Did you not read my post? I’ve explained that there’s nothing wrong with the directions–someone who thinks he’s followed them and hasn’t come up with boiling water has failed to understand the instructions in the first place. Hence, he did not follow them.
I followed your instruction precisely. Why didn’t your potstickers work?
No, you misinterpreted them due to your ignorance of certain conventions, and so you misapplied them–hence you did not follow them.
I don’t understand your question about the gyoza–they came out great, as detailed in a previous post. (I also didn’t follow the instructions, as it happens. But if I had, i would have had a soggy gyoza soup. Bad directions.)
Well, I don’t know what brand of potstickers you used and what the directions were. But I can imagine that if you put them all in the right size covered pan with 1 cup of water and followed them precisely they would have been fine. But you didn’t understand them. And once again, I followed your directions to the letter, I understood every step clearly, and didn’t get the desired result, and according to your logic it is the fault of the directions.
BTW: This argument is turning silly, and simply reflects our different cosmologies. I’m willing to say some directions could be better, and some people don’t understand some directions and leave it at that. But I’m really bored right now waiting for a system to come back on-line, so we can keep playing this game if you want.
A cup of water is too much. And believe it or not, I’m not playing a game–I think you’re demonstrably wrong about something that has some importance, though the immediate application in this context is trivial.
Anyway, I’ve said what I can. Basically, what you’re doing is tantamount to criticizing a set of directions because they’re in Spanish. The only difference is that in the Spanish case, you know you don’t understand the directions, whereas in the boiling water case, you don’t.
No, your pot was too small.
I’m right, you’re wrong. I’m sure you agree, because you would say the same thing word for word. All done now on this. But we could start up again in GD with a more general form of the question if you like.
No, by any reasonable estimation, a cup of water is too much. You probably don’t own a pan which would be large enough, nor would it fit on your burner if you did. An 12 inch skillet needs about 2T of water for frozen potstickers. A 14 inch skillet needs just shy of 4T, or 1/4 cup (that’s the same measurement, for you non-cooks in the audience. 4T=1/4cup, 'kay?)
So, unless you’ve got a really, really big commercial frypan and a propane heating element in your backyard, 1 cup of water is too much for a standard bag of frozen potstickers.
And, of course, a novice cook will generally grab a pan that’s way too small. They rarely err on the side of too big. Thus they increase the chances of making potsticker soup, but it’s still not their fault. A *good *recipe will also specify the size, material and general shape of the pan, as in, “Heat a 12” cast iron skillet…"
The recipe is a bad recipe.
Then so is Fry’s recipe for boiling water. You guys can’t have it both ways.
It *is *a bad recipe. It never tells you when to turn the heat off (or take the pot off the heat). Thus, the water will all boil out and the pot will get hot, just as you said.
Why can’t they both be bad recipes?
Really? They’re so much tastier when they’re hot and soft and chewy and delicious.
I suppose a frozen one could be expected to last a bit longer, of course, but they ARE really hard to chew…
I don’t know. Ask Fry.
:ppffffffffffth
Oh, you’re back?
I don’t want it both ways. If you read the boiling water thing as a recipe, then it is a bad recipe.
I did not ask you to read it as a recipe.
But you are correct: The boiling water instructions I gave, if they are a recipe, are a bad recipe.
Do I win?
Anyway, the potsticker recipe is a bad one, and my directions for producing boiling water are perfectly good. If you end up with a hot pan and no water, you’ve misunderstood the directions, in the sense that you failed to share some of the presuppositions under which they were written, and so did not understand (in this case) what the instruction “wait” means. That problem is in you, not in the directions.
A reasonable reading of the directions by a reasonably well informed reader will lead to the production of boiling water. Indeed, even on your misreading, boiling water was produced–though it was destroyed soon afterwards.
Again, my point here is: If a set of directions does not, when followed, produce what it is supposed to produce, then it is a bad set of directions. However, it is possible for someone to believe they have followed the directions, when they have actually failed to do so. The information contained in the directions is not to be found just by reading the words in it and looking them up in a dictionary. The information involves a lot of conventions that are not explicit on the page. These conventions need not be explicit in order to be included as part of the directions. Someone who does not know or agree to those conventions has not encountered a bad set of directions, rather, they simply don’t understand the directions.
The thing is, Tripolar, as far as I can tell, you agree with all of the above. So what are you doing?
I don’t know. I thought we were disagreeing. I guess I was wrong, or right. Now it’s hard to tell 
I think we disagree about what it means to follow directions. I claim that to follow directions requires interpreting the directions under certain appropriate conventions over and above their basic literal meaning. You claim (I think) that to follow directions simply requires only that one interpret the directions according to their basic literal meaning.
If someone fails to know or follow the conventions, I claim they haven’t followed the directions.
So in other words, I’m saying the directions aren’t just what’s written on the page, you’re saying they are.
Anyway…
Actually I thought we were on the opposite sides there. We may not have been disagreeing at all, except for what we thought we disagreed on.
This is enough. Have a happy new year** Fry**!
I will confess to noshing on the occasional frozen cheese ravioli, sometimes i have nausea issues related to foods, and I find they are neutral enough not to trigger a bout of nausea, and I have found that ice cold foods also tend to not trigger nausea in me, so I will take 3 or 4 of them, and nibble on them still frozen instead of heating and saucing them. But then again, I like frozen grapes and banana slices too.
Recipes should be precise. The problem with the boiling water recipe was that there were so many things that were unspecified (amount of water, size of pot, length of time to wait). If those had been specified, the recipe would be a good one. By not specifying them, at first it seems like the recipe is more inclusive, that it will work for any size of pot or amount of water, but it’s actually too inclusive, as people have pointed out.
The proper way to write a recipe is to write it for a single size. Experienced cooks can safely adapt it by multiplying or dividing quantities and understanding how the process works.
The problem with the potsticker recipe is that “or” has too many meanings in common usage. It can mean inclusive or (pick one: just A, just B, A and B), exclusive or (pick one: just A, just B), explanatory or (A, which is approximately B). If you look at legal documents, they generally very clearly specify which “or” they’re using to avoid ambiguity.
The precision of a recipe is not directly related to how easy it is. Very complicated recipes can still be precise, usually by using specific terms or leveraging other recipes. A recipe that says to julienne some vegetables, or to cover a dish with beurre blanc isn’t geared toward a beginner. They won’t know what either of those things are. But it’s still precise, because the act and the sauce are well-defined quantities and can be looked up.
To reiterate–it’s not meant to be read as a recipe. I agree that if read as a recipe, it makes for a bad recipe. My point was about directions in general, and I gave an example of directions, not specifically a recipe.
If you follow the directions, boiling water will result.