Restaurant reviewer busted

On Sun, 2 Jan 2011 11:54:29 -0800 (PST), Lyndon Watson
wrote:


First of all, you have no proof whatsoever that she lied about her
identity.You do not know who made the reservation, nor in what name it
was made. As you have also seen in this thread there a quite a lot of
restaurant goes here who do not make reservations in their own name
for any number of reasons. There is no social nor legal nor moral
obligation to give's one's real name or occupation to anyone in a
restaurant.

Secondly, reviewers do not lie about their identities, they just do
not reveal them or their occupation to restaurant personnel....you
know, sort of like most of the posters here not using their real
names.


Your ignorance of business is showing. Everyone is there to make money
and there are a lot of inspections done with no one knowing who the
inspector is. There are reasons why it is done that way, too.


Let's go back again to the part where you have no proof she was lying.
Care to point to your evidence? Put up or shut up. Well, actually, I'd
prefer you shut up either way, but do take the chance to climb down
off that high horse, because the horsepucky all around you is almost
up to your armpits now.

Her credibility is evident from 16 years at the LAT. I don't think she
needs you to verify her expertise and talents. So far you can't tell
shit from Shinola, so who the fuck are you to judge someone who knows
her foods, her wines, can write and earn a nifty living at it. You're
just an Kiwi on Usenet - or at least [email protected] implies
that... what the hell do you know about LAT restaurant critics?


May I call you attention once more to the difference about YOUR
OPINION when saying Ms Virbila lied at the restaurant and any FACTS
that you have to support that opinion? I'm still waiting......

Oh, by the way...you're stupid.
Yeah, I bet you get a lot of pleasure reading all those cute dirty
words. Did you get a boner from it all?

Oh, and fuck the horse you road in on, too.

Boron
 
On 03/01/2011 12:19 PM, gloria.p wrote:


That was a problem for me when I went on a trip to Europe with my
brothers and their wives. One on my SiLs is apparently a princess who
had to stay in nice, expensive hotels. Pay a lot extra for facilities
she would never use. She also likes to spend a lot of time sitting
around in her nice hotel rooms. When I travel I like to spend my time
seeing the sights. All I want is a decent location and clean,
comfortable place to sleep.
 
On 08/01/2011 12:21 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


They taught me a good line at my retirement planning seminar:

I married you for better or worse..... not for breakfast.
 
In article ,
Goomba wrote:


I was going to suggest for military folks in the US who want the radio,
check out the base. I don't know about now, but they have had pretty
good prices, I think.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
[email protected]
 
On 03/01/2011 12:20 PM, David Harmon wrote:

Not just him. According to one of the links posted, the partners had
discussed this particular critic and did not want her reviewing their
operation.
 
"Lyndon Watson" wrote in message
news:ec76bdbf-9ec0-4e98-ac7f-25cc89af1528@h17g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 31, 9:37 am, ImStillMags wrote:

According to her own newspaper she booked under a false name. So we
know she is deceitful. I wouldn't want to do business with such a
person either.

* So then the restaurants should just start checking ID when the person
confirms their reservation.

No match of the name on the ID vs. the name used to make the reservation?
Photograph them, out them as a possible reviewer, kick them out of the
restaurant. That forces them to book under their name or someone else in
their party will have to confirm the reservation so that there is a name/ID
match. Even if they aren't a reviewer it will demand that they make
reservations with an actual real name, not a fake name.

Easy solution, problem solved. If necessary, explain to the customer that
it's due to newspaper reviewers being deceitful and making reservations with
assumed/false/fake names with the authorization of the newspapers publish
their reviews. Put a sign on the door and one by the reservation desk that
all reservations will require an ID check.
 
On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 19:13:57 +0000 (UTC), [email protected] (Steve
Pope) wrote:

Really? I'm still trying to wrap my mind around using a cell phone as
a modem. What is that called - tethering?
I was told I couldn't use two routers at home, so why would I be able
to add a router some other system? Doesn't the internet provider need
the router on record?

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.
 
"Steve B" wrote:


Less notably, but more recently-- Drew Carrie and Frankie Yankovic-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGEsi6y0Ib4

Godfrey's version was a favorite of ours when we were kids. Mom &
dad had about six 78's and Too Fat Polka was one of them---


-snip-

And back to the OP-- The restaurant shot themselves in the foot.
Temporary publicity isn't worth pissing off folks who buy ink by the
barrel. You have to play the game.

There are few reviewers of anything that I pay any mind to-- but if I
saw someone fighting to *not* be reviewed, I could only conclude that
they were hiding something.

Jim
 
Daniel W. Rouse Jr. wrote:


(laugh) Hey, you wouldn't want to serve food to someone without
knowing their name, right? It's critical to the dining experience.

nancy
 
On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 09:07:51 -0800, Steve B wrote:


not the same thing. the owner seemed to want to suppress someone from
criticizing *his* preferences.

blake
 
Back
Top