I have no reason to doubt Tobermory, but I do wonder why this is all allowed to be hashed out on LTHForum. I see very little difference between accusing a business of running away with your money (apparently allowed here) and accusing a restaurant of serving contaminated food (clearly not allowed here). Mr. Forlines is being accused here of doing something criminal. Credit card companies, police, and courts seem far more appropriate venues for this discussion.

He's part of "our community". Why shouldn't it be hashed out here? All he has to do is address the thread he started.

nicinchic wrote:He's part of "our community". Why shouldn't it be hashed out here? All he has to do is address the thread he started.

because I guess I see hashing it out here as a pretty clear violation of the LTHForum POsting Guidelines. Maybe I'm just misreading the guidelines, but here's what they say:

Posting Guidelines wrote:- Some types of posts have legal implications for you and the site. Please refrain from accusations of criminal activity, health code violations, or other wrongdoing. If your complaint is serious and provable, please take it to the proper authorities. Further, we find reports of restaurant and purveyor violations or closures, regardless of the circumstances, to be an area ripe for competitor abuse. We will remove these posts unless substantiated with a published source, e.g. a link to a quality published account.

I think this is a very good guideline.

Kenny,

I wrestled with what you are saying a few days ago. The exception on reporting healthcode related issues is when there is a third party source to refer to. When I looked over at his website with the contents largely removed from the home page, except, "The Soylent Fuchsia project is cancelled due to ineffable reasons." Pretty much heresay evaporated with everything known directly from the source.

One post was pulled who accused him of theft. I pointed out it is more like a business deal gone bad, which are usually settled in small claims court. Since very likely PayPal would arrange the refund, Mr. Forline would be an additional $100+ in the hole and not the guest.

If there are inconsistencies, sometimes it is borne from the irregularity of the entire situation.

Regards,

Kennyz wrote:

Posting Guidelines wrote:- Some types of posts have legal implications for you and the site. Please refrain from accusations of criminal activity, health code violations, or other wrongdoing. If your complaint is serious and provable, please take it to the proper authorities. Further, we find reports of restaurant and purveyor violations or closures, regardless of the circumstances, to be an area ripe for competitor abuse. We will remove these posts unless substantiated with a published source, e.g. a link to a quality published account.

You are absolutely right. Mea Culpa. The above-quoted proscription is extremely broad and what we've been discussing re Forlines clearly falls within "wrongdoing," if not "criminal activity."

My bad. Shall I edit away what I posted above?

--Rich

RAB,

If you went in the direction of criminal activity, please edit. If you see other posts, I think I read them all, that do, too. Let me know in a PM.

Most people never read the guidelines until a moderator points out they crossed the line.

Regards,

Maybe tobermory can twitter him? http://twitter.com/soylentfuchsia I don't think he'll friend you on facebook though.

Cathy2 wrote:If you went in the direction of criminal activity, please edit.

The "direction of criminal activity?" Woah. That language is way too imprecise for this recovering lawyer. And for that matter, "wrongdoing?"

Cathy2 wrote:Most people never read the guidelines until a moderator points out they crossed the line.

I read 'em, but forgot this part. Now I read it again and I don't understand how it is applied.

Cathy2 wrote: Pretty much heresay evaporated with everything known directly from the source.

How does heresay come into play? At what point is it kosher to discuss criminal activity? After arraignment? Post-conviction?

Just seeking some clarity,
--Rich

I see what Cathy's saying, and it seems reasonable. Maybe no one has actually accused him of anything, and this is just a discussion of what people have seen happening, all of which could turn out to be explained by something quite innocent. For example, he could have gotten really sick and been unable to correspond for awhile. Who knows.

Hi,

My sense of this situation was an ambitious guy who wanted to jump past the building blocks of experience. Well, he didn't jump quite high enough, caught his foot on the virtual fence and toppled over.

He likely made several pf the early career errors in the article I referred to earlier. If he really wants this culinary career, he will dust himself off and get back on as a line-cook. Learn his trade and earn his slot in the culinary field.

It's a mis-step, unfortunately one made very public by his own gorilla publicity efforts.

Regards,

Cathy2 wrote:It's a mis-step, unfortunately one made very public by his own gorilla publicity efforts.

Although "gorilla" might apply, I think you meant "guerrilla."

The GP wrote:

Cathy2 wrote:It's a mis-step, unfortunately one made very public by his own gorilla publicity efforts.

Although "gorilla" might apply, I think you meant "guerrilla."

Ugh, I should really use spell check ... but you knew what I intended to say.

Regards,

The GP wrote:

Cathy2 wrote:It's a mis-step, unfortunately one made very public by his own gorilla publicity efforts.

Although "gorilla" might apply, I think you meant "guerrilla."

Gorilla Marketing?

First, let me say I'm no hipster. I got an e-mail (now I know we ALL got the e-mail - I didn't follow any of the discussion on this threat until after the event was unceremoniously cancelled and I searched under Soylent Fushcia to see if anyone else was in the same boat or had heard something about a refund) describing an event at a venue I was interested in checking out, with a menu that sounded tasty, that was BYOB (always a plus in my book), and had two dates listed. I chose the second date because I could not make the first date. I paid for my two 'tickets' via a trusted payment method. Then the event was postponed for a later date - for which I was notified via a polite e-mail. OK, the next date worked too. Then prior to the second date I checked the Soylent Fuschia website and the event was cancelled - this time no polite e-mail. When I tried to contact the purveyor/chef/organizer I did not receive a response - leaving me out $112. Had The event actually gone forward and the food was inconsistent/lousy/whatever, that would have been one thing (especially since I'm not much of a foodie, my level of expectation is usually set pretty low) - at least I would have had a nice evening out with my husband, our own wine, and a meal that I neither had to cook nor clean up after. My beef is that I received nothing for my money and the purveyor did not respond to my e-mails asking for it back and has apparently not to date responded to the PayPay trouble resolution ticket. I contacted Kitchen Chicago because I don't want this to happen to anyone else. Basically I've written off the money - it won't break me, but it will keep me from participating in something like this in the future. As for those who seem to think that this was practically to be expected, I'm sorry I disagree. It was being held not in someone's apartment basement but at a commercial licensed community style kitchen rental and paid for via not a mailed check or cash but by a national (international?) payment method. I can hardly be faulted for trying to get my money back or for being irritated at the lack of communication from the event host. If wanting something for my moeny makes me a L7 square then so be it. And might I add, to whomever it was who was so rude to suggest that - screw you.

And one last thing. I'm done with this topic (I assume we all are). My only further post about this debacle will be in the unlikely event I get my money back.

Tobermory wrote:If wanting something for my moeny makes me a L7 square then so be it. And might I add, to whomever it was who was so rude to suggest that - screw you.

WHOA there...I understand you're frustrated, but let's not fly off the handle here. If you were to reread the page of this thread where the "L7" comment was made, you'd see this not too far below it (by the same poster):

Mike G wrote:Obviously I'm being tongue in cheek about this, and in the same situation, I would pursue whatever my reasonable options were.

Strong language aside, Tobermory was treated quite harshly. She posted about her experience with an event that had already generated five pages of discussion. She simply said that she hopes she gets her money back. She was then treated as if she was the gullible one who should have foreseen this and shouldn't complain once it happened. There's a concurrent thread suggesting that we don't always treat new members with the proper respect. I think we owe active members the same respect.

Darren72 wrote:Strong language aside, Tobermory was treated quite harshly. She posted about her experience with an event that had already generated five pages of discussion. She simply said that she hopes she gets her money back. She was then treated as if she was the gullible one who should have foreseen this and shouldn't complain once it happened. There's a concurrent thread suggesting that we don't always treat new members with the proper respect. I think we owe active members the same respect.

Agreed. Look, I can see where the L-7 comment was indeed provocative but it wasn't pointed at Toberymory directly. Nonetheless, there's a lot of innuendo being strewn about here, so please, let's cease with the personal attacks and the near-personal attacks and keep to the topic at hand.

Because of the ongoing nature of some of the issues presented here, we'd like to keep the thread open but if the personal stuff continues, we may have to lock it.

Thanks,

=R=
for the moderators

really a shame a thread like this has led to what it has, a long time poster, (I think tobermory has been here since 2004...), having their response/rational questioned over an issue that I would have probably responded similiarly too, if not done more.. money is money.

I have seen it before on other forums, a troll comes on, starts sh*t, and causes decisiveness, and hard feelings between good members.

I wish tobermory the best of luck getting their cash back, play hardball.

Oh codswallop.

Tobermory certainly has the right to get pissed at my provocations in return, they were certainly exaggerated enough, but spare me anything about peoples' poor widdle feewings. It's teh internet, cowboy up.

Giving money to a young inexperienced stranger on the internet for the second example of an event that promised pretty strongly that its first example was going to be an epically hilarious train wreck was, let me put it as gently as I can, asking for trouble. (Hey, who's up for another New Year's Eve at Cajun Charlie's?) I am baffled what compelled someone who did that if they were NOT under the spell of the mystique of the underground restaurant, as Tobermory now says; but in any case, the mystique of the underground restaurant and whether that particular emperor has any clothes to speak of is certainly a legitimate subject for commentary here whether or not it has anything to do with Tobermory's particulars. If that reduces to a simple question of money for you, fine, turn LTHForum into Ask Mr. Consumer Crusader if you want, but that doesn't preclude me commenting on the part that interests me.

Mike G wrote:Giving money to a young inexperienced stranger on the internet for the second example of an event that promised pretty strongly that its first example was going to be an epically hilarious train wreck was, let me put it as gently as I can, asking for trouble. (Hey, who's up for another New Year's Eve at Cajun Charlie's?) I am baffled what compelled someone who did that if they were NOT under the spell of the mystique of the underground restaurant, as Tobermory now says; but in any case, the mystique of the underground restaurant and whether that particular emperor has any clothes to speak of is certainly a legitimate subject for commentary here whether or not it has anything to do with Tobermory's particulars. If that reduces to a simple question of money for you, fine, turn LTHForum into Ask Mr. Consumer Crusader if you want, but that doesn't preclude me commenting on the part that interests me.

Mikeg, I found your L7 comment funny, and tongue in cheek.

I saw right through the OP with his brash, cocky, intriduction to the site, and even if this type of dinner interested me, I wouldnt give the guy a penny. I was kind of surprised how some seemd to warm to his "charms".

either way I am carefull with my $$$, but I feel bad for anyone who lost $$, especially over a hit and run poster.

its all good, and this thread has been a funny, and intersting reading if nothing more.

Very sorry anyone was burned by the young master. If it were my $, I'd pursue him to hell on principle.

Maybe his mom will write him a note.

Mike G wrote:Tobermory certainly has the right to get pissed at my provocations in return, they were certainly exaggerated enough, but spare me anything about peoples' poor widdle feewings. It's teh internet, cowboy up.

This is LTHForum, not the wild west.

Mike G wrote:Giving money to a young inexperienced stranger on the internet for the second example of an event that promised pretty strongly that its first example was going to be an epically hilarious train wreck was, let me put it as gently as I can, asking for trouble. (Hey, who's up for another New Year's Eve at Cajun Charlie's?)

I partially agree but as I alluded to upthread, there's a big difference between getting an unsatisfying meal and getting absolutely nothing for your money. The fact that the first event took place and was reported about here is enough to lead one to reasonbly believe that the second event would at least take place. And, as others have mentioned, with Kitchen Chicago and Paypal being conduits for the event, there was nothing particularly underground about it (at least not in my opinion). Those are 2 entities that clearly denote mainstream to me.

The bottom line is that there isn't really much of a surprising story here. And what happened is less dramatic than this thread in many ways. Since the tix were purchased thru paypal, unrequited buyers have plenty of recourse. The outcome of the meal wasn't particularly surprising to me, either. This kid would have had to have been an exceptional talent to pull this off as flawlessly as he promised he would. Instead, what he proved was the age-old adage: there's no substitute for experience. But the slim possibility of witnessing something beyond the curve is what drew me to the dinner. I thought I'd either get a great meal, a great story or both. Unfortunately, the food was just ok and the story wasn't so great, either. At least learning about Kitchen Chicago, which seems like a great venue, is something I'm very happy to have taken away from the experience.

=R=

Mike G wrote:Hey, who's up for another New Year's Eve at Cajun Charlie's?

C'mon, Mike. You know that was a Fat Tuesday. And it wasn't even that Fat, since no one liked the food, when it eventually came out.

Someone has to keep the memory alive, Tom. Such things must never be forgotten...

Well, as I stated a few times, the people were the highlight for me, and Andrew's mom was one of those with whom I connected (we're both named Cynthia, plus she's about my age, and we had a lot of interests in common). She promised to send me a book she thought I'd like, which I just received, and the return address enabled me to find her phone number and email address, so I let her know about the storm that had blown up here. She responded that Andrew was horrified to learn that people hadn't gotten their refunds, as he had reversed the charges with PayPal as soon as he canceled the dinner. Now that he knows that the refunds did not go through, he will contact PayPal and find out what went wrong. But the refunds were intended and should have already been credited.

My reaction to the whole family was that things would have been handled correctly. There was just too much love, joy, support, and general "niceness" for this to be crooked. Andrew did not skip town with the money, there was just an electronic snafu, which we can hope is quickly resolved. But it's one more reason why I continue to resist joining PayPal. It is not without its problems.

Andrew has moved back to Colorado, to be near his family. I suspect the reception he got here let him know that he had more to learn before he could take Chicago by storm.

But for any who were out funds, know that an effort is being made to find out why you didn't already get your money back.

Cynthia wrote:Well, as I stated a few times, the people were the highlight for me, and Andrew's mom was one of those with whom I connected (we're both named Cynthia, plus she's about my age, and we had a lot of interests in common). She promised to send me a book she thought I'd like, which I just received, and the return address enabled me to find her phone number and email address, so I let her know about the storm that had blown up here. She responded that Andrew was horrified to learn that people hadn't gotten their refunds, as he had reversed the charges with PayPal as soon as he canceled the dinner. Now that he knows that the refunds did not go through, he will contact PayPal and find out what went wrong. But the refunds were intended and should have already been credited.

My reaction to the whole family was that things would have been handled correctly. There was just too much love, joy, support, and general "niceness" for this to be crooked. Andrew did not skip town with the money, there was just an electronic snafu, which we can hope is quickly resolved. But it's one more reason why I continue to resist joining PayPal. It is not without its problems.

Andrew has moved back to Colorado, to be near his family. I suspect the reception he got here let him know that he had more to learn before he could take Chicago by storm.

But for any who were out funds, know that an effort is being made to find out why you didn't already get your money back.

This is above and beyond, Cynthia. Thanks for the calm work for the community and for Mr. Forlines and fam.

Given the incredible confluence of unlikely events that would have needed to occur for Andrew to still be unaware of the problem until just now, this story strains the limits of credulity. But that said, I suppose the benefit of the doubt is in order so long as everything is set right.

ok, i actually just registered on this site just to respond to all this.
andrews forlines is a dear friend of mine. those of you who attended the dinner would know me as the blonde waitress. and you all were lovely.
andrew actually moved back to colorado the day before the second dinner was to happen, kind of out of the blue. i think he realized that he wasn't fully prepared to do what he wanted to here, plus he missed his family, and just colorado in general. he really is a dear boy, even if he did make a couple messes here. i feel really weird talking about him on here like this, and kind of hope he doesn't see it!
what with all the sudden decisions and moving across the country and all, he probably had trouble finding time to settle accounts. plus i think he may have been a little embarrassed to admit defeat. but he is not a criminal, and i know he will set all accounts right. he just may take a little prodding. let me know if you try emailing him and everything and still have no luck, and i will try calling him myself.
he's a good kid, and i hope he gets everything sorted out soon, because he has a lot of passion and potential.

Fascinating the twists and turns this whole thing has taken. Way better than TV. One of the better $50 I've spent all year, and it keeps reaping rewards!