DHagedorn

Thanks for the reasoned response.

I'm sorry you feel attacked by "piranhas" but must point out that you jumped in with an extremely hostile tone, and didn't hesitate to hurl insults at the membership here. You might have had a warmer reception had this last post of yours been the first.

I did not hurl insults at the membership. I said the post was irresponsible and in poor taste. You all took it from there.

The news is out there on the damn world wide web. It's not secret any more. Apparently the owner knew, the auction house new, probably every chef in DC knew and every person shopping for used restaurant equipment between Richmond and New Jersey knew. Regardless of the motive -- is there reason to think that there's something suspect in the OP's motive? do tell -- putting something that is true and already public on line is perfectly acceptable behavior. No one's happy that RK is closing, or rubbing their hands in malicious glee -- quite the opposite -- but pretending it isn't happening doesn't change a thing.

You might have notices that this site concerns itself with, among other things, news from the restaurant world, which this certainly is.

I've noticed exactly what this site is and that is why I respond from time to time to call foul. And when I do, (to borrow the word a friend used in an email she sent this morning to express sympathy for the treatment I'm getting here) the "piranhas" attack, the people who rationalize the malignant posting of a notice for a public auction (possibly the lowest point of a restaurateur's life) by letting themselves believe it is nothing more than a benign reporting of the news.

You would be hard pressed to find a journalist who would post such a link. What he or she would likely do is call the restaurateur, tell him that the auction came to his/her attention, inform him that the information is out there for all the world to see, and ask if it were true that he is closing. Then, the restaurateur would confirm the closing and ask for the journalist to keep it quiet until he has a chance to announce it himself and tell his employees. The journalist would most likely do this, understanding the delicate nature of the information and feeling empathy for the restaurateur's plight. If he/she feels he/she must report it, he/she would tell the restaurateur so and then do so, without including the link for the public auction in the item.

You are right; many people knew of the auction, but no one saw the need to publish the auction link in a public forum, except here. The original poster published the link and then said he guessed RK was closing. Journalists do not guess. They do what Don did; they check the facts and report the story, without having to guess.

I do not know the OP. I do know that it takes scant deductive reasoning to realize that publicizing the public auction of someone's belongings is not a lovely thing to do. The closing is the story, not the auction, especially to those who are more interested in "news of the restaurant world" than they are in "other things."

No, I don't think it was a public service. I didn't comment on the motives of the original poster, merely said that once the information* was put out there Don did the right thing in contacting them and asking them what they wanted to do. It's too bad that the Washington Post didn't get the scoop, but he doesn't deserve the amount of vitriol you're heaping on him. Is it Don's fault, or our fault somehow, that the sale wasn't supposed to be made public? Have you read anything here that suggests gladness that this is happening? Most of us are sad that Restaurant Kolumbia is closing, and wish nothing but the best for the Stachowskis. I'm sorry that they didn't get to release the information the way they wanted to, but at the same time knowing a little sooner gives the people who care a little more time to show their support. I'll be in today for lunch.

*initially "rumor," but it wasn't a rumor

Don did do the right thing; he cleaned up after someone who did the wrong thing. All I am saying is that there is no good reason to post a link announcing the public auction of someone's business. That's what I object to. The link. The auction link. What purpose did it serve?

What do you mean "and let him handle the matter himself?" I talked with Jamie about it for 10-15 minutes. I asked him how he wanted me to handle it, and got the basic facts out rather than letting the rumor mill flow unchecked. And then I gave him my cell-phone number and told him to call me if he needed anything. Yes, David, I DID do the responsible thing by calling, rather than simply letting that post sit unexamined.

And I went in and had dinner there last night, too - to show some support for two people I care about very much.

Cheers,

Rocks.

Don, I was not talking about you. I was talking about the original poster who created the reason for you having to fact-check the story. I am objecting to someone posting a link to a website announcing that the fixtures of a business will be auctioned off. I receive notices of these auctions and would not dream in a million years of publicizing that information before the owner of that business has done so him or herself.

Don wrote that Jamie was stunned, but it doesn't sound like he was upset, per se. It probably wasn't the way he wanted to tell folks, but that happens.

Isn't providing information that is hidden something the media does all the time? While this board may not be the media, everyone is interested, not to mention most people are extremely supportive. In fact, I would say that us finding out sooner can only provide them with more business and I think we can all agree that is beneficial.

Supportive? Beneficial? Wrap it up in whatever pretty paper you choose. The smell still comes through.

The photos of the bar and booths are very clear.

I'm not mustering much outrage over the original poster's noticing that a board favorite has put it's fixtures up for public sale, especially since Don did the "responsible" thing and confirmed the information.

Almost as responsible as seeing a post for a public auction and calling the owner to say, "Hey, I saw this on a website and think you should know this information is out there" and let him handle the matter himself. Are you suggesting this person was performing a public service? Or that the motive for announcing a public auction of someone's belongings is to manifest endearment? Give me a break. It was just a juicy piece of chum.

While looking through this auction http://rasmus.com/auction_detail.php?ID=371137 it appeared to be Restaurant Kolumbia.

I guess they're closing soon.

How does that "appear" to be Restaurant Kolumbia from that link and why is it your place to make this announcement? I do not blame Jamie for being upset. This post was irresponsible and in poor taste.

I'm somewhat conflicted about commenting on this, because I don't intend to start any kind of row, but Alison Swope's recipes (or at least a couple of them) in the Chef on Call today really had me shaking my head. I thought the barley risotto looked good, and I could see why the one client raved about it. Pearl barley is cheap, nutritious, and filling and good in various preparations. But, the cost of some of the ingredients in the other recipes seemed not to fit the project (or what i understood it to be). This is the article. The recipes are linked in the sidebar.

It's easier to criticize someone else than to go out and volunteer and teach people about nutrition and cooking, and I certainly applaud Chef Swope for doing that. I've lived on slender food budgets, and it can be hard to eat healthy foods all the time, and you don't want to feel deprived. Still, the selection and use of some of the ingredients really has me puzzled.

For the chicken recipe, it makes sense to teach people how to cut up a whole chicken and make the best use of all of it. Some of the other ingredients, though, just... Two kinds of fresh herbs just to use a couple of sprigs?! That's a couple bucks a pop. Two kinds of fresh citrus peel? Peeling strips off lemons and oranges means you have to buy lemons and oranges and find ways to use them so they don't dry out from having part of the peel gone. And the peel gets discarded at the end of the recipe anyway. Emphasizing using good-quality brined olives over canned as a way of imparting flavor makes sense if you have cash for buying good-quality olives, but canned olives in water are a good deal cheaper. Dates are great, but raisins would be cheaper and more readily available. One could use the same type of raisins in the chicken as in the apple crisp and just buy the one thing. Is it really sensible to be burning off 3/4 of a cup of apple juice or cider for that recipe when someone could be drinking it?

And the salad . It's great to use avocado as a healthy source of fat, but avocados are up well over $2 a piece now, based on my recent shopping trips (weather in California a while back is the cause, I believe). It says you can substitute cranberry for pomegranate juice (expensive and not always available), but for that type of recipe you're going to want unsweetened cranberry juice, which is going to be harder to find and (I'm guessing) more expensive than sweetened. I'm also going to venture that pre-packaged baby spinach is not the cheapest salad green, either. I have no comment on the price of grapefruits. Haven't bought any in while. Couldn't the unused oranges that are being partially peeled for the chicken be used in the salad instead?

Maybe I'm way off base and I'm sure someone will tell me if I am .

Yes, you are, and I will. First of all, Alison Swope, having taught at DC Central Kitchen in the past and having been an active participant in Share Our Strength and other like events for many years, in addition to knowledge she possesses as a chef de facto, is fully aware of what things cost.

She also knows that poor does not mean unsophisticated. People make choices with the resources they have. The question was raised at the lesson if another juice could be substituted for pomegranate or another fruit for the dates. The questions were not a function of cost; they were a function of taste. ("I don't like pomegranate juice. Can I use something else?" Another attendee said, "I love pomegranate juice!")

Having had experience of my own subsisting on $5 a day, I know that avocadoes regularly go on sale for $.99, and one avocado can last for 4 days used on a salad or in a sandwich.

She used spinach because it is an ingredient that could easily be donated from the Anacostia farmers market, with which BFC has a gleaning arrangement. Also, bags of spinach often go on sale for $2, and one bag is sufficient to make a salad for 4 people.

Dates cost $5.99/lb, but are available in bulk and can be bought by the piece; 4 or 5 dates would cost less than a dollar for the recipe for 4 people. Raisins cost $2.79/lb. Alison, when asked, informed the clients that they could use any dried fruit they wished to. Again, the question was posed as a fucntion of taste preference rather than cost.

Brined olives are also sold in bulk, and I have witnessed on several occasions, low-income people purchasing them at Whole Foods.

A tablespoon of orange juice does not have nearly the flavor of a strip of oil-rich lemon zest. As you pointed out, using the zest leaves the rest of the lemon/orange, etc. in tact for other uses.

Due to space constraints, not everything that occurred during the lesson could be reported. Chef Swope indicated that dried herbs could be used instead of fresh, with the caveat that they should use a lot less of the dried variety because of their greater intensity. The attendees were also informed that all of the fresh herbs Alison used were being grown at the Seventh Street Garden next door and they could get them there for free if they wished. Also, Bar Pilar grows fresh herbs in giant bins in front of the space and next to the bus stop at the corner of 14th and T. On many occasions I have seen people waiting for the bus avail themselves of those herbs, which they are welcome to do, or at least were when Barton Seaver was the chef there.

Moreover, I purchased pots of fresh herbs at a garden center at the beginning of the summer for $1.79 each and have not had to buy any more for the entire summer. Herbs do not just come in ridiculously overpriced plastic packages for $2. An interest in gardening and the wherewithal to indulge that interest are not characteristics reserved for the economically privileged.

It is sensible to reduce apple juice as a way to cut the amount of refined sugar used in a recipe that serves four people. The nutritional reward outweighs the benefit of one person using that amount of juice as a beverage, if you buy into the absurd notion that the clients of BFC are in such dire straits that they would be faced with having to choose between reducing 12 ounces of apple juice and dying of thirst.

Whereas I am pleased that you read this piece, I am saddened that you seem to have missed the point of it, which, as its writer, I would view as a failure had I not received so many positive responses from others who did get it.

Fit for Fun's goal is to shift the low-income-poor health paradigm by addressing directly the root causes of obesity, high blood pressure, diabetes, and heart disease: poor diet and lack of exercise. BFC seeks to change unhealthful eating habits by educating people in a supportive, respectful environment and empowering them to participate proactively in what will hopefully be a prolonged future.

As BFC's executive director says, which I quoted in the piece, "People may be poor, but they don't have to eat like they're poor." Alison Swope proves that point at her new restaurant, where the spinach salad and the braised chicken with dates and olives she prepared at BFC appear on the menu. In Alison's book, even people on K Street should eat as well as those on Seventh Street.

So I encourage readers and bloggers to rethink their choices when donating to food banks. It does not take much time to cull through a cupboard, find a package of dried apricots or a bottle of olive oil, and take it to Seventh Street. In fact, it takes much less time to do that than it does to pull apart a chicken or an article about someone making a difference.

David Hagedorn

I'm new to the board, and have been trying to catch up on a lot of reading. But I've just got to ask a question.

We'll be moving to the DC area (specific location TBD) within the next couple of months. While we're excited about a whole new food scene to explore, we're understandably saddened by leaving our favorite haunts here in Omaha. (Believe it or not, there really are some great restaurants here. It's almost impossible to get a bad steak dinner.)

The place we'll miss the most, though, is a little bistro-style place called La Buvette. In an old building in downtown, with mismatched tables and chairs (all old), and a tiny kitchen, this place turns out some amazing food. The kitchen consists of a couple of portable propane burners and a couple of countertop convection ovens. They have a bakery in the basement (the stairwell is lined with photos and articles by and about Man Ray) in which they bake a variety of artisanal breads. The staff (except the senior chef) are all students at the local culinary arts school. The wine list changes regularly (it is a wine shop, after all) and always has a couple dozen varieties available by the glass.

But the menu. The menu is different every week. Mussels, in a different sauce each week. Sometimes sweetbreads. Maybe lamb shanks, or pork bellies. Beans and lentils so good you'd be willing to have just a bowl of them with a slice of bread for lunch. In the summer, the table is full of fresh vegetables and herbs from the farmer's market next door. Everything perfectly prepared by a good, if not highly experienced cook under the careful eye of the chef.

The owner of the restaurant is a developer who owns several buildings downtown, and who is a major patron of the arts. So the restaurant is sort of a hangout for the artsy crowd and intelligentsia, Plus those of us who come in from the chain-bound suburbs for a taste of real cooking. There is just no better feeling than opening the door to La Buvette on a stunningly cold winter day to find a warm, cozy atmosphere redolent of braised meats and roasted vegetables.

Now, the office I'll be working from is in Chantilly, so we'll probably be living out on the western edge of town. Is there any hope of finding anything to replace our beloved Saturday lunch place?

Hello, Derek. You should copy this question and send it to Tom Sietsema for his online chat at www.washingtonpost.com on Wednesday morning at 11. He answers earnest questions earnestly.

What if it's oozing cheese?

I can see a bias against "suppurating" for sure ...

Slater must have seen a bunch of cliches in his time, like halibut "napped in a vibrant lemon verbena sauce."

Oh wait, been there, done that ...

"Napped" is not exactly a cliche; it refers to an actual technique in which a sauce is carefully applied to something in coats, spoonful by spoonful, to create a specific effect and achieve a particular balance. The word is quite evocative because it induces the reader to conjure the image of someone performing an action that is more refined than, say, ladling or covering. By the way, "napper" is a transitive verb, so the nappee is nappeed "with" a sauce rather than "in" one.

I meant to say, shilling your place of employment anonymously on some else's site.

Seems Restaurant Gal has declared victory, and her chorus seems to be urging her on. But I agree with David that "A restaurateur's livlihood depends on the good will of the public. One way to gain and retain that good will is to provide an environment that respects the privacy of his guests. That requires the strict enforcement of a policy forbidding employees from gossiping about the clientele, especially publicly." The Lady Lunchers post crosses that line. They would recognize themselves if they read it, and most likely not be happy with the story. And it affects my decision to give them my business - no way would I want to screw up somehow and wind up a story on that blog.

I just read RG's posting deriding Captain Obvious, in which she states: "Out a blogger... and you could cause them to be fired. Yeah, you are messing with real people, and real people’s jobs." She seems not to care that she is messing with her co-workers's (and her employer's) jobs by gossiping about customers. You see, her mission is much greater: to allow readers worldwide to seek out her prose and learn of "life’s lessons, life’s trials, life’s sheer bliss." Restaurant Gal, you are a star! Since you prefer to remain anonymous, how about a pseudonym? Eve Harrington, perhaps?

As a blogger, I wanted to add my two cents. When I first started to blog, I didn't want to put my name out there. For one thing, I felt I could write more freely without having to fret over what my friends and family were going to think of my posts. Not that I was writing anything trashy, I just needed a little anonymity at first to find my footing. Yes, I used a fake name at first, in fact it's the same one I use here. After a while, when I finally told my family and a few close friends about my blog, and they all liked it, and I was more comfortable with my writing, I added my real first name to the blog. But that's as far as I wanted to go. Why? There are too many nutjobs out there. And if someone REALLY wanted to find out who I was, they could so why make it that much easier for them by providing my last name.

Most of the food bloggers I read are good people, some use their real names, some don't. It doesn't make a rats-ass difference to me. The only times it would bother me is when someone is writing awful, nasty things about someone else. That's just chicken shit.

I can also understand some of the frustrations of those here who feel that if someone writes on DR or in a blog and is associated with the restaurant world, they should at least say so and at least use their first name. If what they write is shameful to them, then they shouldn't be writing it in a public forum. But if they are just commenting or leaving remarks as a person not as a chef, bartender, waiter, etc. then let them. They're people too. It's when they cross the line between their personal and professional lives that they need to be upfront.

And as for my real name, it's Barbara. I decided to use my blog moniker here because there was already a Barbara on the boards.

(I think that was more than two-cents worth but who's counting.)

Bloggers have the right to post whatever they wish and so do respondents. All are subject to public scrutiny and have no choice but to accept the consequences of their own actions. There really is no reason to debate whether bloggers should or should not be outed; the fact is they run that risk whether they like it or not. The only person who has any control over the protection of a blogger's anonymity is the blogger himself. When a person blogs about his workplace and coyly releases information sufficient enough for readers to ascertain his identity, then so be it. The fault, dearly brutal, lies in himself.

Moreover, a person who blogs about his workplace without previously giving his employer editorial approval must accept the fact that his behavior may be actionable. A restaurateur's livlihood depends on the good will of the public. One way to gain and retain that good will is to provide an environment that respects the privacy of his guests. That requires the strict enforcement of a policy forbidding employees from gossiping about the clientele, especially publicly.

I looked at Restaurant Gal's blog. I did not find her characterization of "lady lunchers" funny; I found it snarky and offensive. I daresay those ladies would agree and would think twice before returning to that establishment, as I now will. I think the chef/owner should seriously consider RG's promulgations and do what is necessary to safeguard his, and his business's reputation.

This is an excerpt from a version of an article published in The Washington Post on August 31, 2005:

Restaurant diners view reservations as solid contracts when they show up on time, open-ended agreements when they show up late, at-will arrangements when they show up unannounced, and tentative suggestions when they do not show up at all. The public could benefit from a refresher course in Reservations 101:

What is a reservation? A reservation is an appointment whereby a person promises that a party will arrive at a specific time. An accepted reservation is a probability, not a guarantee.

Why do restaurants take reservations? A restaurant’s success depends on its management’s ability to meet sales projections. Projected sales are the function of two numbers only, one a constant (average check price) and the other a variable (covers). A restaurant’s budget, how much labor it employs and how much inventory it carries, is based entirely on its projected revenue: (average check x covers). Restaurateurs accept reservations to take some of the guesswork out of calculating the number of guests they will serve.

Unpredicted changes in reservations are detrimental to a restaurant’s fiscal health and have consequences that affect others adversely. Amongst these changes are:

No-shows: People who fail to cancel reservations renege on a promise to help a restaurateur and his staff pay their rents. They do not care that the restaurateur has turned away other business, that the host had to wait at least fifteen minutes before seating a walk-in party in their place, or that they reduced the income of the person who was going to serve them.

Many restaurateurs have instituted the terrible policy of guaranteeing reservations to a credit card and charging no-shows a fee. It is not unenforceable; if a diner contests the charge, the credit card company will issue a “charge-back” to the restaurant and then demand proof that does not exist for a purchase that did not take place. Moreover, whatever paltry fee the restaurateur could charge is not worth the bad faith its collection would inspire. The policy offends everyone, but the people who object the loudest are those who abuse the reservation system the most.

Late parties have turned themselves into walk-ins. They throw everything off-kilter for everyone else. A restaurateur generally ascribes one-and-a-half hours for a lunch reservation and two-and-a-half hours for dinner. Vacationers with a Saturday-to-Saturday time-share condo understand they must still depart on Saturday even though they arrived on Monday; yet, the 7:00 reservation that “ran behind” by thirty minutes feels no urgency to vacate their table for the 9:30 reservation that was punctual. The restaurateur then gets to buy two rounds of drinks, one to buy the patience of the innocent party, the other to buy back the table of the guilty diners who have suddenly acquired a taste for aged French cognac.

Incomplete parties are late. See above.

Changes in party size: People who announce upon arrival that the size of their party has changed have also transformed themselves into walk-ins. It is a big deal when a party of six becomes a party of two. The restaurant has perhaps turned away other parties of six. The host has to scramble to find a deuce that does not exist. The server who was to have waited on the six-top may have lost twenty percent of his income for that evening. Adding a chair to a four-top for an unexpected fifth diner usually compromises the comfort of diners at adjacent tables.

Overbooking: “Oh, restaurants always overbook,” is the reply thoughtless people offer to the question, “Don’t you think we should cancel our reservations?” Rather than an offensive ploy, overbooking is a defensive strategy to which a restaurateur must resort to avert the threat of economic disaster posed by no-shows. He overbooks by the number of guests he thinks will not show up.

Squatters: Like the hairdresser’s chair and the doctor’s exam room, a restaurant table is time-shared, not purchased, space. When the hairdo is done and the physical is over, clients and patients do not “hang out” ad infinitum. When the coffee cups have been thrice emptied and the check presenter has acquired a layer of dust, the diner’s lease has expired and it is time to go.

I can introduce you to a couple of people if you would like

Not completely when you consider the fact that the underlying cause of anorexia and other eating disorders can come down to gaining and maintaining control. Food and weight become the one thing the person can control. Cooking, while directly related to food, can be a form of expression and art. It can also be theraputic, with the chopping, mixing, pounding, etc.? While I don't want to speculate about this woman's psyche it is possible to seperate cooking from eating.

From another perspective, what about chefs who detest an item yet create brilliant dishes using said item?

This is a from an article that appeared in the Post a few weeks ago: "The inspiration for the Roasted Carrot, Chevre, and Corn “On-the-Cob” came from crockery. For my first menu at Trumpets Restaurant, I wanted to create an appetizer just because I liked a corn-on-the-cob plate I noticed in a store. I couldn’t just offer a piece of corn, so I fashioned a trompe l’oeil cob by roasting a carrot, covering it with herbed goat cheese, rolling it in fresh corn, and baking it. What became my “signature” dish, ironically, was one I never actually tasted. I dislike goat cheese."

Do any of you restaurant owners and managers send waitstaff on their way because of online comments about their poor service? (Or - heh- online comments made by the waitstaff? Not that that ever happens.) Has it ever been the last straw?

Not all that long ago, a Sietsema review got one waitress fired at Charleston when he noted she had made an inappropriate remark.

"Do restaurant owners and managers send waitstaff on their way because of online comments?"

No.

I have an internet address! I have a pen, like Bob Dole! Me want middle bread, me want middle bread. If you see me, give me middle bread. Gimme. Me, me, me. MEEEE.

Now Meaghan, you know in this world some people get middle bread and some people wind up with heels. Life just ain't fair. Just something to Jimmy Choo on...

My conversations as of late have stirred up some worthy discussions in my mind. No, they have nothing to do with my recent nightmares regarding octopus, but they are grounded in what to do when I just wanna have a good time.

Case in point:

I walk into a bar, following some early-goers pre the 5:30pm opening time (drizzling quite a bit.) They were very nice to admit us pre-dinner time!!!

Wonderful atmosphere, and I loved the bartender, soooooo nice and soooooo appealing despite my qualms with my first drink order...what a gem!!! He handled it beautifully, not like I complained but...he was sooooo good about it! Made a beautiful bellini instead!

Oh, the food, how wonderful!! (and beautifully posted here and elsewhere)

An additional case in point:

No names mentioned (of course) however the service was bad. To say the least. I walk in after phoning about questioning dress code and prices to entree plates (my aunt and uncle were in fashionable tourist attire) sat at a table, and basically left neglected. After ordering wine and apps, I know we are ordering cheese. And I say so explicitly to the server. Nasty tasting apps arrives, with no server in site... Do we complain? No, that is not in our nature...Finally I order cheese, and when they arrive...guess what?? My uncle and I are left to guess what the different cheeses are. (more to this but edited to spare you the horror) Beautiful, because the food-runner has still to tell us which is which. Where is said server???

Finally after telling my ordeal to so-called manager person, in a good-humored way...what do we get?? A 15% industry discount!! Wonderful! So what does that mean? Horrible food at a discounted price, and everyone who knows me knows how bad it was....so we deserved bad food at a discounted price cuz I'm in the industry??? Puleeze!! Be for real. Needless to say, my business card with a special note indicating my appreciation for the discount and best wishes for him were there with a 15% tip. Hopefully he gets it.

I happen to feel like a black sheep as of late when I want to go out. Do you know what I mean? After all, what else am I there for??? I just wanna have a good time with nothing else to worry about, especially when it comes to family.

It's funny...do others feel as if they can't go out unless others know who they are?? Tee-hee and ha-ha. I wish it were the opposite in my case...

So, be nice...I wish everyone could just be themselves...No threats, no "vendettas," just people who live and love the restaurant business. It's not about who you are or what you represent...it's about how you love what you do and how you love the people who provide a great time for you and yours...

PS...you never know who is sitting at your table, or the one next to yours.

Yours truly,

Julia

I think I must be missing something here, Julia. It is not in your nature to bring a problem to the management's attention when it occurs; yet, it is in your nature to bring it up after the fact and expect satisfaction.

The guest drives the bus. As someone who is in the business, you know when things are going south. At this moment, you could excuse yourself from the table, find the manager and say, "Excuse me, but our table seems to be falling through the cracks. I'm in the business, so I understand how these things can happen, but this is a special evening and we need to get back on track." Words to that effect. If your goal is to have a good time and you see things are going badly, why not take control of the situation instead of letting the situation happen to you and then complain afterwards? If the apps were "nasty," why not call the manager over and say so? Neither you nor anybody else deserves bad food, but it is up to you to tell someone it is bad when you taste it. If you must wait until later, instead of asking, "What do we get?", why not say, "This is what I want."? "We did not care for the apps. Please remove them from the bill."

You want the management to be "real," but then you write a note of appreciation for something you clearly did not appreciate. You "hope" that the manager/server will get it. Would he not get it for sure if you wrote a note indicating that you found the service lacking and the resolution of the problem unsatisfactory? It was your choice to be ironic instead of candid.

My grandmother always said, "People cannot use you as a doormat without your consent." Every guest in a restaurant is "somebody" and deserves to be treated well. And every guest has the power to take control of the situation to make sure that happens.

Is it true that reusing the bread for croutons, etc. is common?

It reminds me of when we were eating dinner at a restaurant in Paris. I pulled off a piece of roll and, for some reason, I put the roll back in the basket rather than on my bread plate. When the server was clearing our table, I noticed that he took our bread basket and dumped the leftover rolls in a big bin where another server then came and filled up his bread basket. I felt guilty for having put the roll back in the basket, but I had no idea it was going to be reused.

Well, your roll wasn't really used when you returned it to the basket; it was touched. It is true that uneaten baguette slices are recycled in French bistros and cafes. Perhaps they have more experience with deprivation than Americans do and consider wastefulness a higher crime than recycling uneaten bread. In casual settings, they also do not use bread plates and they put their bread right on the table. They are not squeamish about this, but they would never consider dipping their forks into someone else's food to take a "taste." We Americans do not seem to have a problem with doing that. Which is more unhygienic: eating bread that someone has touched with a hand or eating food that has been touched by an implement that has been in another person's mouth? Recycling half a roll for a bread basket is not acceptable, but you may want to think twice the next time you order bread pudding...anywhere. And skip the Caesar Salad.

It's Bippity Boppity Boo.

Cheers,

Sal Icadoola.

Now that's just goppity-goo.

In France, at a cafe, your check is brought with your dessert and coffee. You are expected to pay your bill, if not immediately, then promptly. And properly so.

Here in the provinces, a dauphin, when not a tator tot, is a one-eyed king and, blind to the difference, demands "apres moi" standards from cafes. (Twain, Borges, HG Wells, The Sun King and the recent Palena thread all in one sentence of sixteen words--beat that Farci!).

Server: "Would you care for anything else?"

Diner: "No, thank-you."

Server: "Very well." Server drops the check on a return trip to the table (so he does not give the impression that he is anxious for the guest to leave) and states the obvious: "I'll take that when you are ready."

Diner draws no inference from this completely benign statement and, when he is ready, renders payment in a way that is clearly visible to the server. If the diner is paying with cash, he hands the check presenter to the server and says either, "This is fine, thank-you" or "I will need change, please." Bibbledy-bobbledy-boo!

I clicked there, and I still didn't get it. Maybe I am just missing something.

The point of Mr. Sietsema's review was clear (it takes more than a blustery front-of-the-house performance for a steak house to stand out in DC) AND his words provoked an emotional response. I call that a twofer.

I’ll join the choir of disagreement on this point. This is a clever quote but a poor analogy. At full price, this is neither a rehearsal nor a preview event.

As with the rest of us, her qualifications are not a requirement here. The writing rises or falls on its own merit.

This point seems unfair. Terms like “subpar,” “doesn’t taste like anything,” or even “undercooked,” are clearly opinions. There is no factual standard to bring to bear here. Similarly, terms like “pre-prepared” or “lamp-broiled” are facts. They may be incorrect, but they can be verified objectively. I think most intelligent readers can tell the difference.

This is a little trickier, but first, a nitpick: a ‘boycott’ is a fairly loaded term, usually referring to an organized effort to target an institution, likely for political reasons. (You seem like a good enough editor to know this). This is nothing of the sort. In fact, Ms Grace actually suggests people go to the restaurant, just not for the food.

Now to the main point… any review critical enough of any restaurant is an implicit suggestion by the writer not to go. Whether the writer actually says something like “Don’t bother with this place” or the more common “I won’t be going back” or even “I was very disappointed,” the effect is the same, and the sentiment is perfectly valid to express.

This is a bit like saying that everyone is pretending to be a NASCAR driver on his or her commute to work. I doubt Ms Grace has either aspirations or pretensions to being a paid critic. In this light, while most of your critique of her writing is valid for a published article, here they simply seem cruel. And wrapping these criticisms in the idea that we ALL should endeavor to be journalists is misguided. We are not “researching subjects,” we are writing about our experiences.

There is accountability here. You (or anyone) are certainly welcome to ask questions directly of the poster. It would have been perfectly fine to ask what her idea of a gorgeous dining room is, or even to note that browned scallops were probably seared, not lamp-broiled. Instead, you gave her a thorough editorial dressing-down in the third person, in the process questioned the validity of the rest of our non-professional writing.

Enough of this. I merely think people should make judgments here less hastily and more advisedly, myself included. Slow curtain; the end.

David,

This was my favorite line from your post. Your fatal error in responding to Chica Grace's report was not plastering your missive with smiley faces.

I hope I'm typing my response correctly, Mark. If I get it wrong, I will apparently meet with bodily harm.

I felt the love here, indeed. I see now that I went the wrong way down a one way street here. I understand now that negative reviews are nothing more than mere harmless remarks , it was unprofessional of me raise the issue of accountability , and that I type like an ass*ole .

Here's what it comes down to: this is a board where anyone, no matter who they are, where they are from and how much they know about food, can and should be able to express their opinions freely. To chide Chica on her food-related credentials and to nitpick every detail of her post does a great disservice to what dr.com is all about.

Except, apparently, for me.

I still remember your August 2005 parting note in the Washington Post. I realize the dining public hurt you and I'm sorry your wounds haven't completely healed. I appreciate you standing up for restaurant owners - they are a brave crew.

On a positive note, I took advantage of Derek's invitation to take the World Cup vino challenge on Sunday afternoon. The Alsace white was appley and "heads" above the citrus-y French offering (sure some would've voted the other way). Polished off a steak sandwich/frites and thought I was much better off at Agraria's bar than any of the other Washington Harbor venues.

I got to page through the current wine offerings (e.g., Rioja Blanco) and am looking forward a few low-key bar meals before they settle in with their new team. No high stakes meals, just enjoying the setting and the initial key elements in place.

Thanks for your appreciation. There were no wounds to heal; I had a marvelous time while I was in the restaurant business.