« The list goes up: 106 in 2006 | Main | Fortunately for me, appearing in Glamour won't ever be an issue »




Batali is a riot! I hadn't heard that one before.

You know, a lot of art isn't intended to please. Some of it is even intended to shock. I don't know about you, but I don't want my food to be shocking. Good food is artistry at work, surely, but it's art intended please.

Even if Buck's food and service were up to par, their action in feeling the need to serve D.C. Foodies with a cease-and-desist letter would still turn me off. Any organization that wants to appear "good" by suppressing negative commentary isn't worthy of our patronage.


What I found interesting from the newest version of that DCFoodies post was this:

"I also don't think that the livelihoods of the employees or business partners of Buck's Fishing and Camping should potentially be affected because of a few bad decisions that were made by the chef."

Because I think that skirts the point entirely. I will go to restaurants with terrible service and/or batshit crazy chefs for many reasons, but to ensure the livelihood of the investors in that restaurant is not one of them.


True, Hannah.

What is also worth noting is how the DCFoodies post illustrates one of the Web's fundamental weaknesses: people can pull their content at any time, thus making other people's aggregate information/analysis shaky and incomplete.

Boy, this little saga has everything, doesn't it?


Interesting pick, Hannah. I thoroughly disagree with their sentiment. Business partners who condone or even tolerate a business failing to serve its customers, and proud of that fact, should be financially hurt. That's bad business at its finest. As for the employees, I don't say we should hurt their livelihood, but it would definitely be in their best interests to work somewhere with a bit more business sense - and a better reputation - than this. What better way to help them along that path than hitting the restaurant in the bottom line?

Shoot, if I felt it necessary for me to ensure the livelihood of servers, I'd never get anywhere for stopping at every restaurant I ran into. Food service is a tough way to make a living.


After a recent trip to Korea in October, I have really become rather lax in the whole restaurant cuisine-thing. Not to sounds like a jaded food snob, but everything thing seems pretty pedestrian here after I was served a bowl of freshly killed octopus/squid (not too sure). When I say freshly killed I mean --still moving and wiggling in your chopsticks and the suction cups are still sticking to your bowl and mouth-- kind of fresh. And yes, I ate it because I was a guest. And to be honest...I would eat it again. But it pretty much proves I will eat anything anywhere without hesitation. My only rule.. I don't wait more than 20 minutes for a chain restaurant.

However my hubba feels restaurants aren't really in the service industry but rather the convenience industry. Most restaurants make bland food that you can easily replicate at home but don't want to/to tired to -take your pick of excuses. The only restaurants he considers outside of this "convenience industry" are Le Cirque et al. (restaurants with inconvenient prices, I guess?).

Judging from Buck's menu... it looks to be a convenience restaurant.

drunken monkey

Noticed this in the Globe and Mail today:


The comments to this entry are closed.

December 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      

On twitter:

    follow me on Twitter