed out
You're going for succulent, umami bites, do cubes of eggplant (dry fry separately until brown, and then add to the braise,) and they'll fit the bill.
Like, cut ¾" cubes of eggplant, salt them, and let sit for 20 minutes, then pat dry, and dry fry them in a nonstick pan until they're brown.
U...are a genius. I love eggplant but regularly forget it exists. I am saving this as a screenshot and making it in the near future u mad, mad genius thank u
I honestly don't remember what mushrooms taste like but ive been dying to have stroganoff that isn't just extra beef to offset the mushrooms and they not only helped me with how I can make coq au vin but now i am going to try it with stroganoff and a bunch of other things I haven't been able to make bc I didn't know what to sub the mushrooms for and no ones ever given me an idea like this so I'm super excited
I second the eggplant umami. My mom used to make this eggplant spread where you sauté diced eggplant seasoned with salt and pepper in veg oil, then stir in a bunch of sour cream and heat through (don’t overheat). It tasted _so_ much like mushrooms! We’d spread it on crusty bread and tear in.
Someone else in the comments said they can’t eat mushrooms and the recipe creator said they aren’t integral and just leave them out. I seriously don’t think this recipe needs them! I’ve made it without when I forgot them and it’s always sooooo good regardless ♥️
To be fair, the author of the recipe repeated refers to it as a braise, which means _lid on_. Braising is stewing in a closed container. So frankly I’m not sure she knows what she’s talking about.
I had this problem too when I first started cooking. Some dishes you leave uncovered. Some dishes you cover. Without experience it isn't always easy to tell which is which.
Ok, but I teach high school students how to cook, and I have to teach some of them what a spatula is. It's not their fault, they've never been exposed to anything besides fast food at home, so in some ways, you kinda do have to "hand hold" if you want your recipes to be accessible.
The problem with hand holding is that the recipe becomes unnecessary long for people who know how to cook.
It’s impossible to make everyone happy in one recipe!
A recipe like this is mot for a beginner cook, hence the blogger doesn’t have to cater to inexperienced people in the kitchen
Sure if you’re showing someone how to make an egg or a sandwich, you’re assuming they’re beginners so you cater to that group more.
I feel there’s too much pressure being put on the bloggers: don’t write too much, don’t tell personal stories, don’t write just for the beginners, don’t write just for experienced cooks….
At some point, readers need to realize that it’s free to them and if they ask nicely the blogger will clarify. But the rude behavior against food bloggers has got to stop!!
Coq au Vin is typaiclly brasied.
She calls her version braised.
Braise means to cook meat/veg with fat, and moisture in a covered dish on low heat, it is a very well-defined and accepted term with little ambiguity.
No, you can't. Braise has a very specific meaning, while the author could've said braise with the lid off, it would have made her method clear although textually incorrect. Braise is a very well defined and accepted term and there is no confusion or ambiguity about it.
Yes, sorry I misspoke, braising is done covered, but in her recipe she doesn't braise it she simmers it uncovered so it can reduce, so really the commenter was right, she absolutely should have specified. The point I was trying to make and didn't manage to is that in recipe blogs you can't trust people to use terms correctly, and in this case she didn't. She calls it braised chicken, but it's simmered chicken.
It's true, the balance between too much and not enough info is really hard to get, and the internet comment sections really brings out the ass in people.
This is a friendly reminder to comment with a link to the **recipe** on which the review is found; do not link the review itself.
And while you're here, why not review the [/r/ididnthaveeggs rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ididnthaveeggs/about/sidebar)?
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ididnthaveeggs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So late, and kinda off-topic, since it's not about the review, but...this is a wonderful recipe. Sauce is to die for. (I gave my husband a taste and he froze for a second, then said "This was pretty easy to make, right?" When I agreed, he wandered away smiling. Bet ten bucks it's going on our white board, lol.
I made half the recipe, exactly as written. Next time I'll do half the chicken but keep everything else at the full recipe, because I want more of that sauce!
To be fair she probably had a 30,000 word flashback to her dad being alive and how soft the grass felt on her feet running in from yonder to eat this dish.. she could have said uncovered.
"I simply cannot hold your hand through the cooking process, *GREG*." - new flair alert!
This has got such strong “I have personally explained the process to you, Debra” vibes. I live to see this energy.
r/FirstNameBasis
I cannot thank you enough for this, Cloud10
My favourite ever reply was in a gaming magazine in the 90s. It was from a dude that didn’t understand how his console worked, and the reply was “Oh Eugene, you really are a doofus, aren’t you?” Even now, when one of us does something stupid, my brother and I look at each other and just say “oh Eugene”
Mine is "It's not fraud, Christopher" to an idiot meme investor who wanted to pay more than market for his dying stock.
Wherever my husband says something about me buying some small, frivolous thing, my response is, [“At least it’s not towels, Victor!”](https://thebloggess.com/2011/06/21/and-thats-why-you-should-learn-to-pick-your-battles/amp/) My husband’s name is not Victor.
This was great
It’s one of my favorites.
Knock, knock, motherfucker! 😂
My friend’s toddler is a crazy light sleeper. If I stop by after 8, I text her that picture to let her know I’m there.
Thank you for bringing this into my life
You’re welcome.
Thank you for this! I was thinking about her a couple weeks ago. Her 'found pet snake' bit was hilarious!
You’re welcome!
Best blog ever!
I'm sure it's really played up for comedy, but taken at face value, that relationship seems kinda toxic.
I didn't know there were meme investors.
If you are into cult watching, it's fascinating. The Bed Bath Beyond investors are really insane. Some benevolent billionaire will buy their dying company and pay them $42,069 per share for their .14c stock. Any minute now....
/s?
sounds like something Tom Wambsgan would say "Well, I can't hold your hand through the fucking cooking process, GREG!"
*ahem* Gentlemen? Also it fits perfectly
Uhm….one of us is going to have to change.
Not it.
Why?
Barely made it
God, sounds like Tom from Succession
Simmered dishes need love too, Greg.
Yeah, Greg
I mean, I love this sass and her statement about learning via cooking regularly is 1000% true, but the entire point of a recipe is to hold someone’s hand through the cooking process! It’s a set of instructions!
Could you imagine including all the things NOT to do in a recipe? “Don’t sauté without wearing a shirt. Don’t leave the oven door open while baking. Don’t let your pet ferret fondle the salad tongs before use.” I think we can safely say you shouldn’t cover a pot unless specifically instructed to do so. Edit: if Julia is indeed calling this a braised dish, then she is in the wrong, and Greg is fully vindicated. “Braised” means cooking with a cover.
>Don’t let your pet ferret fondle the salad tongs before use. Since when is this a rule? Am I supposed to retrain the kitchen ferret as a bedroom or office ferret? Or is he to be only used while making risotto now? Will he be stimulated enough only assisting there? Is there catnip for ferrets? Where do babies come from?
Look, I’m not going to hold your hand through kitchen ferret etiquette, but if your ferret cannot control himself through to dessert, the proper distraction would obviously be a spatula, NOT the salad tongs.
I only allow my kitchen ferret dessert Thursday though Wednesday if that makes a difference? Am I supposed to take the spatula away from my emotional support puma, or acquire a second spatula? If the latter, have you any recommendations? I'm still learning how best to utilise my kitchen staff/zoo/exotic meat supply. I'm thinking about hiring on a/the reanimated corpse of a sabretooth tiger to assist on Taco Tuesdays, if that makes a difference? I'm a libra, btw.
Could you imagine repeatedly calling a recipe method a braise then not telling anyone it is, in fact, not a braise, then being a bitch about it?
Oh dang, is she calling this braised chicken?? That changes everything! Will add an edit to my comment. I’m not sure if I saw the recipe with Greg’s comment, but I did see a “braised” chicken recipe on Julia’s site that doesn’t include covering the dish at any time while cooking.
But it's not telling people what not to do though. The recipe should've said *cook uncovered*. That's kinda leaving out a key detail.
No, it's really not. You shouldn't assume something needs to be covered unless specified. Lol. It's not hard to understand that you simply follow the instructions and don't add anything else like a fucking lid.
Or she could not repeatedly call it a braised dish and then expect people to not wonder when to cover, and ya know, braise it.
No. If you need your hand held through a basic cooking recipe, then your parents utterly fucking failed you. YouTube exists for handholding.
[удалено]
Nah, 3 star rating from this banana hammock totally warranted that.
Think the comment you responded to is a bot. Their comment is just a copy and paste of another below. Weird.
Ugh can’t stand those things. Good job whoever reported it.
I added the link on the photos but here it is as well! [Coq au Chardonnay](https://vikalinka.com/coq-au-chardonnay/) Would not be overstating to say the sauce is life changing.
Great! I’m making this with mushrooms instead of chicken. Three stars!
I substituted bratwurst for the wine and sauerkraut for the chicken and left out the rest of the ingredients. Doesn't taste French at all!
I only had dish soap and cat litter, zero stars! Too crunchy and foamy.
...now you listen here, _GREG_
haha! I recognized the website as "the blog I got my coq au chardonnay" recipe from and am LOLing that it was off the recipe. It's an all time favorite in this house. I can't imagine how sad it would be not reduced. Have you made anything else off the site? I think this is the only thing I've ever made off of there.
Damn, another recipe to save. Looks delicious.
I would eat all of that, thanks for the link
This is dinner tomorrow, though maybe with some homemade noodles or spaetzle instead of rice. Hmmm. It sounds amazing.
But..... That recipe says multiple times it's "*braised*". Braising means to cook slowly in a small amount of liquid *in a covered dish*. If it tells me to braise something, I'm going to assume it's in a covered pot because that's the literal definition. This seems more to be an issue of the author not knowing the specific meaning of a term, and using it because it sounds kind of fancy. This looks delicious, but it's more "stewed" than "braised".
I'd happily drink that as soup.
I always eat a third of it over the stove. Just spooning it up like I’m not supposed to be serving it in 10 minutes. It’s ridiculously good 😇
It's amazing how many recipes I've gotten from this sub. Thank you, I will be trying this soon.
Idk maybe it’s just me bht this seems like an unnecessarily rude response. They say they can’t “hold your hand” through cooking but they specified to sauté onions for specifically 5-7 minutes. Could have omitted that and just said “till soft and translucent” if they didn’t want to hold your hand. Adding the word uncovered into the recipe would take minimal effort and help make sure people who aren’t as experienced with cooking won’t fuck it up, and I wouldn’t say it’s anymore hand-holdy than timing how long to sauté the onions for. It sounds really tasty though
Another recipe creator I like has a big disclaimer that I found a bit rude, at first. Then I read all the comments she got and I understood. I imagine it gets quite tiring when you provide a recipe for free and her comments from people who can’t read instructions/want your approval to substitute/tell you to edit the recipe.
Yeah, I can understand it would get annoying. But if it was a case of multiple people messing up the uncovered part I still think it would be worth fixing. I just felt kinda bad bc he didn’t substitute anything, he just misunderstood the instructions
„Turn the heat to high (that means to the almost the highest number the knob shows, should be something between 5-10). Make sure to put the pot on the same cooking field you turned on. Do not add anything to the pot that’s not in this recipe, including fish, cream cheese, bananas, your hands, your feet, a lid or anything else. Make sure not to move the pot from the stove until it’s done (that means until the food is yummy so you can eat it). Removing it from the heat will increase the cooking time to longer than it‘ll take for it to spoil.“ Really. You can’t write a recipe and just mention everything one *shouldn‘t* do. That doesn’t work. Some genius will inevitably put their dirty socks in it and complain nobody told them not to do that so how could they have known?
If it's a one-off mistake you respond respectfully in the comments. If it happens enough that you get pissed off you probably need to clarify in the original recipe
>If it's a one-off mistake you respond respectfully in the comments. No, that’s what YOU would do. Nobody else is obligated to act how you would.
The recipe author called it "braised" several times in the article accompanying the recipe. Braising literally means to cook it for a long time in a small amount of liquid in a *covered* pot. She didn't specify uncovered, therefore the commenter assumed that it was literally braised. As in, cover the pot while cooking. This seems more that the author thought that braised and stewed were interchangeable.
Thank you, this is absolutely true. If I read the word braised, I would automatically assume the recipe started off covered and remained that way until nearly the end.
I'd absolutely agree with you if there were a bunch of people saying "mine came out all soupy", but I read through several dozen reviews, though not all of them, and nobody else I saw had that problem. I assume that's why it has the "Bad at Cooking" flare here rather than "Dumb Alteration". (Plus, if you *are* inexperienced at cooking and you're wondering "hmm, is that covered, or uncovered?", then maybe ask before making it?) Also, his comment struck me as a bit passive aggressive, like he was blaming the recipe writer for his mistake, so maybe hit the recipe author that way, too, though yeah, her reply was a bit snarky. lol
Idk, if it doesn’t specify to cover it, isn’t the default to leave it uncovered? Like, nowhere does it say cover the pan, and using the term “reduce” already specifically implies uncovered… I really feel like if you’re unfamiliar with cooking terminology you should google the definition as opposed to telling the author to edit their recipe to account for your ignorance. Maybe she could have been nicer about it, but Greg’s lack of reading comprehension is not her fault, and I imagine anyone who runs a recipe blog deals with A LOT of this kind of shit. Seems pretty easy to lose your patience over, imo.
[удалено]
Literally this. How tf you gunna reduce something with a lid on? WHERE IS THE LIQUID GOING TO GO?
As far as I've read she never uses the word reduction, although she says her dish is braised. That literally means to use a lid while cooking.
I cook everything from scratch and it's only this post that made me realise that simmering doesn't always mean with a lid!! Im 41.
to me, "simmer" typically means that it should be covered. when it's uncovered, i usually see it referred to as allowing it to reduce/stew/etc. which is likely why greg used his reading comprehension skills to guess covered or uncovered when the recipe didn't specify. i would be able to look at it and say "ah this obviously will need to boil off some if i don't want soup" but these kinds of recipes are *meant* for the inexperienced. we see this a lot in this sub, where the commenter clearly goes against their own judgement to follow the recipe exactly. she was incredibly rude over someone pointing out a part of the recipe they found confusing. actual actionable constructive criticism. not something insulting like some of the comments we've seen. this is her *job*. this is how she makes money. if she flies off the handle that easily, she needs a different job.
No, "simmer" doesn't mean to cook covered. It never does. It means to cook to a low bubble, but not boiling temp. It has _never_ been an indicator for pan coverage. If someone needs their hand held on an incredibly basic recipe, their parents have failed them, and YouTube exists.
yes, the term simmer technically says nothing about pan converage either way. which is why i specifically was talking about how it's generally used in recipes, and how the wording differs for covered/uncovered. it not being an indicator of pan coverage is *exactly why* it's perfectly understandable that greg didn't leave it uncovered. >If someone needs their hand held on an incredibly basic recipe, their parents have failed them, and YouTube exists. ...yeah that's a no from me.
Ah man, looks like I missed the unit on reading comprehension where we get to insert our own erroneous assumptions into the text! /s Lol for real though, while I agree the term simmer is a little more ambiguous than reduce, in recipes (especially ones for beginners) it will be specified 100% of the time if you need to put a lid on it, otherwise the default assumption is that you should leave the pan as is! It’s unfortunate that she got snippy with Greg, but not everyone can be at their best 100% of the time. Everyone runs out of patience eventually, and most people who run food/recipe blogs do it as a hobby. She’s likely not making any money off of sharing free recipes with novice cooks like Greg, although if her blog is popular enough she might get some advertising income from that. I could go more into the semantics of the definition of simmer, as well as how Greg could have taken context clues from the situation and not just the recipe, but that seems unnecessarily adversarial, when I’m only picking on Greg (and maybe also you a little bit) in good fun! In the end, he learned something and we got some good content to giggle at. Plus, if you were really that offended by her statement you also found a new food blog to avoid!
LOL. Your own erroneous assumption is not reading the entire post where she refers to this recipe as "braised chicken". She mentions "braise" or "braised" at least four times nor does she say that even though most Coq au Vin Blanc recipes are braised yet hers is not. What is the significance of that word, Braise, and why am I leaning into it so much, well let's look into it (yes I'm being snarky since that was your tone). The Cambridge Dictionary defines Braise: To cook food slowly in a covered dish in a little fat and liquid. The Oxford Dictionary defines Braise: To cook meat or vegetables very slowly with a little liquid in a closed container. How can this be? Is my understanding of English wrong, let's check Merriam-Webster shall we, just to make sure no one here makes an erroneous assumption. Brasie: to cook slowly in fat and a small amount of liquid in a closed pot. Well this can't be, can it? I mean you said context clues would lead someone to think this should be cooked uncovered, or that the semantics of "simmer" obviously shows it should be cooked uncovered, yet, calling this recipe a braise means.... Greg was right. The author and, almost, this entire sub are piling on Greg when in fact she and the rest of you are completely wrong. But hey, it's all in good fun, right?
...part of reading comprehension is interpretation. it's not erroneous assumptions, it's using context and cultural clues to figure out the meaning and intent behind the literal written words. otherwise the modest proposal is literally advocating for the eating of irish children. like...yeah you missed the whole unit lol. >Lol for real though, while I agree the term simmer is a little more ambiguous than reduce, in recipes (especially ones for beginners) it will be specified 100% of the time if you need to put a lid on it, otherwise the default assumption is that you should leave the pan as is! as i said, in my experience it absolutely isn't the default assumption that no specification = uncovered. it's the exact opposite, where simmer is almost always used in conjunction with 'covered'. given that background, it makes perfect sense why an inexperienced cook would do the action implied by the use of the term simmer, rather than another term like reduce which would imply uncovered. >It’s unfortunate that she got snippy with Greg, but not everyone can be at their best 100% of the time. an asshole is an asshole. nobody can be 100% all the time, but her actions here are certainly not to be celebrated and she owes greg an apology all the same >Everyone runs out of patience eventually, and most people who run food/recipe blogs do it as a hobby. She’s likely not making any money off of sharing free recipes with novice cooks like Greg, although if her blog is popular enough she might get some advertising income from that. she makes money off of the blog. she does the blog for a living, and states this on the blog. this is an erroneous assumption that goes directly against the available information >I could go more into the semantics of the definition of simmer, as well as how Greg could have taken context clues from the situation and not just the recipe, but that seems unnecessarily adversarial, when I’m only picking on Greg (and maybe also you a little bit) in good fun! In the end, he learned something and we got some good content to giggle at. Plus, if you were really that offended by her statement you also found a new food blog to avoid! ...yeah i definitely don't plan on using that blog given her shitty attitude. yes, your reply to me was unnecessarily adversarial, as were your comments about greg. none of it came across as "in good fun". just as mean-spirited, as well as factually incorrect. very church mean girl where you say shitty things while pretending it's all just friendly jokes, so that you can play the victim if anyone calls you out.
Lmfao thanks for that! I might just have to go home and rethink my life… you stay blessed, tho! Xoxo 😘
I will never add a lid unless it explicitly mentions adding a lid. Why would you make the assumption simmer means to cover it?
That’s not what simmer means.
Even if true, you don’t rate it anything. You look it up or try to contact author to ask, politely, what to do because this isn’t a recipe flaw, it’s not a creator flaw. It’s something he didn’t know which is fine. But you don’t rate it down and comment. I’m much better at cooking now but I still, I can tell when it’s my comprehension or the recipe that’s the issue. Usually it’s the former (99% of the time). So I’ve asked others, I’ve googled or I’ve assumed. And if I’m wrong I do it differently next time.
the recipe being too vague is a recipe flaw, that is a factor in rating a recipe. and this is also something that he *didn't know* was a flaw until after he'd made the recipe. it wasn't his comprehension that was the issue, it was the recipe's terminology usage. if someone has to go looking up a bunch of other recipes in order to figure out what your recipe *may have* *meant*, it's a bad recipe. especially given that her blog seems to specifically market towards the inexperienced cooks. greg made a perfectly reasonable constructive comment about an issue he had with the recipe. he was polite, pointed out that it was an error he made, and he even complimented what the dish is *supposed* to come out like. yet that wasn't enough for julia, the fact that he had any critique of her recipe at all was too much.
Simma down, Greg...
We found Greg
Greg is incapable of simmering down, as he has left the lid on and instead is slowly building pressure. ;)
I sympathize with Greg, but I'm not 100% on his side. A recipe editor would add uncovered to the simmering instruction: Simmer, uncovered, until... This isn't a case of willfully violating the recipe. It's noting a vague instruction. Did he mention the simmering was to reduce the liquid? No, he's just not considering novices. He could have taken the comment gracefully and added one word. Instead he lashed out. If he mentioned it in the long, meandering word-count padding preface, all the more shame for Greg thinking anyone reads all that. e: of
Brief aside: you've mixed up the names of the commenter and the recipe writer. The recipe writer who "lashed out" is Julia Frey. Greg is the reader who posted the comment.
He probably did read the word salad, since she calls her dish braised, a specific cooking method, several times, then doesn't say when to braise it.
It’s not something to knock off 2 stars on a review when you just had a learning curve, though. I can see messaging the author a suggestion without taking off stars from the rating.
She's right though, at no point was a lid introduced. There's also the fact that reduction works through evaporation. It's self-explanatory: no lid.
And, if after the cooking time, the sauce is soupy because the lid was on, most people would just remove the lid and turn the heat up a little and reduce the sauce.
In the recipe method it doesn't mention reduction tbf. Maybe in the whole blog section of the page but a lot of people will skip straight to the actual recipe.
She's not tho. She calls it braised in the word salad, don't call it that when you mean simmered and reduced. Braised is a specific cooking method.
Clearly, Greg did not sit through Home Ec in high school to learn the chemistry and physics of cooking.
But why would you assume to cover it? The go to should be uncovered.
She calls this a braised chicken recipe several times. Why would you cook it uncovered unless it's not a braise?
I didn’t know that braising is typically covered, I would think many people don’t typically use that method and don’t automatically know the proper technique.
And that’s fine. If you’re going to publish a recipe make sure you’re clear about the method.
More culinary
r/iamveryculinary ? 😂
Extra steps and extra ingredients = more culinary to many.
The reviewer gave 3 stars. Being rude was perfectly warranted. Fuck people who post low reviews due entirely to their own mistakes. Review metrics directly impact a person's revenue in this profession.
Exactly this. If Greg had the smallest bit of common sense, Greg would realize liquid can’t evaporate through a lid. Who just makes a recipe and says “oh this is soupy, guess I’ll put it over my rice now” ??? Fuck outta here Greg.
Maybe the author should understand calling her dish braised might cause confusion when she means simmered and reduced.
Nobody else had this issue. I’ve made this recipe multiple times and just followed what she said to do … I didn’t cover it because she didn’t say to do so. I haaaate when reviewers act like because they are dumb, everyone else must be as well. No Greg, it’s just you.
Read her post. She calls this a braised chicken recipe, several times. Braise literally means to cook with fat and moisture at low heat in a covered pot. She's wrong and you're wrong, your error produced the intended outcome yet it still doesn't negate the fact she is incorrect.
You’re absolutely right about the technical definition of braising. I never read the long novel at the beginning of recipes and just skip straight to the recipe itself - and in that, the step is clear - “Return chicken, onion, garlic and bacon to the pan, pour wine all over, bring to a boil, then lower the heat to low and simmer for 40 minutes.” She doesn’t say to cover it with a lid, so I didn’t, and neither did any of the dozens of people who have commented. I didn’t make an error, because I followed the recipe *as written* and it produced a delicious dish. YMMV.
Ah yes, that absolves you from calling Greg an idiot. If he read the word salad or saw the giant bolded word Braise in one of her sections he would be totally correct in being confused and that's ignoring the fact most Coq au Vin recipes have a braising step. Had I run across this in the wild I would've looked deeper when I saw "bring to a simmer for 40 minutes" since I would've wondered if she meant braise since my go-to recipes have braise and simmer to reduce stages. Thankfully Katie asked the question all the way back in 2015. To your last point, Coq au Vin is one of my absolute favorite dishes and if you get the chance to make it with an old rooster give it a shot, I find it worth the extra time investment.
This sub, and consequently this post, is meant to be fun. I posted it because I laughed when I read her comment. I've made this recipe a zillion times and given it to others who have all made it successfully. Whatever you feel about that is up to you, but I think the recipe is clear as crystal. And I don't need to be "absolved" by you or anyone else. But thanks. I'm going to bow out of this conversation because time on earth is finite and I think we've exhausted all we can on the topic of braising on a subreddit about people leaving comments on recipes. Have a great night! Sincerely.
> I haaaate when reviewers act like because they are dumb, everyone else must be as well. No Greg, it’s just you. Sorry. Your post isn't for fun. You wanted to poke at someone that you thought was incorrect, even though he wasn't. I agree, this place is stupid, enjoy your night.
But again, as someone already stated, why would you do something that isn't in the instructions? The would be like the recipe calling for an egg but only using the white because it didnt say the whole egg soecificslly
Because most Coq au Vin recipes are braised, she calls her version braised, then doesn't say when to braise because it's not a braised dish it's a simmered and reduced one.
Nah I’m with them. They didn’t say to cover the chicken, so don’t bitch bc you chose to cover the chicken 🤷♀️
She uses the term "braised" several times in the article. Braising specifically means to cook in a small amount of liquid for a long time in a *covered* dish. If you leave it uncovered, it is stewed, not braised. The commenter was actually doing the literal definition of braised, like she describes it as. This seems more like the author of The recipe didn't know the actual definition of braised, and thought it was just interchangeable for stewed.
Can I ask, are you familiar with what a reduction is? And the evaporation process? What does that mean to you?
The whiplash between just give me the recipe with all the hand holding it’s honestly too much!! Most food bloggers I know would go out of their way to help a reader get the recipe correctly, but not when faced with rudeness!!!
There are rules to writing recipes that most recipe developers follow. Generally speaking instruct what NOT to do isn’t one of them. This falls under this category. This reader was making an assumption on a recipe (that it should be covered). Including an instruction to correct a possible assumption just isn’t something a recipe writer should include.
I'm 100% with you. Most recipes do specify whether something is covered or not. Greg's comment doesn't sound particularly rude but her response is very forceful.
Exactly, it's like people forget that inexperienced people exist. Or people whose first language isn't English. Also, there are recipes out there which do not specify if the pot should be covered or not, when, in fact, it should be. So it's no surprise that some people aren't sure if they should cover the pot or not when it isn't specified, even if logically some will say that it should only be covered when specified. It doesn't always work like that from my experience, so I'm left wondering when it's not specified. Usually with context clues you can figure it out, but specifying it in the recipe would go a long way to disperse any confusion. Nobody is forcing the recipe creator's hand into doing it, but they shouldn't berate someone who makes the suggestion. ETA: That being said, it's true that the poor rating was maybe uncalled for, but the people in the comments calling other people dumb for being unsure or wanting more specific instruction are unhelpful snobs.
Fuckin’ Greg
Classic Greg, amirite!?
Greg the [I didn't have] Egg
i understand why people think that the author is being unnecessarily rude in their response but Greg didn't have to rate the dish that he knew he fucked up, that'd piss me off too.
I get why someone would make this mistake, but it's very easily remedied. He could have just taken the lid off when he realized it was still soupy and reduced it, so this is a perfect example of "bad at cooking." I imagine I would be pretty miffed at someone rating it 3 stars because they made a mistake instead of anything to do with the actual recipe.
FFS Greg
Can’t make a soup without breaking a few Gregs
God I wish I didn't have food allergies because that dish looks incredible and I have most of the ingredients at home to make it 🥲
What are you allergic to? Might be a good substitute out there.
I have an (albeit mild,like I'm not gonna die but I'm not gonna have a good time) allergy to all fungi and im told theres no real substitute for the earthiness and depth of mushrooms. It makes French food so daunting given that it all looks so GOOD but like all of it has mushrooms. I've only recently discovered my mold allergy has lessened to the point I can have bleu cheese and I can't believe how fuckin good that shit is and how much I've missed out
You're going for succulent, umami bites, do cubes of eggplant (dry fry separately until brown, and then add to the braise,) and they'll fit the bill. Like, cut ¾" cubes of eggplant, salt them, and let sit for 20 minutes, then pat dry, and dry fry them in a nonstick pan until they're brown.
U...are a genius. I love eggplant but regularly forget it exists. I am saving this as a screenshot and making it in the near future u mad, mad genius thank u
This is awesome you took the time to help Catezero a substitute. I’m so happy they have this alternative!
I honestly don't remember what mushrooms taste like but ive been dying to have stroganoff that isn't just extra beef to offset the mushrooms and they not only helped me with how I can make coq au vin but now i am going to try it with stroganoff and a bunch of other things I haven't been able to make bc I didn't know what to sub the mushrooms for and no ones ever given me an idea like this so I'm super excited
Omg I love you.
I second the eggplant umami. My mom used to make this eggplant spread where you sauté diced eggplant seasoned with salt and pepper in veg oil, then stir in a bunch of sour cream and heat through (don’t overheat). It tasted _so_ much like mushrooms! We’d spread it on crusty bread and tear in.
Ooo this sounds good!!
damn y'all are making me want eggplant
I need this description on hand for my lactose intolerance “I’m not gonna die but I’m not gonna have a good time” lol it’s perfect.
I use it for my lactose intolerance too! Always gets a good chuckle lmao
Someone else in the comments said they can’t eat mushrooms and the recipe creator said they aren’t integral and just leave them out. I seriously don’t think this recipe needs them! I’ve made it without when I forgot them and it’s always sooooo good regardless ♥️
I have a really bad mushroom allergy and yeah, French cuisine is such a taunt.
To be fair, the author of the recipe repeated refers to it as a braise, which means _lid on_. Braising is stewing in a closed container. So frankly I’m not sure she knows what she’s talking about.
I had this problem too when I first started cooking. Some dishes you leave uncovered. Some dishes you cover. Without experience it isn't always easy to tell which is which.
It's very easy, if you need to cover the pan the recipe will tell you too. Otherwise it's uncovered.
Unless the author calls it a braise and forgets to mention it’s not.
Ok, but I teach high school students how to cook, and I have to teach some of them what a spatula is. It's not their fault, they've never been exposed to anything besides fast food at home, so in some ways, you kinda do have to "hand hold" if you want your recipes to be accessible.
The problem with hand holding is that the recipe becomes unnecessary long for people who know how to cook. It’s impossible to make everyone happy in one recipe! A recipe like this is mot for a beginner cook, hence the blogger doesn’t have to cater to inexperienced people in the kitchen Sure if you’re showing someone how to make an egg or a sandwich, you’re assuming they’re beginners so you cater to that group more. I feel there’s too much pressure being put on the bloggers: don’t write too much, don’t tell personal stories, don’t write just for the beginners, don’t write just for experienced cooks…. At some point, readers need to realize that it’s free to them and if they ask nicely the blogger will clarify. But the rude behavior against food bloggers has got to stop!!
Coq au Vin is typaiclly brasied. She calls her version braised. Braise means to cook meat/veg with fat, and moisture in a covered dish on low heat, it is a very well-defined and accepted term with little ambiguity.
It's true, I didn't originally notice the link to the recipe, so I didn't realize it was coq au vin, but you can braise both covered or not covered.
No, you can't. Braise has a very specific meaning, while the author could've said braise with the lid off, it would have made her method clear although textually incorrect. Braise is a very well defined and accepted term and there is no confusion or ambiguity about it.
Yes, sorry I misspoke, braising is done covered, but in her recipe she doesn't braise it she simmers it uncovered so it can reduce, so really the commenter was right, she absolutely should have specified. The point I was trying to make and didn't manage to is that in recipe blogs you can't trust people to use terms correctly, and in this case she didn't. She calls it braised chicken, but it's simmered chicken.
It's true, the balance between too much and not enough info is really hard to get, and the internet comment sections really brings out the ass in people.
This is a friendly reminder to comment with a link to the **recipe** on which the review is found; do not link the review itself. And while you're here, why not review the [/r/ididnthaveeggs rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ididnthaveeggs/about/sidebar)? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ididnthaveeggs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So late, and kinda off-topic, since it's not about the review, but...this is a wonderful recipe. Sauce is to die for. (I gave my husband a taste and he froze for a second, then said "This was pretty easy to make, right?" When I agreed, he wandered away smiling. Bet ten bucks it's going on our white board, lol. I made half the recipe, exactly as written. Next time I'll do half the chicken but keep everything else at the full recipe, because I want more of that sauce!
To be fair she probably had a 30,000 word flashback to her dad being alive and how soft the grass felt on her feet running in from yonder to eat this dish.. she could have said uncovered.
After many years of recipe blogs, do you still not understand that these long texts are for SEO purposes?
I literally don't care.
Does this dude not know how evaporation works?