The Hierarchy of Pretzel Sins

I eat pretzels like Darwin would have. It's a constant survival of the fittest competition. I select two pretzels, eat whichever is most flawed, select another, re-test, and just keep going from there. At the end I've got the best pretzel of the whole bag left, which I then eat.

Admittedly it's not an actual test of the pretzels' fitness to survive -- the pretzels with inferior qualities aren't dying off due to failure to feed themselves and attract mates. Really it's just their ability to conform to my invented notion of the master pretzel, but if you go around saying you eat pretzels like Hitler people back away slowly.

Here then is my criteria for the most fit pretzel presented by defining what makes a pretzel bad. Earlier sins are more severe than the later sins, and the pretzel with the most severe sin gets eaten first.

THE HIERARCHY OF PRETZEL SINS

broken - pretzels must be closed figures with no open ends
bad connectivity graph - pretzels must have 3 distinct, conjoined regions
asymmetric - pretzels must exhibit symmetry about the vertical access
inconsistent thickness - pretzel lines should be uniform in width
overly tall/wide - pretzels should be roughly the same in width and height
flawed skin - pretzels must exhibit unbroken golden-brown skin
bad salting - salt should be neither too heavy, to light, nor uneven

There, now it's published. If no one refutes it in the next 24 hours I'll assume the world accepts the inverse of that list as the definition of a perfect pretzel.

Comments