h a l f b a k e r yMagical moments of mediocrity.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Like many others, I enjoy Oreos, and I sometimes like twisting them open and eating either the plain side first or the filling first. The standard *chocolate-covered* oreo, however, doesn't lend itself to this practice, because the entire sandwich cookie has been dipped in chocolate. However, if each
half of the sandwich cookie (the top and bottom) were dipped separately in chocolate and allowed to dry before the introduction of the filling, then the consumer could still twist the halves apart, getting at most only a little chocolate on his fingers.
Con: It has a little less chocolate than the *normal* chocolate-covered oreo.
If the filling needs a plain surface to adhere to, then one half could be dipped "flat" (i.e., on one side only), or in the alternative could be scraped free of chocolate before the filling is added.
(Inspired by annotations of k_sra and longshot9999 to "Plate Dams.")
[link]
|
| |
Too simple. They must be threaded, mated pairs, with a fine thread of such precision that it must first be cast, then machined to develop the close tolerance features. |
|
| |
OK, maybe a coarse acme thread would be more practical. |
|
| |
(heh, just noticed that there is a category that is entirely dedicated to a brand of biscuit/cookie) |
|
| |
It's the Häagen-Dazs of Oreos. Bun! |
|
| |
*sigh* now I have to go and eat *another* one! : ) |
|
| |
You wanna watch out nobody gets on your case about this being a recipe. |
|
| |