George wrote:
> Sheldon wrote:
>
> > Those are called "Anal Fried Rice". No one weighs ingredients for
> > fried rice... I got your runny hunny.
> >
> > Sheldon
> >
>
> There are lots of people who follow recipes. That isn't my style but
I
> might do it the first time to get a feel for something I have never
done
> before. Following a recipe or asking questions when something is not
> clear doesn't make someone "dumber than a banana..."
>
> My guess is that the OP probably never made a dish requiring cooked
rice
> before, found a recipe that required a defined amount of cooked rice
and
> was trying to work it backwards to determine how much rice to cook.

You don't get it. For novice cooks it's even more important for
recipes to indicate the quantity of rice by volume... makes as much
sense for a recipe to indicate a pound of cooked rice as it is to
indicate a pound of cooked onions. Recipes are much easier to follow
and will be more likely to yield predictable results when ingredients
are listed in *standardized* format. For cooked rice the standard
recipe format is to indicate volume, not weight, because a good recipe
does not assume various cooks all prepare rice the same. When I come
across a recipe that lists a major ingredient in non-standard format I
deem it suspect in all of it's parts and discard it. Anyway, for fried
rice there is no reason to measure anything... you mean to say if it's
pork fried rice and calls for 4 ounces diced roast pork and your piece
of roast pork weighs 5 ounces you are going to toss that one measly
ounce... and the same with the rice and all other ingredients... normal
brained cooks don't cook back asswards. You are obviously one of those
novice cooks, extremely novice.

Sheldon