5 ms·
Punching bag for a reason. Terrible sites especially on mobile, have to scroll through what feels like an infinite amount of pictures and “fluff” text about how
by Lich 6y ago
Punching bag for a reason. Terrible sites especially on mobile, have to scroll through what feels like an infinite amount of pictures and “fluff” text about how this recipe reminds the author about a warm childhood memory, which you can’t even read cause ads are popping up all over the place. The recent “jump to recipe” buttons don’t help. You jump to the recipe, but some late loading ad just pushes the recipe out of view or some ad hovers right over it.
I just don’t bother with these kinds of sites anymore. Even when I was inexperienced with cooking, I felt none of the stories or pictures (often delicately staged much like commercial photoshoot) helped me with making the recipe.
- Niksko 6y agoYou're generalizing too far I think. Yes, a lot of recipes have fluff that doesn't add anything. But some don't, some have crucial information that helps you understand techniques, ingredients or thought processes. If you use recipes like the link, or like the top Google links, you're guaranteed to get zero info. You shouldn't bother with _most_ long format recipe sites, but you should with some. You should also realise that the fluff doesn't mean it's a bad recipe. I have a few sites that have amazing, innovative and bulletproof recipes, with lots of fluff. Those recipes aren't anywhere else. Your top recipe on google simply isn't going to have that level of thought put into it, because if it did, somebody would be monetizing it.
- ghaff 6y ago>or like the top Google links, you're guaranteed to get zero info. I don't necessarily find that to be true. Allrecipes is often a highly ranked link and it's pretty basic. And I have a few sites I tend to like that have a fair bit of writing in addition to the recipe such as SpruceEats that pop up fairly often.