HOME > Chowhound > Food Media & News >


WFD's equivalent on eGullet is great!


Almost every poster has a photo and the description is minimal. The replies are, if any, 'looks great, will you share the recipe?' This is something I'm now quite interested in.

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
    1. Does that mean that those posters who often complain about the format of the WFD threads on CH -- even though they (presumably) aren't forced by some invisible power/obsession to read let alone participate in them -- will now stop their bitching and moaning & instead enjoy the wonderful WFD threads on eGullet?

      Then I'm all for it! Cheers. >pops open a bottle of champagne<

      5 Replies
      1. re: linguafood

        lingua, there are many respected CHs on WFD and there are those who would participate there if it stayed food-oriented. All I'm saying is, yes, if telling/showing what you had for dinner is of interest but not the chatter, then there's an option. CH doesn't need to be a one-size-fits-all. There are many ways to enjoy the food conversation.

        ETA: I didn't realize that people are still "bitching and moaning" about it. *I* did give it an example, when asked, of where chatter exists on CH.

        1. re: c oliver

          From the beginning, c oliver, the WFD threads on Home Cooking on CH was given a good bit more latitude in what could be written. The chatter was allowed. Most seem to like it. As you said - there are many ways to enjoy food conversation. The WFD threads on CH are food-oriented. Just with a bit more conversation. I like having a bit of context vs. just a pic or two and minimalist description.

          eGullet's seeming lack of threading is confusing to me. It's sometimes difficult to figure out who someone is replying to if they don't highlight the post to which they're responding.

          1. re: LindaWhit

            And honestly.... a few usernames I recognized over there are more of a disincentive to participate than anything else '-P

        2. It is an excellent thread on an excellent site

          2 Replies
          1. re: sal_acid

            From looking at the pix and reading various threads, the bar seems to be generally pretty high but I haven't seen much snarkiness.

            1. re: c oliver

              The bar is high but varies a lot. Snark is nothing like CH partially because of active but sensible mods and poster pressure. You gotta stay reasonably on topic over there. It's a more civilized place. Trolls do not thrive like they do here. Most discussions stay interesting and don't descend into rancor

              eG is more about cooking than eating out, so it nicely complements CH.

          2. If that's what you enjoy, by all means go enjoy it! I find the lack of context incredibly dull. Egullet just isn't for me but I really don't get the Chow vs. eGullet attitude.

            11 Replies
            1. re: weezieduzzit

              Not sure I understand the "lack of context" comment. Also I make a HUGE distinction between CHOW and Chowhound.

              1. re: weezieduzzit

                There will always be a "Chow vs. eGullet attitude" because one of the reasons eGullet was started was when several early CH power users got fed up with the way CH handled moderation back then, and left and started their own board.

                1. re: JMF

                  Over on eG there is no attitude re CH. Absolutely none. It does rise up on CH occasionally, which I find odd.

                  1. re: sal_acid

                    Yes, eGullet members ascribe to a higher level, which many on CH can't achieve.

                    1. re: JMF

                      Oh, please. They're two food-oriented web sites. Why does this have to become a competition? I have been on egullet at least as long as I've been on CH, and they are simply two different animals, no value judgements required.

                      1. re: roxlet

                        The little I've poked around I think the same. And it's definitely more cooking than restaurant oriented. I started this in case people wanted an alternative to WFD. WFD is what the participants on WFD want it to be and that's fine. If it's not your cup of tea, eG may be.

                      2. re: JMF

                        So THAT'S why you post on Chowhound, JMF?


                        1. re: foodiemom10583

                          Snark is unbecoming... ;-)>

                          I also post on eGullet. With a different handles, I have two different accounts. One very old that I mostly use, and a newer one that I use occasionally when I remember.

                          1. re: JMF

                            Ah, there's that higher level you were referring to. Now that I see it, it's so obvious.

                            By the way, I don't find snark unbecoming at all.

                            1. re: donovt

                              Interesting who gets upset by this. It seems to hit a sore point.

                        2. re: JMF

                          Wow, seriously JMF? Talk about elitist.

                  2. I never really ventured beyond egullet's UK/Ireland board and even that is now as dead as a dodo.

                    I think it's great if c oliver has found an interesting thread over there which is going to engage her/him. Egullet needs all the supporters it can find. Unfortunately, I no longer have the enthusiasm to be almost a lone poster on a regional board that used to be quite thriving (heck, it's bad enough on Chowhound's UK/Ireland board).

                    As for Chowhound's WFD threads, I'm a regular contributor (since almost the first one)which sort of suggests that I like the format. If others don't like the way the discussion goes, then they can either ignore it (as I ignore most posts, even on Home Cooking) or they can contribute and change the nature of it if others prefer to go along with that. It's a thread on an internet discussion board, for heavens sake, not a monolith that can only have one style of discussion or, indeed, only one discussion. Nor does it actually work like that - there are always sub-discussions going on. And folk can react differently to the different sub-discussions. For example, there are contributors to threads who I prefer not to engage with (mainly because I just don't like their forum persona). If they posted to WFD I would continue to prefer not to engage with them, not contributing to their sub-discussions, etc.

                    Do I always enjoy and participate in the way the threads can meander? No, I don't. But I pass by on those sub-discussions. Seems the sensible thing to do.

                    11 Replies
                    1. re: Harters

                      My only point was that for those who don't like the chatter, sometimes way, way OT, that there is another option. Period.

                      1. re: c oliver

                        I think you're absolutely right. If folk don't like a thread, then don't contribute.

                        And I think you're absolutely right to draw folk's attention to an egullet thread if you think it'll suit you and them better. We play here, or elsewhere, for fun - and if it isnt fun then there's no point in playing. Full stop.

                        1. re: Harters

                          Over the years I'm gradually learning to read the title of a thread and go, nope, not going THERE. And that little yellow star is the BEST feature EVER.

                          1. re: c oliver

                            I've seen the yellow stars against the threads on my profile page but hadnt realised that they mean something. What do they signify, please?

                            Oh, yes, thread titles are the best way of saving reading time.

                            1. re: Harters

                              If you click on the star, you can follow/unfollow a thread.

                              You can also do this while on the thread by hitting the follow/unfollow button at the top.

                              Heaven sent.

                              1. re: linguafood

                                Thanks. So that means I can disappear threads from my profile when someone has irritated the fuck out of me? And they don't reappear when they are resurrected 6 months later? I like!

                                1. re: Harters

                                  You got it, Mr. H.

                                  It's feckin' brilliant (now we all need that star function for posters :-D).

                                  1. re: Harters

                                    Yes, it's been wonderful. One of the better "improvements" to CH. There are threads I like to read, but don't/won't participate in. The "Following" button helps do that.

                                    1. re: LindaWhit

                                      "Cottage cheese" was the first one I got rid of :)

                      2. This thread reminds me of the line from the movie Tommy Boy;

                        "I could get a good look at a t-bone steak by sticking my head up a cows ass, but I'd rather take my butchers word for it"

                        C. are you a paid advertiser for eG now? I really don't get the point of this thread, to recruit Chow members to go to eG? You've made it well known in various other posts that you are using the site, but why an entire thread dedicated to it?

                        1. If it floats your boat, great. But some of those pictures are disgusting (witness the cock roach, er, tomato tart). A cell phone camera does not make you a food stylist or even a good photographer. Perhaps a few lessons from mc?

                          1. I view the WFD thread as the equivalent of a quick catch up over the fence with a neighbour. Not only is it interesting to find out what people are having for dinner I like it that people add some context and give a little bit of insight about themselves. Obviously not everyone want's to chat to their neighbours and that's fine but I do like it.

                              1. re: wincountrygirl

                                The acronym used on the "What's for dinner?" threads.

                              2. I intended this only as an option for those who would like to participate in the topic but not have 300 replies in a couple of days. Nothing more.

                                I was around back in the beginning of WFD when the mods didn't want replies to be offtopic. Nor did they want replies like "leftovers" or "we went out to dinner." But it was and is a popular thread with people and I think it's great that they've given loads of room to roam. Just an option.

                                1. I tried to sign up for eGullet. At the end of the application I was required to write a 45 word essay. After eight words I said ,
                                  "F,,, this stupid sh.."

                                  22 Replies
                                  1. re: emglow101

                                    Not an essay, just introducing. Like hi, guys, I love food of all sorts, live in x or y or z, etc. People then welcome you. Seemed rather civilized to me :)

                                    1. re: c oliver

                                      Advertising a unique slightly more niche forum on a mass market forum never goes over well.

                                      1. re: EatFoodGetMoney

                                        Which is unique and which is mass market please? As I don't shop at one grocery, why only visit one site? And if TPTB had a real problem with this they would have deleted me. Variety - spice - life :)

                                        1. re: c oliver

                                          CH is a more mass market forum I think, I mean it's fairly giant. I go on a few other forums too, definitely love variety. Obviously like it enough to be here too, not saying CH is bad. It is just big, not really specialized. There's things to be learned everywhere really, I think we agree on that.

                                          1. re: EatFoodGetMoney

                                            Thanks for your sensible explanation, EFGM.

                                      2. re: c oliver

                                        Well, that's ok. Must have read it wrong. If you see me there my name will be Two Loaf. It's half salami and the other half mortadella. I purchased some at Corti Brothers in Sacramento.

                                        1. re: emglow101

                                          Oh, wow, my friend Alan Barnes says Corti Brothers is fantastic.

                                      3. re: emglow101

                                        Like emglow101, I was surprised when I registered with egullet. The application essay is an incredibly elitest concept. The UK board was particularly interesting at the time (far more useful than Chowhound - and, indeed, it's archive of posts still makes it generally more useful than Chowhound). So, I decided to continue. In other circumstances, I would just have turned round and walked away. Instead, I wrote a load of meaningless nonsense and thought that if they didnt approve it, then I had lost nothing. In the event, hours later, I'm signed up which suggests they didnt bother to read it.

                                        Says a lot about the management of that site to me - the folk it wanted to attract and, more importantly, those it wanted to put off. Of course, once I became active on the UK board, I realised I was right - it was mainly used by industry insiders who didnt really welcome ordinary paying customers.

                                        I think egullet will always attract users who don't like the Chowhound style - and vice versa. But that's how it is in real life. I like the chatter on What's For Dinner. It's fun, it's humourous, it's a social place to spend a little time. Not a place for folk who take life too seriously - as we say in the UK "too much up their own arse". I like to write about my meals in a light-hearted way - full of gossip and the food put in the context of my day - it's how I am in real life. I'm sorry if folk don't enjoy reading that. Such is life. I'm sure they'll be much happier on egullet rather than sitting round here moaning to themselves about that Harters rabbiting on again about the weather. I wish them well. Really, I do.

                                        1. re: Harters

                                          "The application essay is an incredibly elitest concept. "
                                          I think the idea of the essay (now, more like a statement due to the shortened word count requirement) is more about discouraging spam, bots, and fly-by one-time posters than it is about actually proving anything about how seriously you take food.

                                          1. re: cowboyardee

                                            The fly-by one-time poster may have insight into the restaurant being discussed but other folk will not gain that knowledge due to egullet's elitest policy. Nor will they have a chance to feel welcomed and possibly become a valued member. But that's egullet's style - suits some folk and not others.

                                            On another board (different subject), we actively welcome the one-time poster who just wants an answer to their query. It all adds to the knowledge base of the board. Many members started out just posting a single query and then stayed around.

                                            1. re: Harters

                                              I'm not sure I'm seeing the elitist connection. How can a policy be elitist if absolutely anybody can take the effort to meet the requirement? Should we feel bad for people who were 'unable' to join the egullet club because they didn't feel like it?

                                              More generally, the barrier to entry over there has upsides and downsides. There's certainly less activity over there, and some of that is likely due to the barrier of entry (though I've heard that it probably has more to do with overly controlling moderation a while ago driving people away in EG's heyday).

                                              But it's also almost inarguable that EG (in its heyday, at least) had a higher level of discourse about cooking. And that also probably had something to do with the barrier to entry and the fact that the forum wasn't bogged down with repetitive questions and pat answers from a steady stream of one-timers who, as a rule, don't do their Googling homework. And I'm not convinced that's a bad thing, even if that makes me an elitist.

                                              There's some value to either system. But as CH swings ever farther in its level of accommodation, openly welcoming spam, and gently requesting that shills state their connections to industry rather than giving them the boot or even removing the dishonest post in question, some basic level of exclusion is starting to look awful inviting.

                                              1. re: cowboyardee

                                                I understand what you're saying, cowboyardee. Although to me, the "barrier to entry" as you put it just seems elitest. That's obviously a matter for the site owners but I never felt quite comfortable there, even on my own regional board. It meant I never really wanted to venture elsewhere on the site. Each to their own, of course. It's just not for the likes of me.

                                                1. re: Harters

                                                  Here's one of the "essays" that certainly belies any elitist hooha:

                                                  "Hi All!
                                                  I'm glad to be here :). Novice cook, but eager to learn more. It will be a long ride I guess. :)


                                                  1. re: c oliver

                                                    No, actually it does absolutely nothing it belie anything. That is what someone has chosen to write as their personal statement which as egullet says "yes , we do read it" - with the inference that what is written effects the possiblity of being accepted, seeing as it is an inherent part of the application form.

                                                    The fact of having the "personal statement" or, as cowboyardee more accurately puts it the "barrier to entry" is inherently elitist. Barriers to entry are inherently elitist. Consider other clubs, societies, organisations which perhaos once had "barriers to entry", they are inherently elitist. They are there to say "we will accept this person arbitarily, we will reject that person arbitarily". Of course, some folk like that exclusivity - clearly it appeals to you and, as I've said more than once, I wish you well posting there, rather rather than to Chowhound's WFD thread. Each to their own - but the staid egullet thread has absolutely no appeal to me - but thanks for bringing your interest in it to our attention.

                                                    1. re: c oliver

                                                      While I don't find that writing 45 words is in any way onerous, I did have to redo my eGullet sign up "essay" multiple times as I thought 45 was the max, not min.

                                                      Yours, as written, is 25 words, FWIW.

                                                      1. re: tcamp

                                                        Actually, that wasn't mine just one I copied to show how little is required. I haven't even looked for mine but I didn't make it quite long enough so when I submitted it I immediately got a popout to make it longer. Mine couldn't have been more bland.

                                                        This thread was never intended to say that one site is better than another. But in this particular instance, one seems to appeal to some more than the other. If you didn't know you had a choice (I didn't) now you do know. While WFD is really popular, everyone knows it's a bit wordy for some. So if you want to share - which I might at times - here's one option. There are probably others.

                                                    2. re: Harters

                                                      There was a lengthy discussion last year on eG about moderating policies which led to a massive overhaul of the policies and practices and much more openness about decisions. This discussion is probably still available to read on MetaGullet, which is only accessible to registered members, along with ongoing discussions of issues. This is something eG always handled behind the scenes before leading to lots of misunderstandings and ill feelings.

                                                      During that discussion that it was revealed that the 'essay' was being used in the same way a Captcha is used on other sites and for nothing else. If the eG 'essay' is elitist, so is Captcha.

                                                      1. re: brucesw

                                                        Then they should change it to Captcha which isnt elitist and does a perfect job of deterring spammers, etc. You might reasonably conclude that the fact that they havn't suggests that the "personal statement" is there for more than one reason for it being there. As does the "yes we read it" statement.

                                                        1. re: Harters

                                                          It is done specifically to avoid a capcha, say the elites who run eG.

                                                          Different situation that it was years ago when there was a barrier to entry. Those days are long gone and their engineers either dead or inactive. Different place than it was,

                                                          But anyway...

                                                          1. re: sal_acid

                                                            Of course, I accept your information, sal. But, coming to mind is the old phrase "walks like a duck, quacks like a duck......" And the other one about leopards and spots. :-0

                                              2. re: Harters

                                                Rabbit away, Harters. Rabbit away.

                                                1. re: LindaWhit

                                                  Rabbit....Cockney rhyming slang for "talk".

                                                  We have our ways of confusing foreigners.

                                            2. This gigantic thread is sooooo Chowhoundish. LOL

                                              1 Reply