Well, it's interesting, and surely good, that we've all internalized this notion that a track record is factored into every opinion, and first-time posters who slam a place are regarded with reasonable skepticism until proven legitimate. I can't say that I'm surprised if the rest of the world hasn't picked up on this yet, though. Chowhound has a registration system now, but it didn't until the recent acquisition, and as things like the infamous Sweets and Savories refund thread demonstrated, that easy access and anonymity meant it was easy to commit drive-by slander under a false name there (and to add to the insult, if someone did, chefs couldn't respond). Chowhound back then was so loose and ripe for abuse, I've even heard rumors that people we know at LTHForum today occasionally used pseudonyms to post anonymous gibes or silly pranks there.*

Anyway, I'm sure Dave Richards isn't the only chef whose experience with opinions of his place on the Internet was a somewhat questionable and unfair one. And I think this idea that even if your name is AhLuvsMahGrub, you are as respectable, as fixed in your identity and as tied to a reputation based on your posts as Phil Vettel is to his name and work, is a very new one and one that many folks in the business might not share as yet, understandably.

(By the way, is Phil Vettel really his name? Considering that until Siskel came along, the movie reviewer at the Tribune was always Mae Tinee, I've always thought it might be some play on "vittles" or something like that-- Phil Vettel, "fill me with vittles!")

* Anyone who was on the list-serve still have the text of the post from "Marvin," the guy who wanted to know if he should bring his boombox to Alinea and had trouble using the silverware at some restaurants because of his plantar fascitis? JeffB's response was a hoot, too.

I want to chime in once on the issue of LTH being a tastemaker:

I think LTH can be a tastemaker. I'm not so sure LTH is a tastebreaker, though.

In other words, a lot of positive reviews on LTH can have a positive effect on a restaurant, but I think nearly all restaurants can withstand a lot of negative reviews on LTH.

I think this is largely because people interested in going to a restaurant will go there regardless of the negative reviews -- either they don't care about the negative reviews or they don't care enough to read the reviews at all.

I don't think any negative posting about Frontera on LTH is going to have a noticeable effect on the lines there.

One other note: an LTH thread isn't a static thing, like a negative review in a newspaper. In a year, Coal Oven will have even more reviews, and people reading the thread will have a much clearer picture of the restaurant. Coal Oven is perhaps not able to handle the crowds right now. But, in 2 months, when they are, the thread will be updated, and people who were wary now will head over there.

If Vettel slams a restaurant that's having service issues in its first 6 months, but two years later the restaurant has worked out the kinks and is turning out some of the best food in its class, it's very unlikely he'll re-review it. That's just not the case here.

Oh, and one more great Vettel bit from the recent past: Movie review: Hannibal Rising

I don't know if it's still the case, as I haven't picked up Chicago Magazine in a while, but all their restaurant reviews used code names. One simply got to recognize the little code that best reflected one's own taste. But that was how Chicago kept reviewers from being sway-able. No one knew who they were.

Mike G wrote:(By the way, is Phil Vettel really his name? Considering that until Siskel came along, the movie reviewer at the Tribune was always Mae Tinee, I've always thought it might be some play on "vittles" or something like that-- Phil Vettel, "fill me with vittles!")

When I was writing restaurant reviews professionally thirty-five years ago my editor insisted that I use a pseudonym. Not for any reasons having to do with the need for anonymity, but, since I was also writing theater criticism, he didn't want to admit that his staff was so small.

I was Graham Curry (those of a certain age will recall The Galloping Gourmet, Graham Kerr).

My most dramatic memory of the period occurred after a middling review of an ice cream parlor. I was called into the editor's office and was told that the owner of that establishment had called him and threatened to break my legs. But I was assured that I shouldn't worry. As the editor explained, "I know this guy and he's crazy." As you might imagine, I felt much better.

As for the issue at hand, sometimes critics forget that their words affect people and their life chances. To be sure we cannot - by ourselves - break a restaurant that is otherwise loved, but everytime we persuade others to attend or avoid a restaurant, we have an impact. And we need to be self-reflexive about that power. As modest as it might sometimes be.

And it is entirely reasonable that we should be the target of both love and brickbats.

First off, let me say I avoided the Coal-Fired and the Smoque situations.

But I do think that most sensible people:

- Would like to know when a place is overwhelmed, and that it might be a good idea to avoid it for a week or two;
- Understand that a place that has been open for less than a month is still working out the kinks.
- Tend to discount the service-related negative experiences of other posters unless they are echoed by many more.

I think we are looking for what is on the plate, and any negative post needs to have detail as to what was not good for it to be useful. We are not Metromix and we do not generally look favorably upon posts whose content, at most, is "Overpriced, awful service and the food stinks." Gotta have more meat on the bones to be useful and meaningful.

As for the rest, I like MJN's work just fine, but I think he is pissing in the wind on this one. The Internet allows everyone to publish their opinion, and it is their choice as to how anonymous they wish to be. Me, I am not too anonymous, what with my handle mostly being my name, and my name, email and phone number being all over the place with the GNRs. And I love Rick Bayless as a person, from what I know, and find most of what he has done to be admirable. But I am no longer so thrilled with his restaurants or food, as I have posted. Not bad places, but not places I usually would choose to frequent any more.

One can argue about whether this Internet is a good or bad thing. But it is the way it is, and no amount of argument, hand wringing or anything else is going to change it. And in a little while, such concerns will seem as quaint as the argument about slide rules versus calculators, or typewriters versus word processing software. Or even horses versus automobiles.

I understand the frustration with negative reviews, and the desire to confront, correct or convert the critic. But, Michael, I would humbly suggest that while the Internet allows opinions to be much more widely shared than they would have been just a few years ago, it also makes it a lot easier for the restaurants to gauge that same opinion. To randomly pick on Lee for no particular reason, a chef may not know who Leek is, but the chef can easily know Lee's opinion if he/she wishes to, which would not have been possible those few years ago. And since it is likely a detailed and considered opinion, even if it is negative, it is likely to be of some use to that chef.

Sure, the chef does not have the opportunity to confront the critic, or even know who the critic is, but what constructive purpose would that serve? The chef does have every opportunity to respond with their food and service, as well as in the same forum that the original opinion was posted if they wish. I hope, and believe, that the moderators here will do their best to make it a fair and welcoming forum for the chef to reply.

I believe that is progress in every sense, but if Michael chooses to consider that it is not, he is welcome to his opinion. But the world will not change, internet posters will not be required to post their real names, and in a few years, I expect such concerns will seem quaintly old fashioned, if they do not already.

One can argue about whether this Internet is a good or bad thing. But it is the way it is

Ah, LTHForum, the restaurant industry's equivalent of discovering your teenage daughter has a video that's gotten 2 million hits on YouTube...

Well, you can't say we don't get responses. Someone said too bad an interesting point is raised at New City but you can only talk about it here, so now at least New City will shortly be linking to the discussion here-- which is why I've had to move it out of Site Chat (which is restricted to registered users) and into Other Culinary Chat.

Though I don't think the real issue is anonymity; it's whether or LTHers slam restaurants based on having a bad experience, or just because we've had a bad day. I don't know that anonymity has any bearing on this issue at all - frankly, I think I'm meaner in person than when I've had time to reason and write out my thoughts.

We aren't exactly anonymous, either - if you take issue with what I've said, you have FAR more access to me than you do to a newspaper reviewer. You can open up a dialogue with me inside a thread. You can add pictorial evidence proving me wrong. You can start another post. You can lurk on the events board and arrange to be at an event I attend. If all else fails, you can PM me - try doing any of that with Phil Vettel.

More importantly, during my brief tenure at LTH, I have always felt that this is a community with a real commitment to the truth about food, and I am both humbled and honored to be a part of it. I am inclined to believe that this knowledge keeps me and many others from "car crash day" posts.

Mhays wrote:More importantly, during my brief tenure at LTH, I have always felt that this is a community with a real commitment to the truth about food, and I am both humbled and honored to be a part of it. I am inclined to believe that this knowledge keeps me and many others from "car crash day" posts.

This is precisely why LTH is my primary source for local food information. Absent from this forum are the "This place sucks" posts which can be found at a myriad of other forums----It is my belief that members go out of their way to "self-police" themselves when posting their opinions. That being said, I am not naive----I'm sure that the moderators still have to remove a miniscule number of posts written on "car crash days"

cito wrote:

Mhays wrote:More importantly, during my brief tenure at LTH, I have always felt that this is a community with a real commitment to the truth about food, and I am both humbled and honored to be a part of it. I am inclined to believe that this knowledge keeps me and many others from "car crash day" posts.

This is precisely why LTH is my primary source for local food information. Absent from this forum are the "This place sucks" posts which can be found at a myriad of other forums----It is my belief that members go out of their way to "self-police" themselves when posting their opininions. That being said, I am not naive----I'm sure that the moderators still have to remove a miniscule number of posts written on "car crash days"

And if someone were to post a “this place sucks” comment, I can just about guarantee that within minutes, someone (probably not a moderator) would respond with a query like “could you be a little more specific?”

Over time, in some ways, the duties of moderators have become somewhat easier in the sense that the community has developed a kind of intelligence that not only acts as a voice of conscience and constrains individuals from throwing out their unsubstantiated comments but that also directs the “will of the community” to question or reject such comments.

A "this place sucks" post begets more "this place sucks" posts because when people read vents like that, they tend to draw impressions about the community that spawned those monosyllabic utterances. There are few posts like that on LTH, so there will be few posts like that on LTH.

Hammond

Reading thru this thread, one recent bit of LTH love kept coming back to me over and over--a great compliment and a great way of looking at what we're doing here, posted on Chicagoist and pointed out by Vital Information in the LTH: Total Media Domination thread and echoed by Hammond above:

Vital Information wrote:Nicest thing anyone's ever said about LTHForum (and MikeG's publicity dream continues!) from the Chicagoist:

Menuism allow everyone to be a critic, LTHForum teaches it members - and by extension, its readers - how to be a critic....[emphasis added].

Not that we need to break arms trying to pat ourselves on the back, but it's a nice way to look at being part of this community. Being a semi-active participant in the discussions here has definitely made me a more thoughtful, responsible writer in ways that no full-fledged editor who is paid to edit my work has.

dicksond wrote:Sure, the chef does not have the opportunity to confront the critic, or even know who the critic is, but what constructive purpose would that serve? The chef does have every opportunity to respond with their food and service, as well as in the same forum that the original opinion was posted if they wish. I hope, and believe, that the moderators here will do their best to make it a fair and welcoming forum for the chef to reply.

I think this is a key point. Business people want to understand how their brand is perceived, and how to influence that perception. If an owner takes time to try and address service or quality issues, whether it be in the store, on the phone, or after reading about his/her place getting blasted here... that makes an impression on me.

As Ramon so wisely pointed out above, context is everything. With very few exceptions, criticisms and negative comments on message forums do not exist in a vacuum. Most posters here have histories and the nature of message forums demands that all comments should be viewed within the context of a poster's larger body of entries. To not do so is completely missing the boat.

If a reasonably informed person comes to this forum and reads a supremely negative post, I'd hope that they'd immediately consider the poster's history, number of posts, etc. before accepting the negative comments as definitive. Reading a flame from someone with 10 posts means very little to me and, I hope, to most people. It's basically noise.

Where I believe the rubber meets the road on this issue -- as far as LTH management taking a role in it -- is in keeping strict controls on member's handles. At some point, we're all accountable for what we write under our handles. There is only one of me and as long as I can only post under that handle, folks will learn whether they consider me a credible source of information or not. Again, this is the nature of message forums. If someone wants to come here, read what is written and ignore such context, then there's nothing we can do, regardless. But we certainly cannot censor or edit opinions without changing the very nature of what we are. That'll always be up to the reader to do.

On a separate count, I enjoy MJN's work quite a bit but lately he seems to be a little pre-occupied with what other media outlets are doing. In the past month or so, in his entries at New City, he's taken LTH, Bill Daley and the Chicago Tribune Magazine to task, all over separate issues. I don't know if this is a function New City's editorial mission or if something else is driving it. But, in the context of MJN's work, I find it a noteworthy departure which may indicate more about what's going on with him/New City than what's going on at these other media outlets.

=R=

Recently, having enjoyed a meal at a relatively new restaurant, I mentioned to the owner that I had found out about it on the LTH board.

He scowled and exclaimed, "LTH? Well, I hope you'll be nicer to us than the @#$% who came in here drunk and then posted a nasty review."

I was surprised by the vehemence of his response, but it got me thinking. Clearly, this is no longer a little echo chamber of like-minded foodies. We now have the attention of many restaurant owners and managers as well as the public. And, I believe, with the growing influence of LTH, comes an equivalent responsibility. The time actually may have arrived when a gratuitously snarky review, while momentarily satisfying to its writer, may do real damage to a restaurant's reputation and/or business. Likewise, it could unfairly hurt and demoralize someone who is putting his or her guts into what we all know is a tremendously tough business.
Sure, there are crappy restaurants, and we have every right to point them out. There are also many fine restaurants that occasionally screw up, and sometimes badly. They're fair game, too. But I think we also have to realize the growing reach and power (for better or worse) of our words here, and always choose them with discretion.

Paul SL
I know who I am, that's who.

I wish you'd name the restaurant, so I can make a point to not visit them in the future.

It's fine to be unhappy with a review, but it strikes me as fairly stupid to badmouth anonymous person A to anonymous person B. To express it to a customer, especially using the language you supplied, is very stupid.

gleam wrote:I wish you'd name the restaurant, so I can make a point to not visit them in the future.

It's fine to be unhappy with a review, but it strikes me as fairly stupid to badmouth anonymous person A to anonymous person B. To express it to a customer, especially using the language you supplied, is very stupid.

Ed,

Paul SL is really more than anonymous person B, don't you think? He's a guy that many of us have met.

Anyway, here's the scenario: a restaurant gets blasted by an LTH Forum poster who, according to the owner of the place, was blasted himself. It happens. It's unfortunate. Here's the thing, though, and I think this is Paul's point: power is exercised through posts, and we would do well to be careful how we exercise that power.

On an entirely unrelated note: I was listening to Steve Dahl as I went around to garden stores this afternoon. Was he talking with your employer...Mr. S? Just curious. I never listened to enough to figure out who the guy was, exactly.

Hope you are well.

Hammond

Hi,

There is the potential possibility this restauranteur is reacting to one of our one-hit-wonders. Those people who register to write a scathing review solely to damage reputations, then move on with their lives. Anyone with any experience on this board would not likely give that review much weight, if any.

Of course, people can receive one hundred compliments with few being memorable. They never seem to forget the criticism.

Regards,

Hammond: I meant from the point of view of the owner.

And yes, probably, Skin does about 10-15 radio shows a week around the country.

Speaking of which, we (mrskin.com) are featured somewhat prominently in Judd Apatow's new movie "Knocked Up". Part of a subplot is concluded by loading our site on screen. Even without that, it's a really great movie if you liked, say, The 40 Year Old Virgin, or Freaks and Geeks. Or even if you never saw those.

Paul SL wrote:Recently, having enjoyed a meal at a relatively new restaurant, I mentioned to the owner that I had found out about it on the LTH board.

He scowled and exclaimed, "LTH? Well, I hope you'll be nicer to us than the @#$% who came in here drunk and then posted a nasty review."

I was surprised by the vehemence of his response, but it got me thinking.

Sometimes, there's a tendency to overthink. Who knows why the owner reacted the way he did -- maybe he's paranoid, maybe he's having a bad day? I don't know. But, anecdotally, I have friends in the restaurant biz who are consistently reviewed well, but the idea of LTH, et al., sends a chill down their collective spines. I think it stems from nowhere but the idea that someone could post something, anything, about their restaurant, and all of their nervous energy goes into worrying about the bad reviews, rather than focusing on the good that great reviews bring them.

As for the person you're speaking of, maybe he's unjustifiably using LTH as a scapegoat for a flawed business; or maybe he's unjustifiably focusing on the one "bad" review, whatever that was, and is ignoring, perhaps, the good that getting internet press may have done for his business. (After all, you wouldn't have been a paying customer there if it wasn't for LTH.)

While I agree that fairness in posting reviews is required, sometimes being fair is not being complimentary. And the chips will fall where they may, with or without LTH, or yelp, etc.

gleam wrote:Speaking of which, we're featured somewhat prominently in Judd Apatow's new movie "Knocked Up". Part of a subplot is concluded by loading our site on screen.

Are you saying that a character in the movie visibly downloads LTHForum? Logo and all?

aschie30 wrote:Are you saying that a character in the movie visibly downloads LTHForum? Logo and all?

Um, I think Mr. Skin is associated with a different site.

Aaron Deacon wrote:

aschie30 wrote:Are you saying that a character in the movie visibly downloads LTHForum? Logo and all?

Um, I think Skin is associated with a different site.

Oh, Mr. Skin, is it? (Disclaimer: Only heard about it.) Maybe I'm tired, but I thought he was referring to LTH forum. Oops.

Anecdote.

I had this friend at York High School in Elmhurst, Jane Barwis, who I lost track of after she moved to LA and changed her name to Yana Nirvana. I found her again through Mr. Skin (she was in the X-rated "Cinderella"), and for that reason alone I revere the site, though I have never subscribed. (No, really, I haven't).

Hammond

I was trying to use a bit of discretion myself. The person the owner mentioned is a frequent contributor here, most of whose postings I enjoy and often agree with. I think he was just having a bad day, and took it out on the restaurant. I went back and looked at his review. In light of my own experience, I believe he was unnecessarily harsh. As Hammond says, we need to be careful exercising the power this forum affords us. Now, I'm off to Philadelphia, where I plan to prepare a glowing report on my brother-in-law's' restaurant.

aschie30 wrote:

Aaron Deacon wrote:

aschie30 wrote:Are you saying that a character in the movie visibly downloads LTHForum? Logo and all?

Um, I think Skin is associated with a different site.

Oh, Mr. Skin, is it? (Disclaimer: Only heard about it.) Maybe I'm tired, but I thought he was referring to LTH forum. Oops.

You're not alone.

Regards,

David Hammond wrote:I must admit, though, that unless there's some psychological advantage to having a screen name that's different than your real name (and although I proposed one such advantage, I'm not sure it's valid), I don't really get the point of having a screen name that's different than your real name. I'm not against it, I'm not for it; I just don't get it.

All the reasons others have mentioned are good ones. There are also those of us who'd prefer that our loony ex-spouse not be able to Google up our movements. Or so I hear.