Criticizing the Critics

[Heather]

I second what Shogun says.

Which part?

[TSE]

Man, it's like today didn't happen on DR.com

[shogun]

Which part?

Irrelevant! I just thank lackadaisi for not quoting the whole bloody thing.

On reflection, you ARE right, though, about the "David Hagedorn isn't 'some guy'" part. The whole thing just hit my 'Don't people GET it??" nerve. Comments about restaurants do have real potential consequences for restauranteurs, but generally not the posters. I think we do an ok job self-policing the worst of it, though, and the online format should be embraced by the industry as better feedback than generally available in the past. For what it's worth, I had a less-than-great post (Food good, other bits bad, but not a deal-breaker) lined up about another new restaurant I hit for lunch the other day, but thought better of posting it, to see how (or if...) in due time they take care of the really bloody annoying issue I encountered on a trip there for lunch with some co-workers. That and Chica Grace did it pretty much the right way, and there are far worse posts along the apparently offensive vein that could have been taken apart. My review of the pre-opening of Wasabi, with the explicit 'what I think they need to work on' section, for example...

I also do acknowledge the big potential Karmic hit I've opened myself up to

[Barbara]

Matt: I couldn't agree more with your whole statement. Fabulous writing. Now, what the HELL has happened to your blog? You got me addicted and then you PUNT!

[shogun]

Matt: I couldn't agree more with your whole statement. Fabulous writing. Now, what the HELL has happened to your blog? You got me addicted and then you PUNT!

The IP changed and DNS hasn't propagated. And I haven't written in a month. Check back around 2 tomorrow. <3

[Meaghan]

So says a Washington Post cartoon today:

http://news.yahoo.com/comics/theflyingmccoys

In response to yesterday's cartoon, I resent that there was no emphasis on how much it sucks not to have a pro critic's food budget. Rookie critics dry clean their budget by getting that sixth course on a Tuesday. And then their kids have to go to shitty in-state schools and drive beat up cars .

[Poivrot Farci]

Inspired by Mr. Rockwell’s colorful criticism of “the third-rate petty-swindler charlatans” at Sushi Kappo Kawasaki:

Do you, dearest contributor, present your reasonable gripes (burnt, raw, salty, spoiled, hair, band-aid) in person with the integrity of an honest, accountable being, or like many of the cretinous cowards in this community, do you veil your discontent through a clenched-teeth saccharine smile and sheepishly thank the restaurant representative for a truly wonderful meal only to later slander the establishment (maybe even years later) through binary means, because your innocuous cheeseburger was overseasoned to your taste and not the mid-plus to midwell as requested, and then describe with excruciatingly tedious minutiae every detail of every petty item consumed at every restaurant and every other thought pertaining to anything remotely edible?

Are you ignorant and your reviews a literary parallel to raw cardoons? (some extraordinarly uneducated dribbles should mention seeing polyps.)

Do you have the...courage...decency... unpussiness?... to properly address waitstaff or management so that dissatisfaction and erroneous cookery can be corrected, ensuring a decent meal for other guests? Surely those in the service industry would like to know if their product is far off the mark.

...Unless you complain that there was no caviar in the eggplant caviar. In that case, the central bus station is an suitable outlet and audience for your gaucherie.

[DLB]

I understand both points of views on this issue, however I lean more towards the customer here. I think restaurants have to understand that regular folks like myself are not going to visit a restaurant three times, and try all the dishes before we post about here. Fair or not, you really only have one shot to get it right with the customers. If I have one bad expericence with restaurant, be it the food or the service, I will not be returning to see if it was an off night.

It just does not seem right for any restaurant to say, our food is not up to par yet, a new chef is on the way. (excuses in the eyes of a customer). However, you will be charged full price for this meal! I understand restaurants have operating expenses, however do you really think customers care at all about that? Why should we?

[DanCole42]

(maybe even years later)

Guilty.

[smokey]

...many of the cretinous cowards in this community...

Hmmm...

[Meaghan]

Inspired by Mr. Rockwell’s colorful criticism of “the third-rate petty-swindler charlatans” at Sushi Kappo Kawasaki:

Fortunately, there was once a time when no one had ever heard of Sushi Kappo Kawasaki, like three weeks ago. I would be upset nonetheless if someone had recommended it to me and it turned out that way.

[B.A.R.]

Do you, dearest contributor, present your reasonable gripes ........ Surely those in the service industry would like to know if their product is far off the mark.

It was my understanding that this website was for professionals and non-professionals alike to discuss their likes and dislikes about our dining experience. Big service food/service issues are another story.

If I had to discuss every quibble about a dinner with a waiter/sommelier/manager/owner etc. I might never get to leave. Most probably would not care to hear the criticism in minutae anyway.

We read DR.com because this minutae is what gets us off.

[demandalicious]

We read DR.com because this minutae is what gets us off.

Speak for yourself! Personally, when I get off, it doesn't involve whining on the internet about the waiter who messed up my dessert order last night.

[reverbbrad]

Years ago, writer Dorothy Parker recognized the futility of premature judgments. She responded to a lover apologizing for a hastily concluded performance with the assurance, “Don’t worry; I don’t review rehearsals.”

Ms. Grace, in her comments about Agraria, has reviewed a rehearsal.

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.

Ms. Grace is certainly entitled to her opinions, but what qualifies her to transform those opinions into facts?

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

I took exception to representing opinions as facts…

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.

…and then advising the public to boycott a restaurant's food.

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.

People who are not journalists but play them online…

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.

it was unprofessional of me raise the issue of accountability

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.

[B.A.R.]

Speak for yourself! Personally, when I get off, it doesn't involve whining on the internet about the waiter who messed up my dessert order last night.

I meant READING about the minutae, both positive and negative, is what gets most of us off. Sorry if I was unclear.

[DHagedorn]

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.

[Poivrot Farci]

Personally, when I get off...

So long as it isn't during Matchgame '75 reruns. Otherwise, I'm the one outiside your window, with the viking crown, periscope and a pink carnation, peddling discount France '06 Champs party panties and cardoon truffles.

[Meshe at Eve]

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

David Darling! You will always be my warrior poet!

With Love, Meshe at Eve. PS: Remind me again the name of your blog site.

[crackers]

The Chicago Tribune ran a piece last month "Don't forget to gripe on your way out" that offered a couple of interesting alternatives that Chicago- area restaurants are offering to customers: one restaurant's own website has a forum for rating and commenting on the meal; and one gives a card to customers on their way out, with a toll-free number to call with a comment (and offering a free dessert the next time they come in). Do any local restaurants do this?

[Jacques Gastreaux]

Does a diner have any sort of obligation to send back to the kitchen an improperly prepared dish, in essence giving the kitchen a second chance to do better, before publically criticizing the restaurant?

[DC in DC]

Does a diner have any sort of obligation to send back to the kitchen an improperly prepared dish, in essence giving the kitchen a second chance to do better, before publically criticizing the restaurant?

No. There are all sorts of logistical problems involved, namely that your dining companions have already gotten their meals, and it is awkward to sit there and wait. Also, if it's a business setting, I would almost never send a meal back. I've also had bad experiences where the second iteration of the dish tastes suspiciously similar to what was sent back... In all, more often than not I'll just suck it up and evaluate whether the rest of the experience is enough to make me return (e.g. everyone else's dishes were good, appetizers were good, etc).

[lackadaisi]

Does a diner have any sort of obligation to send back to the kitchen an improperly prepared dish, in essence giving the kitchen a second chance to do better, before publically criticizing the restaurant?

I think no. If that were the case, every restaurant with bad food would have to make each dish twice for each customer before receiving any criticism. A diner is entitled to believe that the dish provided the first time was the prepared as usual. The diner is under no further obligation to attempt to fix the issue. On the other hand, if the waiter asks how the dish was or if everything was okay, the diner should tell the waiter the problem before criticizing the dish publicly.

[Biscuit Girl]

Ok, I'll throw myself into the mess here and add my two cents. I have a blog and sopme of the things I write about are restaurants we've been to. Most have been positive experiences. But every now and then everyone's going to hit a clunker. And, yes, I do write about the bad experiences as well as the good, even if it's only been one visit. In one case, that's all it took for us to say we'd not go back. And in hindsight, we should have talked to a manager that night or at least called the next day. Who knows what the outcome would have been if we had. But that's water under the bridge.

I'll also leave my comments here on DR (although not that many yet). That's certainly what this board is about, being able to comment, suggest or to let others know about what's happening on the food scene. And by far, this board is much more civilized than Chowhound.

And should restaurants look at what we are writing here and on food blogs? Yes! I know there are some who say food bloggers have no business playing food critic but I have never thought of myself in that way. I'm simply writing about our evening out at a restaurant. I'm not paid for what I do and I write because I enjoy it. If someone finds what I have to say intersting, great! If they don't like what I have to say, then move on. It'll take a lot more than someone griping about my blog or my comments here to ruffle my feathers.

Ok so that was a little more than two cents.

[jrichstar]

Does a diner have any sort of obligation to send back to the kitchen an improperly prepared dish, in essence giving the kitchen a second chance to do better, before publically criticizing the restaurant?

Definitely not, for similar reasons as stated by others. Places like dr.com have given the diner another outlet to express their frustrations and criticisms where they might have not been comfortable doing so at the restaurant. Though it's still good to deal with the restaurant directly if the diner is willing......

[dinwiddie]

Does a diner have any sort of obligation to send back to the kitchen an improperly prepared dish, in essence giving the kitchen a second chance to do better, before publically criticizing the restaurant?

I think it depends on the dish and what you mean by "improperly" prepared. If I ask for my steak medium rare and it comes out medium well, I send it back (For the record, I never ask for a steak to be medium well, and almost always ask for rare or medium rare) because the server may have misheard me (it has happened several times where the server wrote medium well instead of medium rare) and it isn't the kitchen's fault. If the restaurant fixes the problem to your satisfaction, you won't have a need to blast them on any board, and in fact if you are going to write about them, you should say that they fixed the problem. On the other hand if you the menu says one thing, and it comes covered with onions, which the menu said nothing about, it isn't the kitchen so much as the restaurant as a whole doesn't know what is going on. You can blast them. But my first impression is to give a kitchen a second chance to fix what is fixable before saying anything negative about them.

[qwertyy]

Does a diner have any sort of obligation to send back to the kitchen an improperly prepared dish, in essence giving the kitchen a second chance to do better, before publically criticizing the restaurant?

When I have a fabulous first meal at a restaurant, I don't wait to report on it till I go back a second time, just to give them the chance to do worse.

[JPW]

When I have a fabulous first meal at a restaurant, I don't wait to report on it till I go back a second time, just to give them the chance to do worse.

[DonRocks]

Here's another perspective: If I wrote about every poorly executed dish I was served, I wouldn't be doing much else. I remember about a year ago, I was sitting at Pesce talking with Régine Palladin, and was raving about how good my fish dish was. She just shrugged her shoulders, and said very matter of factly, "Sometimes we overcook it." Misfires happen every night at every restaurant. I'm not saying not to mention a soggy order of french fries, but let's not make a federal case out it either.

Cheers,

Rocks.

[bilrus]

I'm not saying not to mention a soggy order of french fries, but let's not make a federal case out it either.

Unfortunately it is often the defenders of the restaurants who make the Federal case.

[Pat]

Here's another perspective: If I wrote about every poorly executed dish I was served, I wouldn't be doing much else. I remember about a year ago, I was sitting at Pesce talking with Régine Palladin, and was raving about how good my fish dish was. She just shrugged her shoulders, and said very matter of factly, "Sometimes we overcook it." Misfires happen every night at every restaurant. I'm not saying not to mention a soggy order of french fries, but let's not make a federal case out it either.

Cheers,

Rocks.

When you think about how many dishes they prepare, it's amazing how often most restaurants get it right.

I wouldn't generally make a big deal about one individual dish, but I probably would mention it within the context of a more general comment about a whole meal. It does become problematic if there are a lot of things wrong with a meal at a restaurant. In that case, it can be prickly to say something on the spot because when it's a lot of things, you don't know what to say. Where do you start? You just sound like a complainer. There's only one restaurant (on egullet) that I really shredded and said I wouldn't go back to. Most places I would give more than one chance, unless it's a place I have to go out of my way to get to or that is extremely expensive.

It's really quite a judgment call to know when to say something about things not being quite right. I tend to be very adaptable and don't say something/send food back unless it's really a problem (e.g., the seafood tasted off). I get fidgety when I'm out with people who complain a lot and make frequent special "requests." While I like meat rare, I also like crusty meat well-cooked . In the case of ordering a steak medium rare that came out well, I would probably mention to a server or manager that I liked the meat even though it wasn't served the way I ordered it.

[Pappy]

I eat out often.

I don't think I have ever sent a dish back. I have to assume that what was sent out of the kitchen was the best they could produce at the time and is worthy of praise or criticism given the conditions that exst.

I stopped mentioning a criticism to waiters/managers/owners long ago when I realized that not a single one of them ever took it constructively, and instead simply tried to comp my dessert (which I didn't want in the first place.)

Standards have to vary depending on lots of things. What kind of restaurant? How busy is it? How long have they been open? Could it have been mis-interpretation?

At the end of the day (meal), a slightly over-cooked steak isn't going to change my opinion about a restaurant. However, given the number of restaurants available to me, a bitchy hostess, a disappearing waiter, thoughtless food, warm wine, and a $300+ dinner tab are not going to add up to..."maybe it was an off night I guess we should try it again."

[Jacques Gastreaux]

When does a person who issues a scathing description in public of maltreatment at a restaurant have an obligation to reveal the identity of th estabishment so that others will know to beware?

[Erik Ox]

When does a person who issues a scathing description in public of maltreatment at a restaurant have an obligation to reveal the identity of th estabishment so that others will know to beware?

I too would like to hear the answer here. I had an experience last year somewhat close to what happened to Dean, but didn't post because most of the other posts about it was pretty positive. I made the decision that I would not patronize this place again, but everyone else can make up their own mind.

A little while back the service/management issue was raised by a couple of folks and I felt validated but still opted to not pile on since my one experience was nearly a year ago.

Discuss.

[Jacques Gastreaux]

I too would like to hear the answer here. I had an experience last year somewhat close to what happened to Dean, but didn't post because most of the other posts about it was pretty positive. I made the decision that I would not patronize this place again, but everyone else can make up their own mind.

A little while back the service/management issue was raised by a couple of folks and I felt validated but still opted to not pile on since my one experience was nearly a year ago.

Discuss.

I sense an institutional fear of the "sacred cow" syndrome.

[Poivrot Farci]

When does a person who issues a scathing description in public of maltreatment at a restaurant have an obligation to reveal the identity of th estabishment so that others will know to beware?

People will most likely know the identity of the restaurant because of the name of the thread that it is under, with the exception of this one. No restaurant's nom de plume is under obligation to be revealed by the plaintiff, however, to make a "scathing" criticism of an incognito establishments is (though free catharsis) simply repressive, and masturbatory and offers readers little more than an anecdote. Mr. Gold's experience deserves a bitter finger-wagging "That Smell" rendition, but with so many karaoke bars in the mid-atlantic states open for lunch, how are we to know which one's sake isn't up to snuff?

A recently censored post in this thread recommended objectivity when depreciating experiences. Balderdash!

Objectivity is the antithesis of an interwebtron community in which users are able and encouraged to post their sardonic thoughts, endearment, heckles, and whatevers with respect to the food industry anonymously and therefore without consequences. Objectivity is the unbiased fluff one finds on major channels’ Evening News whose fear of losing viewers and $$ perpetuates inoffensive blandness. A strictly objective Don Trotsky forum would be limited to topics of sunshine, lollipops, rainbows and cookies; all of which would be swell or super.

Our personal epicurean experiences are perceptions unique to us -subjectivity- and taste is a personal matter of preference -be they durian or sweetbreads- while mathematics and science constitute objectivity. Nuances in flavor and service can be expected since food items differ from one to another and robots don't yet understand the comedic value of penis jokes in a kitchen setting or work for tips. Objectivity is not the pursuit in criticism thread.

[deangold]

When does a person who issues a scathing description in public of maltreatment at a restaurant have an obligation to reveal the identity of th estabishment so that others will know to beware?

When the restaurant in question has had time to reposnd to my written letter of complaint. If they respond and resolve the issue, then I will not post their name.

[deangold]

but with so many karaoke bars in the mid-atlantic states open for lunch, how are we to know which one's sake isn't up to snuff?

I post with my own name, not anonymously.... and no Karaoke. But as I have been a long time customer of this restaurant, I would like to have the full story before posing its name. Yes it was an annecdote regarding the poor handling of sending back food. I failed to note that in the original post.

[Jacques Gastreaux]

I post with my own name, not anonymously.... and no Karaoke. But as I have been a long time customer of this restaurant, I would like to have the full story before posing its name. Yes it was an annecdote regarding the poor handling of sending back food. I failed to note that in the original post.

And I find it shocking that a longtime regular customer would be treated in such a fashion. If they treat the regulars that way, I wonder what kind of treatment the occaisional diner would receive.

[deangold]

And I find it shocking that a longtime regular customer would be treated in such a fashion. If they treat the regulars that way, I wonder what kind of treatment the occaisional diner would receive.

Thats why I think they deserve a chance to reply before naming them. If their reply is negative or not forthcoming, I will respond here one way. If it shows that they value my custom I will reply another way. anyone can have a bad day: I should know as I have had many of them.

[DanCole42]

I too would like to hear the answer here. I had an experience last year somewhat close to what happened to Dean, but didn't post because most of the other posts about it was pretty positive. I made the decision that I would not patronize this place again, but everyone else can make up their own mind.

A little while back the service/management issue was raised by a couple of folks and I felt validated but still opted to not pile on since my one experience was nearly a year ago.

Discuss.

I like to think that the people on these boards have the good sense to take a single bad review amongst multiple positive ones with a grain of salt. It's like the "should I post about a single bad meal" issue that's under discussion a few posts back. If the bad meal WAS a fluke, then there should be several other posts talking about how GOOD the restaurant was.

I say post about your bad experiences (even if you've only been once), MENTION the restaurant, and then leave it up to the good sense of the reader to sort out whether the restaurant is viewed on average favorably or unfavorably.

[Heather]

I like to think that the people on these boards have the good sense to take a single bad review amongst multiple positive ones with a grain of salt.

Yes, you'd think so. There are a few places where it's just not worth the crap to post something critical, IMO.

[DonRocks]

[Please don't let this thread stray any more off-topic.]

[Erik Ox]

I sense an institutional fear of the "sacred cow" syndrome.

Except that it isn't a sacred cow and the reason I walked out had nothing to do with the food. The service was abusive before we ordered so we got up and I've never gone back. At this point the exact wording of the exchange is a little fuzzy (like I said, nearly a year ago) but the sentiment was damn clear. After a few months to let it go, I thought about going back (perhaps I caught them on a very off day) but recent comments only confirmed my experience. So that settles that.

So what I'm taking away from this is that I should have posted at the time. I feel the need to learn to write better (lessons from Nadya perhaps?) as I don't want to come off as one of those people from the other boards where "everything sux" (or ruuuules).

[Heather]

Wow. Never mind the food, I would think most people on the board would want to know about abusive service.

[DCJono]

I like to think that the people on these boards have the good sense to take a single bad review amongst multiple positive ones with a grain of salt.

Boards like this democratize these differing opinions. If everyone is raving about someone's crispy fries, and I go and they're soggy, I'd usually post that. Although matters of expectations and taste creep in here, lots of restaurants have bad days and sometimes bad dishes mistakenly get sent out to the floor. One or two people saying here: "Hey! They were soggy!" doesn't mean that their observation was wrong, just that perhaps the fries are inconsistent. Or that they are much better when one cook makes them. This ain't McDonalds - variation happens a lot.

I also want to add that sending something back or talking to a manager is not always an easy thing to do. On a date, in a big group, a business dinner, none of these are really appropriate occasions to "make a big deal" out of your average problems.

Is it fair to always give the management the chance to fix something before posting about the experience? Sure! But who said that ANYTHING in the restaurant business was fair? If the restaurant is good, there will be more good reviews than bad.

[mame11]

Okay, last night I went to a restaurant for the first time. It was an Asian restaurant. I did not like it at all though everybody else at the table, including a trustworthy foodie, did like it. So what was wrong with the meal... ME! I ordered the wrong item. I went for something of which I should have been wary.

I tend not to post negative reviews of places where it is pretty clear that the problem in the equation is me. I am sure someone on the board remembers which physicist established that the mere act of observation changes a situation. Here, I ask do you consider what impact you have on the experience at a restaurant.

[Nadya]

Okay, last night I went to a restaurant for the first time. It was an Asian restaurant. I did not like it at all though everybody else at the table, including a trustworthy foodie, did like it. So what was wrong with the meal... ME! I ordered the wrong item. I went for something of which I should have been wary.

I tend not to post negative reviews of places where it is pretty clear that the problem in the equation is me. I am sure someone on the board remembers which physicist established that the mere act of observation changes a situation. Here, I ask do you consider what impact you have on the experience at a restaurant.

Aren't you being a little too hard on yourself? I don't think there's anything wrong with following your taste. In my mind, the key here is realizing that "this dish is cooked and tastes like it ought to, it's just that I, me, mine, do not enjoy that particular taste."

For instance, I don't enjoy creamy, custardy textures, never have. I never had a creme brulee or mashed potatoes I liked. I am sure they were all cooked by the book and tasted like they should have! Just not for me.

[Michael Landrum]

For instance, I don't enjoy creamy, custardy textures, never have.

Perhaps I can change your mind...

The potatoes, people, the potatoes. Ray's The Steaks' mashed potatoes.

[Nadya]

Perhaps I can change your mind...

The potatoes, people, the potatoes. Ray's The Steaks' mashed potatoes.

See my signature line, babycakes. Thanks, Rocks!

[legant]

It was my understanding that this website was for professionals and non-professionals alike to discuss their likes and dislikes about our dining experience.

Boards like this democratize these differing opinions

How does one define a “great” meal? Is it the quality/quantity of the food? The uniqueness or variety of the menu? The company? The service? Do your standards/expectations change depending on the type of eating establishment ($$ vs. $$$)? (Can you really compare Ruby Tuesday’s burger to Palena’s?) Is it based on value for your buck? Is it ambience? Or, is it the “seen and be seen” factor? If one course is truly exceptional (or truly bad) does that influence your proclamation of a great/good/bad dining experience? How about consistency?

During RW I went to three restaurants, highly touted on DR.com. My dining companions raved about the food. Although we either shared dishes or had the same dish, I found nothing to write home about. (But there was that risotto. Hmm… risotto… ) At one, the service was good; at the other, it was lacking; and yet at the third, it was truly attentive.

I realize that there cannot be a universal, objective standard, but what are your personal benchmarks? In general, what constitutes a “great” dining experience? What's on your "checklist"?