When you go to a house party- do you expect home cooked food? Ok with Costco food?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. It’s tacky and not good. If you don’t want to cook, order excellent take out, or just have over for drinks. But Costco reheated food, hard no. That’s offensive.

Honestly, I would not want to be friends with you. Tacky? Offensive? It's yummy food with friends. Lighten up.

I mean ... Costco stuff is not "yummy food." It's perfectly fine, in my opinion, for a party that is just some apps. But it's not "yummy." DP

I think some people just don’t know any better. They don’t cook, they don’t eat home cooked food, and they live on ready to eat meals and take out. They think Costco apps are gourmet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just do a pot luck. If everyone just brings one thing they tend to go a little more all out making something for a crowd or from a known popular place. The food will be better.

Ew no. If you're hosting, you should provide the food. Don't make other people supply food for your party.

If by providing you're just buying a bunch of Costco food then you're barely doing anything. At least give other people a chance to bring something decent.

Nope. You're trying to say it's better for the guests if they have to cook themselves rather than eat costco food, but I disagree. If you're a lazy host, just let someone else host. If you don't want to provide food for your guests, go out to eat. You're creating work for your guests and that's inappropriate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just do a pot luck. If everyone just brings one thing they tend to go a little more all out making something for a crowd or from a known popular place. The food will be better.

Ew no. If you're hosting, you should provide the food. Don't make other people supply food for your party.

If by providing you're just buying a bunch of Costco food then you're barely doing anything. At least give other people a chance to bring something decent.

Nope. You're trying to say it's better for the guests if they have to cook themselves rather than eat costco food, but I disagree. If you're a lazy host, just let someone else host. If you don't want to provide food for your guests, go out to eat. You're creating work for your guests and that's inappropriate.

Nope. We all know everyone is busy. Nobody really wants to host and it’s a giant pain in the ass. But people want to get together. So everyone pitching in lightens the load and might make others more likely to host in the future if it’s not such a massive undertaking. Do you want more parties or fewer when people just give up because the takers never reciproate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just do a pot luck. If everyone just brings one thing they tend to go a little more all out making something for a crowd or from a known popular place. The food will be better.

Ew no. If you're hosting, you should provide the food. Don't make other people supply food for your party.

If by providing you're just buying a bunch of Costco food then you're barely doing anything. At least give other people a chance to bring something decent.

Nope. You're trying to say it's better for the guests if they have to cook themselves rather than eat costco food, but I disagree. If you're a lazy host, just let someone else host. If you don't want to provide food for your guests, go out to eat. You're creating work for your guests and that's inappropriate.

Nope. We all know everyone is busy. Nobody really wants to host and it’s a giant pain in the ass. But people want to get together. So everyone pitching in lightens the load and might make others more likely to host in the future if it’s not such a massive undertaking. Do you want more parties or fewer when people just give up because the takers never reciproate?

You should definitely stop hosting if you hate it and your guests this much.

[Anonymous]

I think if husband wants home made food he should make home made food. If he's not willing to put in the effort himself, he doesn't get to dictate it to his wife.

I cook a lot myself but I think Costco apps are fine, personally. It's a party with finger food.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just do a pot luck. If everyone just brings one thing they tend to go a little more all out making something for a crowd or from a known popular place. The food will be better.

Ew no. If you're hosting, you should provide the food. Don't make other people supply food for your party.

If by providing you're just buying a bunch of Costco food then you're barely doing anything. At least give other people a chance to bring something decent.

Nope. You're trying to say it's better for the guests if they have to cook themselves rather than eat costco food, but I disagree. If you're a lazy host, just let someone else host. If you don't want to provide food for your guests, go out to eat. You're creating work for your guests and that's inappropriate.

Nope. We all know everyone is busy. Nobody really wants to host and it’s a giant pain in the ass. But people want to get together. So everyone pitching in lightens the load and might make others more likely to host in the future if it’s not such a massive undertaking. Do you want more parties or fewer when people just give up because the takers never reciproate?

Is this the crux of your issue? Your friends don't reciprocate so you punish them by forcing them to bring food to your house so you don't have to do any actual work to host? I'm confused as to why you want to host people you don't seem to like (calling your friends "takers" is certainly a choice). Just decline hosting if you don't want to. I'm sure no one is knocking down your door to cook you food so... what's the point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just hosted a Hanukah party with TJs frozen potato pancakes.Rest of the food was mine No regrets or apologies

Those TJ's latkes are actually pretty similar to the ones my grandma would make (a little saltier), but I was delighted when I found them. Making them from mashed potatoes is a bit labor intensive and I don't have the time to do it as much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just do a pot luck. If everyone just brings one thing they tend to go a little more all out making something for a crowd or from a known popular place. The food will be better.

Ew no. If you're hosting, you should provide the food. Don't make other people supply food for your party.

If by providing you're just buying a bunch of Costco food then you're barely doing anything. At least give other people a chance to bring something decent.

Nope. You're trying to say it's better for the guests if they have to cook themselves rather than eat costco food, but I disagree. If you're a lazy host, just let someone else host. If you don't want to provide food for your guests, go out to eat. You're creating work for your guests and that's inappropriate.

Nope. We all know everyone is busy. Nobody really wants to host and it’s a giant pain in the ass. But people want to get together. So everyone pitching in lightens the load and might make others more likely to host in the future if it’s not such a massive undertaking. Do you want more parties or fewer when people just give up because the takers never reciproate?

You should definitely stop hosting if you hate it and your guests this much.

Says the person insulted by their “friends” if they ask them to bring a dish to share. But it’s not about the food, right? Supposed to be about getting together?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just do a pot luck. If everyone just brings one thing they tend to go a little more all out making something for a crowd or from a known popular place. The food will be better.

Ew no. If you're hosting, you should provide the food. Don't make other people supply food for your party.

If by providing you're just buying a bunch of Costco food then you're barely doing anything. At least give other people a chance to bring something decent.

Nope. You're trying to say it's better for the guests if they have to cook themselves rather than eat costco food, but I disagree. If you're a lazy host, just let someone else host. If you don't want to provide food for your guests, go out to eat. You're creating work for your guests and that's inappropriate.

Nope. We all know everyone is busy. Nobody really wants to host and it’s a giant pain in the ass. But people want to get together. So everyone pitching in lightens the load and might make others more likely to host in the future if it’s not such a massive undertaking. Do you want more parties or fewer when people just give up because the takers never reciproate?

Is this the crux of your issue? Your friends don't reciprocate so you punish them by forcing them to bring food to your house so you don't have to do any actual work to host? I'm confused as to why you want to host people you don't seem to like (calling your friends "takers" is certainly a choice). Just decline hosting if you don't want to. I'm sure no one is knocking down your door to cook you food so... what's the point.

Nope again. I host and go to parties often. We all bring something to share. You all don’t go to parties much if Costco food excites you and you’re just happy to be invited. You don’t get out much, we get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just do a pot luck. If everyone just brings one thing they tend to go a little more all out making something for a crowd or from a known popular place. The food will be better.

Ew no. If you're hosting, you should provide the food. Don't make other people supply food for your party.

If by providing you're just buying a bunch of Costco food then you're barely doing anything. At least give other people a chance to bring something decent.

Nope. You're trying to say it's better for the guests if they have to cook themselves rather than eat costco food, but I disagree. If you're a lazy host, just let someone else host. If you don't want to provide food for your guests, go out to eat. You're creating work for your guests and that's inappropriate.

Nope. We all know everyone is busy. Nobody really wants to host and it’s a giant pain in the ass. But people want to get together. So everyone pitching in lightens the load and might make others more likely to host in the future if it’s not such a massive undertaking. Do you want more parties or fewer when people just give up because the takers never reciproate?

You should definitely stop hosting if you hate it and your guests this much.

Says the person insulted by their “friends” if they ask them to bring a dish to share. But it’s not about the food, right? Supposed to be about getting together?

Are you on the wrong thread? It's most definitely about the food. If you don't want to provide even the most minimal of costco apps, do not bother hosting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just do a pot luck. If everyone just brings one thing they tend to go a little more all out making something for a crowd or from a known popular place. The food will be better.

Ew no. If you're hosting, you should provide the food. Don't make other people supply food for your party.

If by providing you're just buying a bunch of Costco food then you're barely doing anything. At least give other people a chance to bring something decent.

Nope. You're trying to say it's better for the guests if they have to cook themselves rather than eat costco food, but I disagree. If you're a lazy host, just let someone else host. If you don't want to provide food for your guests, go out to eat. You're creating work for your guests and that's inappropriate.

Nope. We all know everyone is busy. Nobody really wants to host and it’s a giant pain in the ass. But people want to get together. So everyone pitching in lightens the load and might make others more likely to host in the future if it’s not such a massive undertaking. Do you want more parties or fewer when people just give up because the takers never reciproate?

Is this the crux of your issue? Your friends don't reciprocate so you punish them by forcing them to bring food to your house so you don't have to do any actual work to host? I'm confused as to why you want to host people you don't seem to like (calling your friends "takers" is certainly a choice). Just decline hosting if you don't want to. I'm sure no one is knocking down your door to cook you food so... what's the point.

Nope again. I host and go to parties often. We all bring something to share. You all don’t go to parties much if Costco food excites you and you’re just happy to be invited. You don’t get out much, we get it.

You always show up with a potluck dish to every party? That's actually one of the most bizarre things I've ever heard. Someone hosts a baby shower and you're showing up with jello salad? So weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just do a pot luck. If everyone just brings one thing they tend to go a little more all out making something for a crowd or from a known popular place. The food will be better.

Ew no. If you're hosting, you should provide the food. Don't make other people supply food for your party.

If by providing you're just buying a bunch of Costco food then you're barely doing anything. At least give other people a chance to bring something decent.

Nope. You're trying to say it's better for the guests if they have to cook themselves rather than eat costco food, but I disagree. If you're a lazy host, just let someone else host. If you don't want to provide food for your guests, go out to eat. You're creating work for your guests and that's inappropriate.

Nope. We all know everyone is busy. Nobody really wants to host and it’s a giant pain in the ass. But people want to get together. So everyone pitching in lightens the load and might make others more likely to host in the future if it’s not such a massive undertaking. Do you want more parties or fewer when people just give up because the takers never reciproate?

You should definitely stop hosting if you hate it and your guests this much.

Says the person insulted by their “friends” if they ask them to bring a dish to share. But it’s not about the food, right? Supposed to be about getting together?

Are you on the wrong thread? It's most definitely about the food. If you don't want to provide even the most minimal of costco apps, do not bother hosting.

There’s a much better solution to the boring tasteless Costco apps that you’re so impressed with. Your parties sound sad.

[Anonymous]

Well OP, you're already ahead of some people on this thread LOL.

Costco > Potluck

At least you're not as tacky as pp. Tell your husband he should be happy you aren't pushing the cost and effort of your party onto your friends and family!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just do a pot luck. If everyone just brings one thing they tend to go a little more all out making something for a crowd or from a known popular place. The food will be better.

Ew no. If you're hosting, you should provide the food. Don't make other people supply food for your party.

If by providing you're just buying a bunch of Costco food then you're barely doing anything. At least give other people a chance to bring something decent.

Nope. You're trying to say it's better for the guests if they have to cook themselves rather than eat costco food, but I disagree. If you're a lazy host, just let someone else host. If you don't want to provide food for your guests, go out to eat. You're creating work for your guests and that's inappropriate.

Nope. We all know everyone is busy. Nobody really wants to host and it’s a giant pain in the ass. But people want to get together. So everyone pitching in lightens the load and might make others more likely to host in the future if it’s not such a massive undertaking. Do you want more parties or fewer when people just give up because the takers never reciproate?

Is this the crux of your issue? Your friends don't reciprocate so you punish them by forcing them to bring food to your house so you don't have to do any actual work to host? I'm confused as to why you want to host people you don't seem to like (calling your friends "takers" is certainly a choice). Just decline hosting if you don't want to. I'm sure no one is knocking down your door to cook you food so... what's the point.

Nope again. I host and go to parties often. We all bring something to share. You all don’t go to parties much if Costco food excites you and you’re just happy to be invited. You don’t get out much, we get it.

You always show up with a potluck dish to every party? That's actually one of the most bizarre things I've ever heard. Someone hosts a baby shower and you're showing up with jello salad? So weird.

The thread is “house parties”. Do you want to talk about wedding, funeral, and baby shower food? You know, parties not usually at a house? Some of you don’t go to many parties and it shows.

[Anonymous]

I'd rather costco prepared or frozen appies than a potluck. If OPs DH thinks costco food is "gauche" I cannot imagine what he thinks of potlucks... probably not going to be very popular.