should i update with results?
I haven't had this issue on other Stack Exchange sites, but cooking is maybe more clearly divided in a theoretical and practical side. When programming, a possible solution either works, or doesn't. A solution proposal may need some tweaks until it works, but each version is either fine or not.
In cooking, success isn't as clearly defined, and usually, nobody tests several versions back-to-back (alright, I do sometimes, but I think that I am the exception). I usually ask a question to help with a specific dish I am planning to cook, cook it, incorporating the best ideas from the answers, and evaluate my result based on several criteria like taste, texture, effort needed to prepare, etc. Even if I have ideas for how to make it better, they have to wait for the next time (which could easily be months, as I am always cooking different stuff, instead of perfecting a small number of dishes).
When I have posted a question and cooked the dish, I want to post about the results, as a feedback to the people who gave me the good answers, and advice/warning/suggestion to later readers who will find the question when they are faced with the same problem. But I don't know where to post.
An edit to the question itself feels strange. After all, the question should be solved at that point (hopefully). So I am not trying to explain more in order to get a better answer; I just don't need more answers.
A comment to the question itself also has its drawbacks. It is limited in size and formatting. Also, it would go under if there are a lot of others (maybe slightly off topic) comments.
Comments to individual answers only feel right if I have to say something about the answer itself, which is not always the case. Sometimes I just want to say "I used idea 1 from answer X, and idea 2 from answer Y. Texture was great, taste can use improvement." I cannot contribute texture and taste to one answer or the other, and besides, the report would be too fragmented.
Some time ago I saw an old question, where yossarian had made a report in an answer to his own question. So I followed this strategy in my own latest question. But it didn't feel like I was making a contribution worthy of its own answer. I didn't offer new ideas, just said that the existing ones had worked, and noted some issues with the dish (which could be, but are not necessarily related to the question). I felt that Sobachatina's answer was a really good answer, and that it deserved the accept. Usually, if I see a question where there is an answer at least as good as the one I could write, I don't write a new one, but upvote the existing one. And I have some kind of reserve against answering my own questions, probably created by the warning mechanism. Because of these two factors, it feels wrong to make it an answer.
As there is a drawback associated with all possible places for a report, I was wondering: is there some kind of ettiquete which says where to write one? Or is it discouraged to write them if they don't have enough information to qualify as a good answer?