Serious Eats - seriouseats.com

Ok, I've tried it out for a few days. I stand by all my comments above. But the deal breaker is, I can't click on more than one or two links without SE crashing my web browser. That's bad enough when I'm at home, but when I'm at work and I have a bunch of tabs open for work, it's a big problem. This will significantly decrease the amount of time I spend here.

If I was going to add anything to it, I would add vodka. That's probably not the answer you were looking for. Sorry, I'm half Russian; I add vodka to everything.

You could make a cobbler or streusel. If you have some puff pastry in the freezer you could make turnovers.

I saw a friend post on FB that SE had a new design. I got really exicted; I love site redesigns! But this one has me a bit bummed.

I do think it looks cleaner and more professional, but I value usability over snappy design. I agree with all those who don't like the shorter previews. Quite honestly, the majority of the titles don't pull me in. The first sentence or two often doesn't pull me in, either, as it's usually personal commentary. It's usually the second paragraph of the preview that makes me want to click through. Now that's gone. The current format is too easy to scan without actually seeing anything. It feels like a list of links. Actually, it looks a LOT like the mobile version, but with mini pictures. When I put down my iPhone and wrestle out the laptop, I want to be rewarded with a richer layout, not just bigger text.

That big picture at the top is lovely, but
1. I'd rather have a lot of medium pictures than one big picture and a billion tiny ones.
2. When you hover over a picture on the slideshow to get the text, the text is incredibly hard to read on any picture that doesn't have a white background. I didn't even bother trying to read it. It's equally difficult to read the text on the itty bitty pictures on the banner at the top. And besides, if you compromise the layout of the entire site for one giant picture, why compromise that picture by blocking the lower third with illegible text?

As for talk - I'd like to see it come back to the main page. Talk was the difference between SE and "just another food blog." Burying it in a tab at the top tells me SE no longer sees Talk as a major component of its content. I used to come scan the list of Talk topics for new topics or new comments. It was nice to do that on the front page. If I have to keep clicking back and forth between Talk and the Home page, I'll probably get annoyed and visit less.

And I agree with every word @LunaPierCook said. If you really want to make community members happy - if this is indeed still a community - start with their requests. We've told you guys over and over and over what we want. By ignoring those requests and going in a totally different direction, you are telling us that SE isn't about its community of users, it's about...a slick look? The vision one staff member had in his/her head? I can't really tell what it's about now, but I can tell it certainly ISN'T about having a conversation about food.

I applaud you guys for trying to freshen things up; I did think the original site looked amateurish. Hopefully, this is only Take 1, as I believe it missed the mark. I'd rather go back to the amateurish look with the better layout.

Firm balls, no noodles. I've eaten a lot of matzoh ball soup, but I've never heard of it with noodles. Then again, everyone in my family uses basically the same recipe and I've never eaten it out.

*products, not projects.

I try to do most of my oven cooking at once, too. In the winter, I prop the oven door open after I turn it off (I stick a wooden spoon between the door and the button that turns the light off so the light isn't on for hours). I already paid for the heat in my oven, I might as well get maximum usage out of it and let it warm the whole downstairs. For small stuff, like three cookies or one serving of roasted potatoes, I use the toaster over. I rarely use paper towels - I go through about 4 rolls a year. I don't use chemical cleaners. I've found vinegar and baking soda work wonders on just about everything, so I use them throughout the house. I don't eat meat and depending on the time of year, 70-100% of my produce is local.

But being green in the kitchen isn't just about the non-durable goods you use. It also involves things like getting an extra 5-10 years out of your kitchen cabinets by refacing them instead of replacing them. Buying energy star appliances. Using flooring and counters made of recycled or sustainable materials. Using low/no VOC paints and adhesives. Buying wood products that don't contain formaldehyde. Buying high quality tools and fixtures that don't have to be replaced as often, etc.

I don't think wanting good food necessarily means a person wants to limit their environmental footprint. Quit the opposite, actually. Many foodies seek out imported products, buy fresh blueberries in January, consume overfished species, and so on. I'm not saying a person can't be a foodie and a greenie at the same time, I just don't think one naturally leads to the other.

As Chiff mentioned, the oval ones are a lot easier to deal with if you have an electric range with the connector in between the front and back on one side. If you don't have that, I'd definitely suggest the round. If I had a new one, I would christen it with mushroom bourguignon.

@JeSuisJuba I love those rainbow pyrex bowls! I have the loan survivor from the set my mom used when I was a kid, which I'm pretty sure she got many, many moons before I was just a wee little zygote. Those bowls are so tacky, but they are present in just about every kitchen memory I have from my childhood, (including the time we had one filled with baby fish because my sister's new molly unexpectedly gave birth and we didn't have a spare tank). I really wish I had the rest of the set.

Er, Inglorious Custerds? :)

Oh, and as far as the first question, I eat my calories with only three rare exceptions: alcohol, soy chai, and hot cocoa. When I have a caloric beverage, I count it as part of my meal or snack. So if I have a beer with dinner, I'll skip the potato. If I have a chai or a low-cal hot cocoa at snack time, either that will consist of my entire snack or the rest of my snack will be veggies. I think people forget that calories in beverages count, too.

@KtMc24, it's www.papaspuds.com. Right now they only operate in the Triangle (NC).

I don't live in the area so I can't offer restaurant suggestions, but as a woman, I will say I HATE a "let's get dinner" first date. It's so...expected? I don't know, it just bugs me. I much prefer drinks at some unusual little place I've never heard of or an activity. And if you are out of practice or nervous or just not digging the person, the conversational pressure at the dinner table can make matters worse. I much prefer a first date that consists of something that can morph into dinner if both people are feeling it.

As far as the "play it by ear" thing goes, yeah, that's tacky. That sounds like a guy wants to either wait and see if he gets a better offer later in the evening or he wants to figure out if you are going to go home with him before he committs his whole evening to you. If a guy said that to me, my response would be something along the lines of "hmm...I just realized I'm busy that night. Maybe we can do it another time. Let's play it by ear."

Whatever you decide, Simon, I hope it goes swimmingly!