Post History

I think comparisons between ingredients that affect cooking decisions should be on-topic.  (And by the way, I too have wondered about the sea-salt fad and whether it actually makes a difference.)  If ingredients A and B are different that *probably* has implications for when to use which, whether it's cooking properties (like smoke point for oils), flavor, or something else.

Subjective questions like "which is better, apples or oranges?" wouldn't be a good fit anyway, but not just because it's about different foods.  "Which is better, gas or charcoal grill" also isn't a good fit.  The problem is the subjectivity -- better *for what*?  On the other hand, if the question is about choosing fruits for a crisp (and how you might need to modify recipes if you're using apples instead of peaches), or it's about trying to produce a certain effect where grill type seems relevant, that's a question that can be answered more objectively.

I haven't answered your broader question, I know, only parts of it.  I think *scope* boils down to "does the answer to this question help make me a better cook?", and *subjectivity* boils down to moving from pure opinions (everyone's got one; how do you evaluate them?) to questions that prompt answers that can be supported.