I doubt most would have been caught up in this discussion if it had originated as currently structured. A new thread with Steve Plotnicki as the OP was started. I don't know who came up with the thread title, which I dislike quite a bit.
And I agree with that this thread seems better suited to "Other Culinary Chat" or the trashbin. Yet I got involved posting and continue to read it- somewhat perversely at this point- I must admit.

[/quote]
I made the call, performed the split and came up with the thread title. Mr. Plotnicki started the discussion, so there's no logical reason for his post not to be first. If he wants to edit the subject line, he's free to do so.
The main goal here, which was successfully acheived, was to preserve the Spoon thread. This multi-page tangent -- one certainly worthy of its own thread, regardless of anyone's personal feelings about Mr. Plotnicki -- would have been out of place on the Spoon thread and made it difficult to navigate for anyone coming here seeking information about Spoon Thai. That is why the discussion was split off, and I stand by my decision 100%.
As for where the thread resides, when it was first split off, the discussion was more about Eating Out in Chicagoland than it is now. But come on. Does it really matter where it resides? If you're in a vortex, it doesn't matter where a thread resides, you're going to keep reading it, regardless. If we move it, are you really going to stop reading/participating?
=R=
for the moderators[/quote]
The title of this thread is awful. Really, I'm not sure how connecting "ethnic" restaurants with the use of pre-fab, non-artisanal ingredients (i.e., with cheapness, lack of sophistication, and just general inferiority) can be anything other than blatantly racist. That is, considering that the vaster majority of non-ethnic restaurants* also use pre-fab, non-artisanal ingredients, and in greater amounts. Is this a case of a shortcoming of an individual entity being attributed to an entire swath of people or culture, so long as that entity is a member of "the other," whereas if the shortcoming is found in one of "one's own," it's just an isolated fluke or otherwise shouldn't be considered as representative of "one's own"?
If the objection to the kind of praise Spoon gets here is that certain segment of self-proclaimed restaurant experts automatically give undue credit to an "ethnic" restaurant just for being ethnic (which I could see is possibly condescending and pretentious in a Stuff White People Like kind of way), that's one thing. But to say "most ethnic restaurants are cheap" -- as if most non-ethnic restaurants are not cheap or are less cheap -- is another (in addition to being demonstrably wrong).
*Pertinent to the discussion is one's definition of ethnic vs. non-ethnic restaurants. My (somewhat) tongue-in-cheek definition of a non-ethnic restaurant is one that: (1) serves American or Western-European food; or (2) otherwise is not run by, nor serves the traditional food of, Thais, Koreans, Chinese, Indians, Mexicans, or even (gasp) Albanians. Included in the category of non-ethnic restaurants are: McDonald's, Burger King, Subway, Chili's, Applebee's, IHOP, Denny's, Ruby Tuesday, your corner diner, and pretty much every other restaurant on "Diners, Drive-Ins, and Dives." So, mathematically speaking, which category of restaurant uses more pre-fab, non-artisanal ingredients, in terms of both frequency and quantity? If the above list of restaurants aren't included in your calculus or definition of restaurant, why not?
Stepping off my soapbox now ...