Same thing as if you lose everything but the olives.

Yeah, but if you eat only the olives, you still have, you know, a whole sandwich left over, which you don't have the other way around, and thus it's not all that difficult to say that the one (without the olives) is a muffaleta, and the other (the olives) is not.

Ditto for Muffaletta eaters who scrape off the olives.

Pffft.... If you were to scrape the olives off and leave it sitting out, somebody else walking by would see it, and at first glance, they'd probably think "hey look, a muffaleta," not "I think I know wwhat that is, but I better double check that the olive salad is on it before I'm satisfied with my sandwich identification abilities."

but if you eat only the olives, you still have, you know, a whole sandwich left

So if you lose everything but the bread and the olives, it's then still a muffaletta?

Assuming they didn't just put "sandwich" on the receipt, which could wreck everything.

Now I see you don't agree with him, so I withdraw that.

Nah, I do agree with him on the hard currency part, because from what I remember of the folks who lifted an eyebrow as they held the olives, thirty plus years ago in NOLA? They wrote "muffaletta n/o" on the receipt.

But you asked specifically what you were eating if you only ate the olives. I think in that instance, you're eating olives.

Unlike Hil, I consider the olives to be the defining ingredient of the muffaletta - even moreso than the bread. It is not a mere condiment but that thing which transforms an otherwise basic Italian sandwich into a muffy. It is the transmogrifier.

It's like saying, "I made Coq au vin with hot dogs and beer instead of chicken and wine."

Dude, even by sixth grade trying to make your case by trace elements is to concede the entire argument. Trace elements only count in chemistry and criminal forensics .

If you're lactose intolerant, those trace amounts of cheese will make a big difference then.

Sorry -- you agreed with Sean, and I thought that meant you were going by the receipt not what had been eaten, like he said.

Now I see you don't agree with him, so I withdraw that.

I've moved on from the receipt thing. You should let it go.

I say this with love, but you all know that you are BIG GIANT FREAKS, right?

Unlike Hil, I consider the olives to be the defining ingredient of the muffaletta - even moreso than the bread.

So you're saying that, if you put the meat and cheese and olives onto a sub roll, you'd still have a muffaletta, rather than a sub with olives?

I say this with love, but you all know that you are BIG GIANT FREAKS, right?

If you had a muffeletta you'd understand.

you asked specifically what you were eating if you only ate the olives. I think in that instance, you're eating olives.

I was going by the bit of his argument I now see he has now discarded.

Because now he seems he thinks there is an irreducible essence too. Which involves bread, so far.

(blinking)

I just realised something - I'm arguing about sandwich zen.

Hooookay, time to go contemplate my belly button.