This thread brought back memories of last September.

My wife and daughter went to check out Honey1 based on the positive comments made on this board. We went, and were disapointed. We did not comment on the food, but on the physical aspects of the place.

I think that my opinion is just as important as anyone elses, on this board, and should be respected. But my comments about Honey1 were taken to task. Things like stone cold food, fries that came with the ketchup already on them, but no salt, a burger that was also stone cold, and a lack of napkins, salt and pepper.

I was told that I was wrong in expecting a professional dining experience, since Mr. Adams was not trained in operating a restaurant. The fact that the price was the same, did not seem to make any difference to them.



I did make the mistake of making a couple negative comments about the Edgebrook Diner. Things like getting our meal peicemeal, as bad as getting the toast long after our meals were finished. Waiting 20 minutes for bacon and eggs. But Nooooo, I was told that the charm of the place excused the 20 minute wait for bacon/eggs/toast/coffee.

That cured me to two things, first making comments that upset the "regulars" and ever going to the places that are highly recomended by the "regulars"

Based on that experience I rarely comment on one of this board "favs", because if you do, you will have to defend your opinions.

Around Easter, I started a thread about butter. About the fact that Jewel, Meyer, etc, all sold the same butter from the same plant, but at different price points. A "regular" came back and questioned my motives, and wanted to know why I asked people to check the plant ID on the inner packages. All this time I thought this was a forum, an exchange of information, from equals, but I learned differently.

And what the hell is so bad about "meat Jello"?

you will have to defend your opinions.

I really have to ask... what's wrong with that?

If they're yours, defend 'em! Stand up for them! Wave 'em proudly! Revel in the fun of being a gadfly! It's not like this is your job and you're ticking the boss off with possible real repercussions. It's just a food board on the Innernut. Enjoy marching to the different drum!

Frankly, I don't get the idea that you can slam a place that lots of people like and not expect some of those same people to rise to its defense. Now, probably a few comments crossed the line a little, though by Internet standards this place is incredibly civil, but you've got to expect some response when you take a well-liked place and scorched-earth-slaughter every single thing about it.

Likewise, Sabersix, I hardly see that you were ill-treated in that Honey 1 thread long ago, but you weren't unquestioningly agreed with in your complaints about napkins and credit card processing being the primary criteria for judging barbecue joints, that's for sure. If that's too rough and tumble, well, sorry. I don't remember the Edgebrook Diner thing but as for the butter thing, someone raised the suspicion that you were using our community to do some kind of market research without being upfront about it and when you were asked you offered an answer that increased, rather than allayed, such suspicions. Even if that was all a big misunderstanding, it hardly represents some breach of the honest exchange of information between equal participants. In fact, it represents vigilance to ensure that LTHForum remains just that.

But to get back to the main point. Folks, if you express a strong opinion you're going to get one back. You shouldn't have to deal with incivility but this site is NOT going to protect you from other people disagreeing with you equally strongly. It's that simple.

I think AP Deli has very good corned beef.

No one agrees with me. But, I still think so.

Some one said:

"Attacking someone because they express an opinion will do nothing but drive away potential contributors. The only reason for the post was because I found reviews on the site and it seemed appropriate to post my thoughts. Disagree? Fine. Simply attempt to disagree in a rational manner."

Did anyone in the great butter discussion think I waited almost a year, and 80some posts to start doing market research?

And for me it is not the reasonable exchange of opinions, it it the elitest
attitudes of the "regulars", that bothers me.

Who died and left you guys in charge of what is BBQ and what is not? You "regulars" are of the opinion that if it is not smoked, it is bad, i.e "meat jello" or am I missing something and "meat Jello" is a positive expression. I guess the 1,000's of people that go to Gale Street Inn, to the Anchor, Fat Willies, to just about every other place in Chicago that does not have a smoker, for years and years, are food illiterate, and have no taste.

The "regulars" are right and the rest of us are wrong. Someone posts for the first time, he is a shill, but you guys can pack Honey1, but cuz everyone does it, it is OK. And as to market research, this board is so small, the sample rate would not mean anything, but yet, I am accused of that sin.

As someone said, express a strong opinion, you should expect a strong responce.

YourPalWill wrote:I think AP Deli has very good corned beef.

No one agrees with me. But, I still think so.

Will, I believe I'm on the record as being a fan of AP.

Had a fine corned beef there one St. Patty's day...

Hammond

Sorry to break it to you, Will, (don't tell nobody) I like AP CB too! I'm convinced I even backed you on this in another place and time.

Just buy AP Deli corned beef by the pound, don't tell anybody where its from, and make your own sandwiches out of it. Your guests will be pleased. Whatever you do, do not tell.

-ramon

Ramon wrote:Sorry to break it to you, Will, (don't tell nobody) I like AP CB too! I'm convinced I even backed you on this in another place and time.

Just buy AP Deli corned beef by the pound, don't tell anybody where its from, and make your own sandwiches out of it. Your guests will be pleased. Whatever you do, do not tell.

-ramon

AP is also, I think, an excellent example of a place that is favored by some, disfavored by some...perhaps for good reason all around. I believe it is inconsistent, but I've had good luck the several times I've been there.

Hammond

I just wanted to take this opportunity to thank LTHForum for over two successful years of engaging conversation, enriching knowledge, and facinating and delicious food.

When this site started, I had never met a soul from any other Chicago food forum and since my first dinner with JimInLoganSquare at Friendship Chinese, I've met dozens and dozens of warm, welcoming, intelligent, and friendly people. This crowd represents a diverse group of opinons on the things that they are passionate about, yet still manage to channel their love of food into an overwhelmingly positive experience. The past two-plus years of LTHForum have been an unexpected pleasure.

The group of people that I see at LTH events and read from on the board is changing and growing all the time, and it fascinates me.

For those of you who have never had a chance to meet some of the faces behind the posts, take the time to show up at an event. There's always another chair.

Best,
Michael

P.S.
I don't like Sabatino's.

sabersix wrote:Who died and left you guys in charge of what is BBQ and what is not? You "regulars" are of the opinion that if it is not smoked, it is bad, i.e "meat jello" or am I missing something and "meat Jello" is a positive expression.

Lighten up, Frances. It ain't called The Smoke Ring for nothin'. Once you take the time & put in the effort to learn to make your own, and do it right, your tolerance for substandard 'cue will vanish quickly - mostly because it gives you an appreciation for how much time & effort is involved in doing it the right way. This also tends to lead to admiration for the few pros that do it right - like Robert Adams, Mr. Mack, et al. As Hammond said, you trash people that we hold in high esteem, don't be surprised if there's some pushback.

sabersix wrote:I guess the 1,000's of people that go to Gale Street Inn, to the Anchor, Fat Willies, to just about every other place in Chicago that does not have a smoker, for years and years, are food illiterate, and have no taste.

So, by your logic, the millions that eat at McD's every single day really know their burgers too, huh? Personally, I try to aim a little bit higher than that.

Edited to correct spelling

Many of us have certain restaurants that we cherish or distain with which members of the board disagree.

Courtesy demands that we not be excessive in our praise or blame. It is OK to suggest that Honey 1 is the worst BBQ a poster has ever eaten, but surely a single exclamation point should suffice!!! (And one assumes that jcampagna42 has avoided the pleasures of BBQ at Burger King (or was it McD's?)).

Mike G posted on "Site Chat" A Note on Moderation in Moderation, but it also stands to reason that there is a need for Moderation in all forms of participation.

And it is certainly OK to hold to one's opinion. For my part, I dissent from the consensus on this board of the failures of Arun's, but don't retreat from my belief.

But as in so many arenas of life, there is a period of testing, of judgement before one is accepted into a community, particularly in cases in which one can imagine (fairly or not) ulterior motives.

So, jcampagna42 let us hear more of what you love, have mixed feelings about, or dislike a little. And then perhaps another tough critique.

Some one said:

your tolerance for substandard 'cue will vanish quickly -

Another elitest statement, assuming that "smoke ring BBQ" is better than every other way of cooking ribs.

People vote every day, they vote at polling places, they vote for TV shows using their controller, and people vote for food every day.

More people vote with their rib buying dollars at, oh say Gail Street Inn, in a single day, than Honey1 does in a week. What does this say?

Bringing in MickyD's to the discussion means that one poster does not know s**t from ChiNOLA. But to address the point. It means, in Chicago, that 1000's and 1000's of people, every day perfer what MickyD has to offer, over what anyone else is serving. They are voting with their dollars.

sabersix wrote:And for me it is not the reasonable exchange of opinions, it it the elitest
attitudes of the "regulars", that bothers me.

Hey, sabersix, I thought you were a regular! Anyways ...

sabersix wrote:Who died and left you guys in charge of what is BBQ and what is not? You "regulars" are of the opinion that if it is not smoked, it is bad, i.e "meat jello" or am I missing something and "meat Jello" is a positive expression.

Now I think it is you who is being unfair, sabersix. You've certainly oversimplified things. There aren't just two kinds of barbecue: "smoked" and "meat jello." For example, the baked barbecue at Carson's is quite toothsome, not "fall off the bone" (a/k/a "meat jello"), but the closest it comes to smoke might be the Winston Red in the lips of the chef. And there are all kinds and degrees of smoking -- over pure wood fire (like Honey 1 uses), or some combination of charcoal, wood chunks and/or gas ... or at least I think so!

There are a number of real experts on barbecue who post here. In the way that a carpenter or the guy who fixes your TV is an expert, not just blowhards. I am not one of them, but I am willing to defer to their expertise in a subject where they are, demonstrably, experts. There is always room for differences of opinion, but not for ignorance, willful or otherwise. And you need to apply some common sense and familiarity with how a good argument (or even a bad one) is developed and presented. The OP in this thread took a big risk by failing to present a real argument (at least not in that first post), instead posting very strong opinions without getting very specific about what was wrong. Not until others drew him/her out did we learn the barbecue he/she got at Honey 1 Friday night had been overcooked to resemble shoe leather; I think it would have been more useful to post that fact in the first instance than to merely opine it was the "worst" barbecue the OP had ever tasted, with nothing more to explain or justify that strong opinion. Nothing wrong with strong opinions, but as a general rule, the stronger the opinion or the farther removed it is from common or received wisdom, the stronger the proof you ought to offer, if only for your own protection!

sabersix wrote:I guess the 1,000's of people that go to Gale Street Inn, to the Anchor, Fat Willies, to just about every other place in Chicago that does not have a smoker, for years and years, are food illiterate, and have no taste.

Now, you know that was unfair. I don't think anybody said this, and it's somewhat passive aggressive, too. (It's also a logical fallacy. Your implication, though stated ironically, is that the thousands who enjoy Gale Street, et al. are not only not wrong, they are RIGHT or, more precisely, CANNOT be wrong. If what you mean is that you can't be either right or wrong about taste in food, then there may be something to that and I'd like to hear more. But if what you're trying to say is that all those thousands of people who enjoy these Chicago-style rib spots are "right," and the "regulars" here are "wrong," then I can't agree (although I don't really think that's what you were getting at...) I'm sure you know that millions believed the world was flat, that there was a Christian king in Africa named Prester John, and that mandrakes were plants with human heads that screamed when pulled from the ground. That didn't make them right; in fact, they were all dead wrong.

sabersix wrote:As someone said, express a strong opinion, you should expect a strong responce.

Yes, but hopefully we can keep those strong responses focused on facts, arguments and opinions (disclosed as such). Arguing is not fighting. Arguing, properly understood, doesn't include name-calling or baiting or ad hominem attacks or faulty generalizations. It never ceases to amaze me how my own perspective and understanding on this seems to differ from so many other people. I have a background that included several years of intensive study in philosophy and logic (undergraduate and graduate study). That's where I learned the difference between arguing ("good") and fighting (bad"). To me, a good argument is entertaining, enlightening and -- hopefully if rarely -- a means for arriving at (*gasp*) truth. But routinely, I find people can't tell the difference (or at least act like they can't), either censuring me for engaging in real argument, or thinking they are "arguing" when in fact all they are doing is fighting.

Real argument is not a game of one-upsmanship or aggression. I often wonder, what were all those other, non-philosophy majors doing in college? Daily group hugs? Why don't they seem to enjoy, or at least appreciate the potential value of, good argumentation? Why can't people get this basic idea, that it's not only OK but DESIRABLE to argue, early, often and with enthusiasm, but in a reasoned way, about normative matters of ethics, taste and opinion (food falling into all three of those categories, I think)? So, it looks like all kinds of folks have failed in all kinds of ways to do that in response to the OP's post about a lousy experience at Honey 1. I really wish people would stop picking -- and picking up on -- fights. If somebody comes out with both guns blazing, count to ten and ask some meaningful questions that might elicit a meaningful, explanatory response.

That's this "regular's" two-cents' worth.

eatchicago wrote:P.S.
I don't like Sabatino's.

You Ignorant Bastard!!!

GAF wrote:But as in so many arenas of life, there is a period of testing, of judgement before one is accepted into a community, particularly in cases in which one can imagine (fairly or not) ulterior motives.

This, to me, is the most interesting angle of this exchange.

I believe some may feel that this forum is maybe like a bulletin board or a suggestion box where you can drop your thoughts, more or less anonymously. Doesn't work that way. This is a community; like all communities, it has standards, it evolves, makes mistakes, creates scapegoats, heralds saviors, recognizes authority, has a status quo.

It also, ultimately, can be unfair to some few while it creates a productive space for most.

In a mano a mano dispute between, say, Antonius and some new guy I never met, I will admit my tendency would be to favor A. I can’t help it. I know the guy. I respect him. He could be wrong (though jeez, don’t tell him that!), so it is going to take some arguing to convince me to accept the opinion of someone I never met. I cannot imagine anyone saying that this tendency does not make sense. You trust the people you know; though, ultimately, it's the quality of the actual argument that matters most. That’s normal, I think.

David “International Standard for Normalcy” Hammond

sabersix wrote:your tolerance for substandard 'cue will vanish quickly -

Another elitest statement, assuming that "smoke ring BBQ" is better than every other way of cooking ribs.

Guilty as charged, I guess. I freely admit to being a BBQ snob. At least that way I don't have to eat that crappy meat jello stuff...

sabersix wrote:More people vote with their rib buying dollars at, oh say Gail Street Inn, in a single day, than Honey1 does in a week. What does this say?

Nothing at all with any relevance to quality, which is what this thread was about in the first place. The masses are asses, as has been proven repeatedly. Your numbers argument is pretty feeble. Is Britney Spears a "better" musician than Thelonius Monk was purely because she has sold more albums? Puhleeeze.

sabersix wrote:Bringing in MickyD's to the discussion means that one poster does not know s**t from ChiNOLA.

FINALLY somebody got the joke! I've been posting under that name for a couple of years now & you are the first to pick up on it. Congratulations! Let's bury the hatchet - I'll buy you a nice Belgian Ale at the Hop Leaf - but somehow I think you'd rather have a Bud Lite....

ChiNOLA wrote:

sabersix wrote:Bringing in MickyD's to the discussion means that one poster does not know s**t from ChiNOLA.

FINALLY somebody got the joke! I've been posting under that name for a couple of years now & you are the first to pick up on it.

Oh, come on. EVERYONE got that joke five minutes after your first post; we were just too polite to say how obvious it was. Being the polite bunch we are. Sheesh.

YourPalWill wrote:I think AP Deli has very good corned beef.

No one agrees with me. But, I still think so.

Will,

I sure as hell don't.

Count me two for two on this thread. I don't like the corned beef at AP Deli or meat jello BBQ. Come to think of it, I don't like the Lowest Common Denominator burgers at Micky D's either.

Enjoy,
Gary

taste, being subjective, makes that more or less an opinion. and we all know that opinions are like... everyone's got one. one man's salty is another man's bland.

that being said, the level of mediocrity in food, culture and society in general that passes for acceptable or good never ceases to amaze me and is a fact we should try to overcome by exceeding expectations in whatever we attempt to do. taking the easy way out by catering to the lowest common denominator may be construed as a vote, only if you support it. there are many other factors though that should be taken into consideration as well, such as budget, convenience and knowledge.

this forum seems to me to be composed of individuals who are not content with average and seek, appreciate and find the intriguing and outstanding. it's certainly has made my return to chicago that much more wonderful than it would have been without it.

to me, a bad meal is a wasted oppty and i tend to pout like a child when i'm on the receiving end of one. i thank lth for guiding me towards many wonderful meals i may not have been aware of on my own. and for steering me away from some i might have had. and yes, certain people on this blog tend to hold more credibility w/me as i've met them or read of their suggestions and i like and agree with them. there's that ugly human nature rearing it's head again. delicious.

Not everyone likes real BBQ, Neapolitan pizza, Issan food or natto. I can live with that. Frankly, at this point the unanimity of praise for H1 from James Beard winners to John Kass to Gary means that a few dissenting opinions might keep H1 on its toes. However, I'm still trying to figure out why nearly every overtly critical statement about H1 seems to mention how great the other place down the street is.

On a similar note, because I feel the BBQ is rather similar, I ate at the Horseshoe the other night. The BBQ was pretty bad, but I loved the place. Great diverse crowd, nice bartenders, excellent band whose name I missed.

I don't know about the others, as a "non-regular", I am thoroughly enjoying this thread. Especially JimInLoganSquare's post on the fallacy of fighting and merit of arguing. It is quintessentially my single biggest reason for visiting this forum daily vs. all those other elementary sites (i.e. citysearch, metromix, bleh blah) that caters to the masses that vote w/ their "dollars".

Okay, I've tried to stay out of this, but I do think words have meaning.

A friend several weeks ago asked me to make her some barbeque. So I got some spare ribs and started smoking them. At the last minute she called to cancel, saying she was a little tired. I said okay. Later I apologized for being a little brusque on the phone, but I explained that I was already about four hours into the smoking/barbequing process. That made her angry. She said:

In my circle of friends, barbeque consists of slapping on KC Masterpiece while you're grilling something.

Words have meaning. I'm looking at Harold McGee's On Food and Cooking. His definition: "Barbequeing is the low-temperature, slow heating of meat in a closed chamber by means of hot air from smoldering wood coals ... Many barbequed meats end up with a "smoke ring," a permanent red or pink zone under the surface ..." He goes on to explain the chemistry behind what occurs within the protein molecules, which I won't bore others with. Get the book.

But my point is that, according to most currently accepted definitions, barbeque doesn't include anything parboiled, steamed, baked or microwaved. It's unfortunate that the word is so misused so frequently, especially by restauranteurs who should know better, but resort to techniques which, at best, approximate barbeque and are much quicker and more economically efficient.

So (echoing a message Gary sent a while ago), when a place like Gale Street Inn or Fireplace Inn wants to call their product "ribs" no one can argue with that (although, to go a little further afield, I can argue with McD's occasional appearance of "McRib" - which has no rib meat in it, and is so wrong for so many other reasons).

But both places call their ribs barbeque, and while I don't have specific knowledge of their cooking process, I suspect they're loosely throwing around that word to the unsuspecting with no intention of delivering on it.

It's like promising grouper and serving Asian catfish.

But both places call their ribs barbeque, and while I don't have specific knowledge of their cooking process,

Gale Street Inn is definitely boil-b-q/meat jello. No smoker involved.

Oh well, there are other reasons to go there.

Okay, now we're wandering into a subject that has occupied my mind for a while.

I am most certainly one who is frustrated by debased food terminology (Kobe being only the most recent popular addition to a long list of offenders). But BBQ is a troubling one for me, because I'm unaware of any good terminology for the alternative to "real" BBQ. You have what I would consider the technical definition, that being the low temperature slow-cooked w/smoke version, and then you have the wider colloquial definition, which basically includes any kind of meat prepared in any manner with BBQ sauce.

So the problem is, if one wants to limit the term BBQ to the former definition, what the heck do you call the latter? As amusing as Meat Jell-o is (and this is a name that really, really needs an actual dish to go with it), I have to believe there's something a little more diplomatic

Dmnkly wrote:I have to believe there's something a little more diplomatic

Rib Pudding.

Porksicle?

Spoon-B-Que

Well, so far I'm not getting the terminology I'm looking for... but the upshot is that I AM getting some absolutely absurd recipe ideas, which are usually the best.

Piggly Wiggly.

G Wiv wrote:

Dmnkly wrote:I have to believe there's something a little more diplomatic

Rib Pudding.

Which, playing on the older meaning of "pudding," goes well with the sickly-sweet "BBQ sauce" that the kitchen would slather and glob onto the ribs. (Note emphasis on "kitchen"; no such thing as sauce on the side at the Rib Pudding Hut, unless you mean extra sauce).

(By the way, that highly offensive Quizno's commercial for the Smokehouse Beef Briscuit Sub just came on ... the one with the "authentic" barbecue cooks threatening to sue Quizno's on some sort of ill-defined theory of intellectual property infringement. An insult to both barbecue cooks AND lawyers who actually took the time to learn their craft/profession and rightly take offense at the typical "good enough for advertising work" simulacrum that perpetuates stereotypes and denies the value of truth).

Burpy-Q