Discussion:
10 worst dining trends of the decade
(too old to reply)
Don Martinich
2009-12-31 02:18:30 UTC
Permalink
http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/dining/chi-091021-worst-dinin
g-trends-pictures,0,5192606.photogallery


10 worst dining trends of the last decade

"Decades from now, when you reflect on what dining was like during the
fledgling years of the 21st century, on a good day you will picture a
heartening trend toward comfort food in the wake of Sept. 11 and a
well-meaning push toward locally sourced menus.

But on a bad day, when someone asks what the worst restaurant trends of
that
first decade were, will you be able to shut up? One restaurant type
cracked:
"As long as we're not naming names, I'll talk. Because now that you ask
this, specific chefs and self-important restaurants are coming to mind."

Then there were those who, like It Boy and New York chef David Chang,
when
asked to name the worst trends of the decade, simply blurted: "The
Cheesecake Factory. The Kobe beef movement was stupid -- it was never
meant
to be a burger! Sliders are stupid too. Sorry, I mean to say 'a trio of
sliders' is stupid. What else? Walls of wine bottles as decoration. The
steakhouse craze -- why does there need to be more than a couple of
steakhouses in any metropolitan area?"

Then, when his outrage subsided, Chang made an excellent point: "Bad
trends
were usually good trends. They just got watered down into a really bad,
overdone trend."

Which, in a way, is precisely how Tanya Steel, the editor-in-chief of
Epicurious (epicurious.com), saw the decade unfolding: "The beginning and
the middle were just the height of obnoxiousness, very reminiscent of the
1980s -- you call ahead for a table and they tell you '5:30 or 10:30'
though
there are 10 empty tables at 8 p.m. There were restaurants, especially
here
in New York, that refuse to list a phone number or have the name of the
place outside. I would say the second part of the decade didn't begin
until
September 2008, when the economy meant no one could afford to act like
that
now."

"Worst trend?" said Tim Zagat, co-founder of the Zagat restaurant
survey. "B
uying wine to show off. It's not new but it got out of hand with Wall
Street
types this decade. If you spend $100 on a bottle now, you're exhibiting
some
degree of stupidity."

What follows are the 10 worst restaurant trends of the decade, culled
from
interviews with chefs, consultants, even the owners of a food bookstore
in
Maine. I couldn't include every gripe -- mache, water sommeliers,
organ-meat
entrees, unisex bathrooms, bacon tattoos on chefs, over-flaunted kitchen
burns, chefs tables ("usually they're done as an afterthought, and it
shows") -- but here's what leaped out, in order of annoyance:


10. Fried onion blossoms

A "personal pet peeve," said Rita Negrete, senior editor at Technomic, a
food industry research firm. Oh, Rita -- that is so far from personal. We
like to believe the fried onion blossom could be done right -- i.e., not
sweaty, or greasy, without slivers of onion behind monstrous tan shells,
served like county fair food on porcelain -- but we haven't seen it yet.


9. Molecular gastronomy

As Chang pointed out, not all trends start bad. That said, "few chefs
know
how to do (molecular gastronomy), to make food fascinating and delicious
at
the same time," Steel said. "Do I see it as a trend that will last? No.
As
inspiration, maybe. But something feels disconnected when a chef has to
buy
a machine costing tens of thousands of dollars to cook. If anything, it's
ebbing and will spark a return to beautiful and simple ingredients."


8. The $40 entree

Not just at establishments sporting Beard awards and gravitas. At your
neighborhood bistro. Enough.


7. The communal table

Said Michael Schwartz, the chef/owner of Michael's Genuine Food & Drink
in
Miami: the communal table "assumes people who don't know each other want
to
sit together."


6. Proudly obnoxious fast food options

Carl's Jr.'s Big Carl burger (920 calories). Hardee's Monster Thickburger
(1,420 calories). KFC's Double Down (bacon and cheese between fillets of
fried chicken serving as bread). A dare? A brazen red-state response to
blue-state delicateness? The genius was to market them not as mere meals
but
extensions of your civil rights.


5. Knee-jerk online reviews

Extreme Yelpers and likewise. "In particular, the opening-night blog
reviewers," said Don Lindgren, co-owner of Rabelais, a food-centric
bookstore in Portland, Maine. "You can't judge a restaurant from its
opening
night. It may be exciting to be there early. But to review it based on
that
first day is crazy and wrong."


4. Foam

It's suds. We guess we taste the kiwi-caramel tones. (Wait, no, we
can't.)


3. The menu as book

There is nothing wrong with "artisanal" or "local," or " Vermont-raised,"
and nothing wrong with identifying the source of the goat milk you are
being
served, but when menu items grow to entire paragraphs, it's a bit much


2. The chef as media whore

They cook, of course. They also sell shoes and star in reality shows.
Sometimes they cook. Rocco Di- Spirito, a middecade pan flash, is
arguably
the finest example. "There are celebrity chefs who manage to stay chefs
and
run excellent restaurants," said Zagat, "but there are times when you
wonder
what a chef is supposed to be doing. TV brings people into their
restaurant.
But when do they find time to cook?"


1. Deconstruction

Said Joyce Goldstein, a San Francisco-based chef, cookbook author and
restaurant consultant: "I do not want a poached egg on top of carbonara
sauce and the pasta on the side. I don't want the ingredients laid out
before me anymore. I want a chef to show me how it is brought together.
Cooking has become an intellectual thing, but it's not a sensual thing.
We
have all gotten so smart about food, we are losing touch with sex appeal.
Everything else is getting so exhausting -- a lot of chefs saying, 'Look
at
me,' and 'Look at this technique,' and, next decade, I would prefer not
to
look at them for a while."


</>
Tim
2009-12-31 08:44:49 UTC
Permalink
On Dec 30, 6:18 pm, Don Martinich <***@att.net> wrote:
> http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/dining/chi-091021-worst-d...
> g-trends-pictures,0,5192606.photogallery
>
> 10 worst dining trends of the last decade
>
> "Decades from now, when you reflect on what dining was like during the
> fledgling years of the 21st century, on a good day you will picture a
> heartening trend toward comfort food in the wake of Sept. 11 and a
> well-meaning push toward locally sourced menus.
....

These atrocities echoe the same atrocities of the 90s, and before
that, the 80s.

As I'm not being paid to compile a list, I won't. But remember the
"Fern Bars"? Remember when every twentysometing was drinkin "Sambucca"
and "Galliano"?

For the past ten years or so, they've been separated from their money
for even more bullshit drinks, namely, "ultra premium vodkas." Nothing
more to say.

The author above left out things like "tapas." Now I've had tapas, or
tapas-like things, in Europe. (Though not in Spain, which I only
stopped-over once for in Barcelona, for an hour, as a kid.) Believe
me, American-made and American-priced tapas are no doubt an insult to
the spirit of these dishes.

What ought to be a kind of bar food is somehow priced as a gastronomic
experience only those on corporate tabs, or trying to impress a
gullible chick, will pay.

And so it goes. Grossly-inflated tabs, and yet still these places are
failing.

Meanwhile, people can't get enough of In-N-Out and are clamoring for
them to open branches in their towns. I think there's a big lesson
there.

--Tim May
rone
2009-12-31 23:40:42 UTC
Permalink
Among the 10 worst Usenet posting trends of the decade: reposting
entire articles from a Web site, poorly formatted and without a word
of commentary.

rone
--
"The priest jabbered incomprehensibly on the distinctive nature of Christian
actions, as opposed to Jewish and Muslim actions, in the world. Not one word
about Mary. No connection to the readings. I am getting tired of this man,
and I think his liturgy is suspect." -- Richard Allan Baruz
Dr. Curmudgon Gee
2010-01-02 00:21:49 UTC
Permalink
In article <dmartinich-***@text.giganews.com>, Don Martinich <***@att.net> wrote:
>
>http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/dining/chi-091021-worst-dinin
>g-trends-pictures,0,5192606.photogallery
>
>
>10 worst dining trends of the last decade

i think #1 is the creeping up trend of tip. used to be 15%. they seem to be
pushing for 18-20% now.

regards,

Pam's Ode to Spammers & Telemarketers

May all spammers & telemarketers die an agonizing death; have no
burial places; their souls be chased by demons in Gehenna from one
room to another for 1000 years while listening to Bartok microcosmos +
Scriabin playing together.
Todd Michel McComb
2010-01-03 01:27:51 UTC
Permalink
In article <dmartinich-***@text.giganews.com>,
Don Martinich <***@att.net> wrote:
>10 worst dining trends of the last decade

Most of these things don't seem particularly related to the past
decade to me.

>heartening trend toward comfort food in the wake of Sept. 11

Gag.

>The Kobe beef movement was stupid -- it was never meant to be a
>burger!

This does seem strange to me also.

>The steakhouse craze -- why does there need to be more than a
>couple of steakhouses in any metropolitan area?

I had no idea there was supposed to be a current steakhouse craze.
If anything, they seem less common.

>I couldn't include every gripe -- mache, water sommeliers, organ-meat
>entrees, unisex bathrooms, bacon tattoos on chefs, over-flaunted
>kitchen burns, chefs tables

What's wrong with organ-meat entrees (I assume not everyone has to
order them), or unisex bathrooms (those seem like an improvement)?

>10. Fried onion blossoms

I've never had a good one either, but surely the Outback Steakhouse
was serving these in the 20th century.

>8. The $40 entree

It might surprise the author that the price of most things went up
in this decade. Somehow it works that way.

>7. The communal table

I would like more of these. They seem rather rare.

>6. Proudly obnoxious fast food options

Why do people like their food to be obnoxious? I have no idea, but
obviously there are people who like that tack.

>5. Knee-jerk online reviews

As if this is new.

>4. Foam

I'm ambivalent.

>3. The menu as book

I like the food to be well-described. It makes it easier to decide.
I'm not in a rush to order.

>2. The chef as media whore

Yeah, well, it's hardly unique to food.

>1. Deconstruction

Hmm, I tend to agree with this one.
Steve Fenwick
2010-01-03 04:57:38 UTC
Permalink
In article <hhorqn$1f3$***@agricola.medieval.org>,
***@medieval.org (Todd Michel McComb) wrote:

> In article <dmartinich-***@text.giganews.com>,
> Don Martinich <***@att.net> wrote:
> >10 worst dining trends of the last decade
> >I couldn't include every gripe -- mache, water sommeliers, organ-meat
> >entrees, unisex bathrooms, bacon tattoos on chefs, over-flaunted
> >kitchen burns, chefs tables
>
> What's wrong with organ-meat entrees (I assume not everyone has to
> order them), or unisex bathrooms (those seem like an improvement)?

Especially for women, if the bathrooms are kept clean (not gas station
men's room clean).

Some of these sound like a reaction to Bourdain's success after
essentially abandoning the kitchen for TV. But he did it with no
excuses; on one episode of "Kitchen Confidential", he even went back to
Les Halles to do a shift. It was funny.


> >10. Fried onion blossoms
>
> I've never had a good one either, but surely the Outback Steakhouse
> was serving these in the 20th century.

Chili's was doing these at least since the late 1980's.


> >8. The $40 entree
>
> It might surprise the author that the price of most things went up
> in this decade. Somehow it works that way.

$40 is still high for a local neighborhood restaurant. But it's also
higher than any place I consider "nice" (e.g., Zucca, House, Canteen)
without being "super fancy" (Dining Room at the Ritz, Manresa).


> >7. The communal table
>
> I would like more of these. They seem rather rare.

Really don't like these. Tried one once at Slanted Door and really
disliked the random "camaraderie" that could not be fixed when two
couples really wanted just to talk among themselves and not with the
rest of the table.


> >6. Proudly obnoxious fast food options
>
> Why do people like their food to be obnoxious? I have no idea, but
> obviously there are people who like that tack.

I'm not sure what this means, but if it includes the Carl's Jr. "we're
good because we're messy" concept, yes, it's off-putting.


> >4. Foam
>
> I'm ambivalent.

As with molecular gastronomy, if it's done well and has a purpose that
adds to the dish/meal, I have no problem with it. If it's just added
because the CIA-fresh chef thinks it's needed to be "haute cuisine",
then it's as useless as any pointless frill.


> >1. Deconstruction
>
> Hmm, I tend to agree with this one.

Yeah, this is just stupid.

Steve

--
steve <at> w0x0f <dot> com
"Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to
skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, chip shot in the other, body thoroughly
used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
Peter Lawrence
2010-01-03 07:44:53 UTC
Permalink
Steve Fenwick wrote:
> In article <hhorqn$1f3$***@agricola.medieval.org>,
> ***@medieval.org (Todd Michel McComb) wrote:
>> In article <dmartinich-***@text.giganews.com>,
>> Don Martinich <***@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> 10 worst dining trends of the last decade
>>> I couldn't include every gripe -- mache, water sommeliers, organ-meat
>>> entrees, unisex bathrooms, bacon tattoos on chefs, over-flaunted
>>> kitchen burns, chefs tables
>>
>> What's wrong with organ-meat entrees (I assume not everyone has to
>> order them), or unisex bathrooms (those seem like an improvement)?
>
> Especially for women, if the bathrooms are kept clean (not gas station
> men's room clean).
>
> Some of these sound like a reaction to Bourdain's success after
> essentially abandoning the kitchen for TV. But he did it with no
> excuses; on one episode of "Kitchen Confidential", he even went back to
> Les Halles to do a shift. It was funny.
>
>
>>> 10. Fried onion blossoms
>>
>> I've never had a good one either, but surely the Outback Steakhouse
>> was serving these in the 20th century.

I had a few good ones of these at Outback, but even Outback isn't too
consistent, because I have plenty of bad ones there as well. I usually won't
order them, but if I'm dining in a large group at Outback or Chili's,
invariably someone will order them.

>>> 8. The $40 entree
>>
>> It might surprise the author that the price of most things went up
>> in this decade. Somehow it works that way.
>
> $40 is still high for a local neighborhood restaurant. But it's also
> higher than any place I consider "nice" (e.g., Zucca, House, Canteen)
> without being "super fancy" (Dining Room at the Ritz, Manresa).

For as long time as I can remember, fresh lobsters have often been a $40
entrée at many seafood restaurants.

>>> 7. The communal table
>>
>> I would like more of these. They seem rather rare.
>
> Really don't like these. Tried one once at Slanted Door and really
> disliked the random "camaraderie" that could not be fixed when two
> couples really wanted just to talk among themselves and not with the
> rest of the table.

These work best at more casual and social eateries like sports bars,
hofbräus, burger and BBQ joints. I don't think they would be too popular in
more upscale settings.

>>> 6. Proudly obnoxious fast food options
>>
>> Why do people like their food to be obnoxious? I have no idea, but
>> obviously there are people who like that tack.
>
> I'm not sure what this means, but if it includes the Carl's Jr. "we're
> good because we're messy" concept, yes, it's off-putting.

Why? I think it's just a reaction to all the froufrou and in vogue PC foods
that people constantly being bombarded with by the media.

>>> 4. Foam
>>
>> I'm ambivalent.
>
> As with molecular gastronomy, if it's done well and has a purpose that
> adds to the dish/meal, I have no problem with it. If it's just added
> because the CIA-fresh chef thinks it's needed to be "haute cuisine",
> then it's as useless as any pointless frill.

Foam -- the antithesis of the proudly obnoxious fast food options. No
wonder you find the obnoxious fast food options off-putting. You're a foam
person. ;-)

>>> 1. Deconstruction
>>
>> Hmm, I tend to agree with this one.
>
> Yeah, this is just stupid.

Agreed.


- Peter
Todd Michel McComb
2010-01-03 07:59:50 UTC
Permalink
In article <hhphto$mui$***@news.eternal-september.org>,
Peter Lawrence <***@aol.com> wrote:
>These work best at more casual and social eateries like sports
>bars, hofbraus, burger and BBQ joints. I don't think they would
>be too popular in more upscale settings.

I do agree they work best in situations where the timing of the
courses, if there are even courses, isn't very important, and people
can come & go easily.

I often sit at the bar. But it'd be nice if more places had communal
tables. My girlfriend and I had some people join us at our table
on New Year's Eve, which was pretty casual, but probably wouldn't
have happened if the place hadn't been so crowded -- even though
we'd've been totally fine with it without the crowds.
Ciccio
2010-01-03 17:34:31 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 2, 11:59 pm, ***@medieval.org (Todd Michel McComb) wrote:

> I do agree they work best in situations where the timing of the
> courses, if there are even courses, isn't very important, and people
> can come & go easily.

Back in the day, communal seating was prevalent at Basque restaurants
with multiple courses. They, however, had times certain for seating.
It was always an enjoyable experience. That, for the most part, has
disappeared from Basque restaurants. Now, I only experience that at
social clubs.

Ciccio
Wallace
2010-01-03 17:53:00 UTC
Permalink
"Ciccio" <***@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:478b26cc-6417-4c7c-9096-***@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 2, 11:59 pm, ***@medieval.org (Todd Michel McComb) wrote:

> I do agree they work best in situations where the timing of the
> courses, if there are even courses, isn't very important, and people
> can come & go easily.

Back in the day, communal seating was prevalent at Basque restaurants
with multiple courses. They, however, had times certain for seating.
It was always an enjoyable experience. That, for the most part, has
disappeared from Basque restaurants. Now, I only experience that at
social clubs.



Yep. Hey, what are some good social clubs around here?
Todd Michel McComb
2010-01-03 19:50:08 UTC
Permalink
In article <478b26cc-6417-4c7c-9096-***@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
Ciccio <***@comcast.net> wrote:
>Back in the day, communal seating was prevalent at Basque restaurants
>with multiple courses. They, however, had times certain for seating.
>It was always an enjoyable experience. That, for the most part, has
>disappeared from Basque restaurants.

The Basque restaurants I've been to in Nevada and Alturas were setup
for communal seating, but they weren't so full that anyone ever sat
with us... so basically we were 5 people at a long 10-person table.
(Communal seating with a family of 5 doesn't have much appeal, not
because I mind, but because we're too big & crazy a group to interact
with others much. When I'm out as a couple, it's more fun.)

Those Basque places do have courses, I guess, but I certainly never
had the impression they were trying to time them in any particular
way... just bring out the food when it's done.
Ciccio
2010-01-04 01:05:59 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 3, 11:50 am, ***@medieval.org (Todd Michel McComb) wrote:
> In article <478b26cc-6417-4c7c-9096-***@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
>
> Ciccio  <***@comcast.net> wrote:
> >Back in the day, communal seating was prevalent atBasquerestaurants
> >with multiple courses. They, however, had times certain for seating.
> >It was always an enjoyable experience. That, for the most part, has
> >disappeared from Basque restaurants.

> Those Basque places do have courses, I guess, but I certainly never
> had the impression they were trying to time them in any particular
> way... just bring out the food when it's done.

I wasn't referring to the timing of courses. Rather the Basque
restaurants used to have particular seating time when dinner was
served. Some places had two seating times. Everybody would sit at
communal tables and dinner would start at the appointed time.

Ciccio
Todd Michel McComb
2010-01-05 21:11:19 UTC
Permalink
In article <4e80a7ae-188c-4ae0-9754-***@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
Ciccio <***@comcast.net> wrote:
>I wasn't referring to the timing of courses. Rather the Basque
>restaurants used to have particular seating time when dinner was
>served. Some places had two seating times. Everybody would sit at
>communal tables and dinner would start at the appointed time.

Oh, I see. The places I've been more recently had flexible seating
times.
Tim
2010-01-04 11:35:35 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 3, 11:50 am, ***@medieval.org (Todd Michel McComb) wrote:
> In article <478b26cc-6417-4c7c-9096-***@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
>
> Ciccio  <***@comcast.net> wrote:
> >Back in the day, communal seating was prevalent at Basque restaurants
> >with multiple courses. They, however, had times certain for seating.
> >It was always an enjoyable experience. That, for the most part, has
> >disappeared from Basque restaurants.
>
> The Basque restaurants I've been to in Nevada and Alturas were setup
> for communal seating, but they weren't so full that anyone ever sat
> with us... so basically we were 5 people at a long 10-person table.
> (Communal seating with a family of 5 doesn't have much appeal, not
> because I mind, but because we're too big & crazy a group to interact
> with others much.  When I'm out as a couple, it's more fun.)
>
> Those Basque places do have courses, I guess, but I certainly never
> had the impression they were trying to time them in any particular
> way... just bring out the food when it's done.

Q: Why do so many Basque restaurants have communal, crowded seating?

A: More people in the blast radius.



--Tim May
sf
2010-01-04 20:43:40 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 03:35:35 -0800 (PST), Tim <***@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Q: Why do so many Basque restaurants have communal, crowded seating?
>
>A: More people in the blast radius.
>
>
>
>--Tim May

God you're pathetic. Go back to the woods, hick.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.
Julian Macassey
2010-01-05 02:58:33 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 12:43:40 -0800, sf <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 03:35:35 -0800 (PST), Tim <***@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Q: Why do so many Basque restaurants have communal, crowded seating?
>>
>>A: More people in the blast radius.
>
> God you're pathetic. Go back to the woods, hick.

Well, I thought it was funny. Maybe you want to get your
sense of humour repaired.




--
"Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix. I don't
think that is a coincidence." - Anon, The UNIX-HATERS Handbook
Ciccio
2010-01-05 03:28:51 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 4, 6:58 pm, Julian Macassey <***@tele.com> wrote:

> "Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix.  I don't
> think that is a coincidence." - Anon, The UNIX-HATERS Handbook

There's no doubt in my mind whoever wrote the man pages was on acid.

Ciccio
Julian Macassey
2010-01-05 03:42:55 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 19:28:51 -0800 (PST), Ciccio <***@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Jan 4, 6:58 pm, Julian Macassey <***@tele.com> wrote:
>
>> "Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix.  I don't
>> think that is a coincidence." - Anon, The UNIX-HATERS Handbook
>
> There's no doubt in my mind whoever wrote the man pages was on acid.

But was it good acid?


--
"Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix. I don't
think that is a coincidence." - Anon, The UNIX-HATERS Handbook
Michael Siemon
2010-01-05 04:25:44 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@adeed.tele.com>,
Julian Macassey <***@tele.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 19:28:51 -0800 (PST), Ciccio <***@comcast.net>
> wrote:
> > On Jan 4, 6:58 pm, Julian Macassey <***@tele.com> wrote:
> >
> >> "Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix.  I don't
> >> think that is a coincidence." - Anon, The UNIX-HATERS Handbook
> >
> > There's no doubt in my mind whoever wrote the man pages was on acid.
>
> But was it good acid?

The epigrammatic clarity of the original man pages is rather unlike
the detritus of acid :-). I think that Brian Kernighan's pages (I
_think_ he wrote the man page for find, with the description of its
syntax as "rebarbative") are wonderful. I worked a bit with Brian
(and at least consorted with Dennis and Ken, and Rob Pike) for a few
years as a consultant at Bell Labs in the 80's. While AT&T was
unravelling around us...
jcdill
2010-01-05 05:03:10 UTC
Permalink
Julian Macassey wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 19:28:51 -0800 (PST), Ciccio <***@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On Jan 4, 6:58 pm, Julian Macassey <***@tele.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix. I don't
>>> think that is a coincidence." - Anon, The UNIX-HATERS Handbook
>> There's no doubt in my mind whoever wrote the man pages was on acid.
>
> But was it good acid?

Hey, at least we are back on the topic of things one can "consume"!

jc
Michael Siemon
2010-01-05 03:49:59 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@adeed.tele.com>,
Julian Macassey <***@tele.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 12:43:40 -0800, sf <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 03:35:35 -0800 (PST), Tim <***@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>Q: Why do so many Basque restaurants have communal, crowded seating?
> >>
> >>A: More people in the blast radius.
> >
> > God you're pathetic. Go back to the woods, hick.
>
> Well, I thought it was funny. Maybe you want to get your
> sense of humour repaired.

Speaking of "sense of humo[u]r", I have recently been noticing
your sig. Is this a recent change, or have I just been oblivious?

"Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix.
I don't think that is a coincidence."
- Anon, The UNIX-HATERS Handbook

This is rather bizarre on its face: UNIX is a product of Bell Labs,
with the BSD rewrite being an interesting offshoot, but it hardly
makes UNIX a "product" of Berkeley. LSD is even less connected
(invented in Switzerland, used heavily [and idiotically] by the
CIA, and any connection with Berkeley (other than some use while
I was there :-)) rather tangential... For the Timothy Leary style
"tune in, turn on, drop out" usage, that derives from Leary's
Harvard years. He had nothing to do with LSD while at Berkeley!
And the emergence of LSD usage in the mid-60s was pretty much a
uniform phenomenon across the top-tier of liberal universities.[*]
Yes, I scored some acid from a Berkeley student (whom I had met
in Chicago) when I first started graduate school here, but that
was a couple of years after I had my first trip. And UNIX came
to Berkeley in the early 70s, with me dropping out in '75 just
before Ken Thompson arrived as pied-piper to Bill Joy and others.
-
[*] I'd say that most of us were more heavily influenced by
Aldous Huxley, and acid was just one of the more recent and kewl
things along the same lines as mushrooms. Which seems to have been
Leary's trajectory on this also. "Better living through chemistry."
Stef
2010-01-05 04:56:30 UTC
Permalink
In article <mlsiemon-***@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au>,
Michael Siemon <***@sonic.net> quoted:

> "Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix.
> I don't think that is a coincidence."
> - Anon, The UNIX-HATERS Handbook

Here's the version of the quote that I have. I wonder if "The
UNIX-HATERS Handbook" stole it from Andrew Bulhak or the other way
around.

There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and BSD
UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence. -- Andrew Bulhak
--
Stef ** ***@cat-and-dragon.com **
** cat-and-dragon.com/stef ** firecat.livejournal.com **
**
"Y'know, I do Lou Reed better than anyone. Watch me turn into Lou Reed
before your eyes!" -- Lou Reed, quoted by Neil Gaiman
Steve Pope
2010-01-05 05:05:08 UTC
Permalink
Stef <***@panix.com> wrote:

>Here's the version of the quote that I have. I wonder if "The
>UNIX-HATERS Handbook" stole it from Andrew Bulhak or the other way
>around.

>There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and BSD
>UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence. -- Andrew Bulhak

That's a slight improvement over earlier versions, which
did not include the qualifier "BSD", and baldly claimed
that UNIX came out of Berkeley. So this one is only 50%
incorrect instead of 100% incorrect.

Steve
Pete Fraser
2010-01-05 05:00:35 UTC
Permalink
"Michael Siemon" <***@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:mlsiemon-***@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au...

> [*] I'd say that most of us were more heavily influenced by
> Aldous Huxley, and acid was just one of the more recent and kewl
> things along the same lines as mushrooms. Which seems to have been
> Leary's trajectory on this also. "Better living through chemistry."

I like much of Huxley's writing but, I must admit, I find the writing
quality in "Doors of Perception" and "Heaven and Hell" to be a
potent argument against taking hallucinogens.

obFood. Just verified that the Concord Costco has hand-dipped
ice cream bars, but not the good ole hot dogs.

Pete
Ciccio
2010-01-05 07:56:48 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 4, 7:49 pm, Michael Siemon <***@sonic.net> wrote:

> This is rather bizarre on its face:

That's because it's a JOKE, son...It's a JOKE!

[UNIX LSD stuff snipped]

Ciccio
Michael Siemon
2010-01-05 08:17:15 UTC
Permalink
In article
<668e53cb-b40c-4571-8855-***@u41g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
Ciccio <***@comcast.net> wrote:

> On Jan 4, 7:49 pm, Michael Siemon <***@sonic.net> wrote:
>
> > This is rather bizarre on its face:
>
> That's because it's a JOKE, son...It's a JOKE!
>
> [UNIX LSD stuff snipped]
>
> Ciccio

Like _your_ fact-deprived assaults on Berkeley? We're supposed
to laugh because _you_ think it's funny? The caps in your note
sound a lot like a net version of Foghorn Leghorn, and the
wording suggests you even are trading on that. Bizarre, as I
said before...

signed,

Clyde Serious
Ciccio
2010-01-05 15:12:11 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 5, 12:17 am, Michael Siemon <***@sonic.net> wrote:

> Like _your_ fact-deprived assaults on Berkeley? We're supposed
> to laugh because _you_ think it's funny?

Well, those fact based statements aren't always meant to be funny.
They're meant to point out how fucked up Berkeley is. That said, even
if you don't laugh at a joke, like Julian's sig, you shouldn't be so
damn stupid as to take it seriously.

> The caps in your notes sound a lot like a net version of Foghorn Leghorn, and the
> wording suggests you even are trading on that.

Oh, that time, you got it...good, you're improving.

> Bizarre, as I said before...

What's bizarre, is your taking an obvious joke and then running off
with a lengthy exposition in an attempt to challenge it. I feel sorry
anybody you dropped acid with, because you must have been one big
bring-down.

Ciccio
Michael Siemon
2010-01-05 08:31:09 UTC
Permalink
In article
<668e53cb-b40c-4571-8855-***@u41g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
Ciccio <***@comcast.net> wrote:

> On Jan 4, 7:49 pm, Michael Siemon <***@sonic.net> wrote:
>
> > This is rather bizarre on its face:
>
> That's because it's a JOKE, son...It's a JOKE!
>
> [UNIX LSD stuff snipped]
>
> Ciccio

I enjoyed Julian's sig quote the first time I saw it. It was
still faintly amusing the second time. Eventually, its sheer
falsity got to me. So sew me. We are trying (with little luck
so far :-)) to teach the "once funny" meme to a 4 year old.
Are you 4 years old?
Ciccio
2010-01-05 15:19:03 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 5, 12:31 am, Michael Siemon <***@sonic.net> wrote:
> In article
> <668e53cb-b40c-4571-8855-***@u41g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
>
>  Ciccio <***@comcast.net> wrote:
> > On Jan 4, 7:49 pm, Michael Siemon <***@sonic.net> wrote:
>
> > > This is rather bizarre on its face:
>
> > That's because it's a JOKE, son...It's a JOKE!
>
> > [UNIX LSD stuff snipped]
>
> > Ciccio
>
> I enjoyed Julian's sig quote the first time I saw it. It was
> still faintly amusing the second time. Eventually, its sheer
> falsity got to me. So sew me.

"Sew" you a dress?...Argh, Argh.

> We are trying (with little luck so far :-)) to teach the "once funny" meme to a 4 year old.
> Are you 4 years old?

No, but I pity any kid who is learning from you.

Ciccio
Julian Macassey
2010-01-05 10:41:51 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 19:49:59 -0800, Michael Siemon <***@sonic.net> wrote:
> In article <***@adeed.tele.com>,
> Julian Macassey <***@tele.com> wrote:
>
>
> Speaking of "sense of humo[u]r", I have recently been noticing
> your sig. Is this a recent change, or have I just been oblivious?

I cycle through various .sigs depending on how I feel.
>
> "Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix.
> I don't think that is a coincidence."
> - Anon, The UNIX-HATERS Handbook
>
> This is rather bizarre on its face: UNIX is a product of Bell Labs,
> with the BSD rewrite being an interesting offshoot, but it hardly
> makes UNIX a "product" of Berkeley. LSD is even less connected
> (invented in Switzerland, used heavily [and idiotically] by the
> CIA, and any connection with Berkeley (other than some use while
> I was there :-)) rather tangential...

I use that .sig because of its very wrongness. Most of
the book is like that, either written in anger or jest, maybe
both.

I Most of the book is like that, either written in anger
or jest, maybe both.

--
"Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix. I don't
think that is a coincidence." - Anon, The UNIX-HATERS Handbook
Todd Michel McComb
2010-01-05 21:17:01 UTC
Permalink
In article <0d375afe-c911-46c2-82f4-***@j19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
Ciccio <***@comcast.net> wrote:
>That said, even if you don't laugh at a joke, like Julian's sig,
>you shouldn't be so damn stupid as to take it seriously.

Jokes are better when they get their underlying facts correct.
Getting everything wrong, as in this case, doesn't leave much space
to be funny. At that point, it's all showmanship, as they say.
Julian Macassey
2010-01-05 21:36:45 UTC
Permalink
On 5 Jan 2010 13:17:01 -0800, Todd Michel McComb <***@medieval.org> wrote:
> In article <0d375afe-c911-46c2-82f4-***@j19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
> Ciccio <***@comcast.net> wrote:
>>That said, even if you don't laugh at a joke, like Julian's sig,
>>you shouldn't be so damn stupid as to take it seriously.
>
> Jokes are better when they get their underlying facts correct.

I will let my Norwegian Blue parrot know that.

> Getting everything wrong, as in this case, doesn't leave much space
> to be funny. At that point, it's all showmanship, as they say.

Or "just a flesh wound" really.


--
"It was not café society. It was Nescafé society." - Noel
Coward about Las Vegas.
Ciccio
2010-01-06 03:01:56 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 5, 1:17 pm, ***@medieval.org (Todd Michel McComb) wrote:
> In article <0d375afe-c911-46c2-82f4-***@j19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
>
> Ciccio  <***@comcast.net> wrote:
> >That said, even if you don't laugh at a joke, like Julian's sig,
> >you shouldn't be so damn stupid as to take it seriously.
>
> Jokes are better when they get their underlying facts correct.

It depends, as many very funny jokes are based upon exaggerations and
distortions. For example, my favorite recent one by Wanda Sykes...

"Tiger Woods is half Black and half Asian. The Black half made him buy
the Cadillac...The Asian half made him crash it.

> Getting everything wrong, as in this case, doesn't leave much space
> to be funny.  

Thousands of comedy routines and jokes prove that to be so wrong.


Ciccio
Todd Michel McComb
2010-01-06 18:37:14 UTC
Permalink
In article <cfcce5ea-0162-480e-84cd-***@l30g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
Ciccio <***@comcast.net> wrote:
>"Tiger Woods is half Black and half Asian. The Black half made him buy
>the Cadillac...The Asian half made him crash it.

This joke starts with an accurate statement. If it started with
"Tiger Woods is half Chinese and half Moroccan" I don't think it'd
be very good. Agree?

I wrote:
>>Getting everything wrong, as in this case, doesn't leave much space
>>to be funny.
>Thousands of comedy routines and jokes prove that to be so wrong.

As stated, it's *less* leeway. There's still atttitude (I think I
said something like that that you snipped). It's just more difficult.

In Julian's case, as I understand his later comments, the basis in
fact for his joke is that the Unix Hater's Handbook actually makes
this statement. We're supposed to be laughing, at least in part,
at that. Not knowing Julian very well, this subtlety in intent had
escaped me.
spamtrap1888
2010-01-05 04:55:49 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 4, 6:58 pm, Julian Macassey <***@tele.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 12:43:40 -0800, sf <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 03:35:35 -0800 (PST), Tim <***@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> >>Q: Why do so many Basque restaurants have communal, crowded seating?
>
> >>A: More people in the blast radius.
>
> > God you're pathetic.  Go back to the woods, hick.
>
>         Well, I thought it was funny. Maybe you want to get your
> sense of humour repaired.

Ye, men, terrorist bomb blast jokes are funny.
Golden California Girls
2010-01-05 17:55:34 UTC
Permalink
spamtrap1888 wrote:
> On Jan 4, 6:58 pm, Julian Macassey <***@tele.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 12:43:40 -0800, sf <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 03:35:35 -0800 (PST), Tim <***@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Q: Why do so many Basque restaurants have communal, crowded seating?
>>>> A: More people in the blast radius.
>>> God you're pathetic. Go back to the woods, hick.
>> Well, I thought it was funny. Maybe you want to get your
>> sense of humour repaired.
>
> Ye, men, terrorist bomb blast jokes are funny.

Please engourage him. Perhaps it will get him on more better watch lists.
sf
2010-01-05 07:55:22 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 02:58:33 GMT, Julian Macassey <***@tele.com>
wrote:

>On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 12:43:40 -0800, sf <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 03:35:35 -0800 (PST), Tim <***@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Q: Why do so many Basque restaurants have communal, crowded seating?
>>>
>>>A: More people in the blast radius.
>>
>> God you're pathetic. Go back to the woods, hick.
>
> Well, I thought it was funny. Maybe you want to get your
>sense of humour repaired.

You two are truly nuts.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.
Julian Macassey
2010-01-05 10:45:17 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 23:55:22 -0800, sf <***@geemail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 02:58:33 GMT, Julian Macassey <***@tele.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 12:43:40 -0800, sf <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 03:35:35 -0800 (PST), Tim <***@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Q: Why do so many Basque restaurants have communal, crowded seating?
>>>>
>>>>A: More people in the blast radius.
>>>
>>> God you're pathetic. Go back to the woods, hick.
>>
>> Well, I thought it was funny. Maybe you want to get your
>>sense of humour repaired.
>
> You two are truly nuts.

And I truly have two nuts.


--
"Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix. I don't
think that is a coincidence." - Anon, The UNIX-HATERS Handbook
Todd Michel McComb
2010-01-05 21:19:19 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@4ax.com>,
sf <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>You two are truly nuts.

The flaw in the joke is that Basque communal seating isn't crowded...
less so than many restaurants.
Pete Fraser
2010-01-06 00:33:35 UTC
Permalink
"Todd Michel McComb" <***@medieval.org> wrote in message
news:hi0acn$ba6$***@agricola.medieval.org...

> The flaw in the joke is that Basque communal seating isn't crowded...
> less so than many restaurants.

Reminds me of one of the lengthy stories on (IIRC) ISIRTA.
The gist was that there was a fire in a cinema in Northern Spain.
The crowding of the cinema and the fact there was only one door
resulted in great loss of life. The moral:
"Don't put all your basques in one exit.".
Julian Macassey
2010-01-03 20:56:37 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 09:34:31 -0800 (PST), Ciccio <***@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> Back in the day, communal seating was prevalent at Basque restaurants
> with multiple courses. They, however, had times certain for seating.
> It was always an enjoyable experience. That, for the most part, has
> disappeared from Basque restaurants. Now, I only experience that at
> social clubs.

That's still true in Basque Country (France/Spain
Pyranees). I enjoyed that, as well as the food. The Basques,
despite their dislike for the Central government seemed pretty
friendly and social people. I enjoyed the local sardines and
cider.


--
"Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix. I don't
think that is a coincidence." - Anon, The UNIX-HATERS Handbook
Ciccio
2010-01-04 00:49:56 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 3, 12:56 pm, Julian Macassey <***@tele.com> wrote:

>         That's still true in Basque Country (France/Spain
> Pyranees). I enjoyed that, as well as the food. The Basques,
> despite their dislike for the Central government seemed pretty
> friendly and social people.

Hmmm. I have known many people who disliked central government to be
very sociable.

Anyhow, in my life I've encountered hospitable folks in many cultures,
here and abroad. I, however, have never known a group to be more
consistently exceedingly hospitable than the Basques, whether they
have been strangers, friends, or family[by marriage].

Ciccio
Steve Fenwick
2010-01-03 08:36:15 UTC
Permalink
In article <hhphto$mui$***@news.eternal-september.org>,
Peter Lawrence <***@aol.com> wrote:

> Steve Fenwick wrote:
> > In article <hhorqn$1f3$***@agricola.medieval.org>,
> > ***@medieval.org (Todd Michel McComb) wrote:
> >> In article <dmartinich-***@text.giganews.com>,
> >> Don Martinich <***@att.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> 10 worst dining trends of the last decade
> >>> I couldn't include every gripe -- mache, water sommeliers, organ-meat
> >>> entrees, unisex bathrooms, bacon tattoos on chefs, over-flaunted
> >>> kitchen burns, chefs tables
> >>> 8. The $40 entree
> >>
> >> It might surprise the author that the price of most things went up
> >> in this decade. Somehow it works that way.
> >
> > $40 is still high for a local neighborhood restaurant. But it's also
> > higher than any place I consider "nice" (e.g., Zucca, House, Canteen)
> > without being "super fancy" (Dining Room at the Ritz, Manresa).
>
> For as long time as I can remember, fresh lobsters have often been a $40
> entrée at many seafood restaurants.

I'll give you that, but also point out that they are also listed as
"A.Q.", which is the restaurant equivalent of "if you have to ask you
can't afford it".

Steaks are getting into the $40+ range, too. But I stand by my assertion
with regard to regular, listed menu items.


> >>> 7. The communal table
> >>
> >> I would like more of these. They seem rather rare.
> >
> > Really don't like these. Tried one once at Slanted Door and really
> > disliked the random "camaraderie" that could not be fixed when two
> > couples really wanted just to talk among themselves and not with the
> > rest of the table.
>
> These work best at more casual and social eateries like sports bars,
> hofbräus, burger and BBQ joints. I don't think they would be too popular in
> more upscale settings.

I don't mind counter seating with individual seats. But if I'm going to
be (literally) cheek-to-cheek with someone else, I want the choice to be
mine. And at a counter, I'm facing the waiter, not someone else with
whom there may be a social requirement to converse.


> >>> 6. Proudly obnoxious fast food options
> >>
> >> Why do people like their food to be obnoxious? I have no idea, but
> >> obviously there are people who like that tack.
> >
> > I'm not sure what this means, but if it includes the Carl's Jr. "we're
> > good because we're messy" concept, yes, it's off-putting.
>
> Why? I think it's just a reaction to all the froufrou and in vogue PC foods
> that people constantly being bombarded with by the media.

There are a few messy burgers I like, but it's in spite of the
messiness, not due to it.

What are the froufrou and in vogue PC foods to which you refer? I skip
TV commercials and don't read them in print, so I must not be seeing
them. Or are you talking about TV shows about food?


> >>> 4. Foam
> >>
> >> I'm ambivalent.
> >
> > As with molecular gastronomy, if it's done well and has a purpose that
> > adds to the dish/meal, I have no problem with it. If it's just added
> > because the CIA-fresh chef thinks it's needed to be "haute cuisine",
> > then it's as useless as any pointless frill.
>
> Foam -- the antithesis of the proudly obnoxious fast food options. No
> wonder you find the obnoxious fast food options off-putting. You're a foam
> person. ;-)

I don't mind foam, but I don't seek it out. Same with M.G., although two
plane tickets to Spain and reservations at El Bulli would be thankfully
accepted. ;)

Steve

--
steve <at> w0x0f <dot> com
"Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to
skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, chip shot in the other, body thoroughly
used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
Todd Michel McComb
2010-01-03 08:40:31 UTC
Permalink
In article <nospam-***@nothing.attdns.com>,
Steve Fenwick <***@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>I'll give you that, but also point out that they are also listed as
>"A.Q.", which is the restaurant equivalent of "if you have to ask you
>can't afford it".

Sometimes the seasonally priced items are in the same price range
as other menu items.

>I don't mind counter seating with individual seats. But if I'm
>going to be (literally) cheek-to-cheek with someone else, I want
>the choice to be mine.

Have you been to communal seating where you have no choice at all
who you sit with? (I guess the least choice I can think of was
with Amtrak.) Usually, there's some choice involved, IME, often
quite a bit.
Steve Fenwick
2010-01-03 09:03:00 UTC
Permalink
In article <hhpl5v$2ge$***@agricola.medieval.org>,
***@medieval.org (Todd Michel McComb) wrote:

> In article <nospam-***@nothing.attdns.com>,
> Steve Fenwick <***@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> >I'll give you that, but also point out that they are also listed as
> >"A.Q.", which is the restaurant equivalent of "if you have to ask you
> >can't afford it".
>
> Sometimes the seasonally priced items are in the same price range
> as other menu items.

Sure; I note that, at the Fish Market for example, there are three menu
items (including Australian lobster but not Maine lobster) at or above
$40. Even at Forbes Mill, the high-end steaks and some of the "regular"
steaks are at or above $40 (I'll credit $39 the same as $40), but most
of the entrees (including several decent steaks) are below.


> >I don't mind counter seating with individual seats. But if I'm
> >going to be (literally) cheek-to-cheek with someone else, I want
> >the choice to be mine.
>
> Have you been to communal seating where you have no choice at all
> who you sit with? (I guess the least choice I can think of was
> with Amtrak.) Usually, there's some choice involved, IME, often
> quite a bit.

Last I recall were places like theme parks (big benches, especially if
there is a hofbrau/Octoberfest theme) or sports bars (again, benches at
picnic tables). If they're crowded, there is little choice. In the case
of Slanted Door, herself and I were seated side-by-side, and the hostess
seated other couples across from us (also side-by-side).

Never had a problem with Amtrak, but I always travelled east of the
Mississippi and quite a while ago, so YMMV.

Steve

--
steve <at> w0x0f <dot> com
"Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to
skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, chip shot in the other, body thoroughly
used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
Todd Michel McComb
2010-01-03 09:11:36 UTC
Permalink
In article <nospam-***@nothing.attdns.com>,
Steve Fenwick <***@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>If they're crowded, there is little choice.

This is true, although if a place is that crowded, if they aren't
doing communal tables, that probably means you're going to wait for
a seat.
Steve Fenwick
2010-01-03 18:21:37 UTC
Permalink
In article <hhpn08$2ji$***@agricola.medieval.org>,
***@medieval.org (Todd Michel McComb) wrote:

> In article <nospam-***@nothing.attdns.com>,
> Steve Fenwick <***@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> >If they're crowded, there is little choice.
>
> This is true, although if a place is that crowded, if they aren't
> doing communal tables, that probably means you're going to wait for
> a seat.

I'd rather wait for a seat than sit at a crowded communal table. On a
cruise, I'd rather have a table for two (or the size of my party) than
be part of an eight-top. Not a big fan of "banquet" functions that have
big tables, either.

Steve

--
steve <at> w0x0f <dot> com
"Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to
skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, chip shot in the other, body thoroughly
used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
Todd Michel McComb
2010-01-03 19:53:51 UTC
Permalink
In article <nospam-***@nothing.attdns.com>,
Steve Fenwick <***@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>Not a big fan of "banquet" functions that have big tables, either.

Why else would you go to a banquet? Or are you there grudgingly
in the first place? I hope that didn't come out as hostile; I just
don't understand this point of view.

I wouldn't want to sit with randomly selected strangers every meal
I eat out, but I think it's often fun, especially when they aren't
so randomly selected.
Peter Lawrence
2010-01-03 20:00:23 UTC
Permalink
Todd Michel McComb wrote:
> In article <nospam-***@nothing.attdns.com>,
> Steve Fenwick <***@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> Not a big fan of "banquet" functions that have big tables, either.
>
> Why else would you go to a banquet? Or are you there grudgingly
> in the first place? I hope that didn't come out as hostile; I just
> don't understand this point of view.
>
> I wouldn't want to sit with randomly selected strangers every meal
> I eat out, but I think it's often fun, especially when they aren't
> so randomly selected.

I just think Steve has a deep-seated aversion to socializing with strangers.
He is probably not big into small talk either.

(Not there's nothing wrong with that. Being anti-social isn't a crime.)

;-)


- Peter
Steve Fenwick
2010-01-03 20:29:56 UTC
Permalink
In article <hhqt0p$5te$***@news.eternal-september.org>,
Peter Lawrence <***@aol.com> wrote:

> Todd Michel McComb wrote:
> > In article <nospam-***@nothing.attdns.com>,
> > Steve Fenwick <***@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> Not a big fan of "banquet" functions that have big tables, either.
> >
> > Why else would you go to a banquet? Or are you there grudgingly
> > in the first place? I hope that didn't come out as hostile; I just
> > don't understand this point of view.
> >
> > I wouldn't want to sit with randomly selected strangers every meal
> > I eat out, but I think it's often fun, especially when they aren't
> > so randomly selected.
>
> I just think Steve has a deep-seated aversion to socializing with strangers.
> He is probably not big into small talk either.

It's odd. In the Bay Area, we have almost no social life. In Ashland, we
have parties every week. Surprisingly big into small talk with people we
already know, but not with strangers. We dilute the strangeness by
adding individuals to our circle of acquaintances slowly. It's just a
comfort thing.

Steve

--
steve <at> w0x0f <dot> com
"Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to
skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, chip shot in the other, body thoroughly
used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
Peter Lawrence
2010-01-03 21:23:43 UTC
Permalink
Steve Fenwick wrote:
>
> It's odd. In the Bay Area, we have almost no social life. In Ashland, we
> have parties every week.

It's interesting that you mentioned this, because I've noticed that when I
I'm in Oregon, the people there are more into throwing parties on a regular
basis versus people here in the Bay Area. Maybe it's because there are more
social activities one can avail themselves here in the Bay Area than in most
parts of Oregon.


- Peter
Steve Fenwick
2010-01-03 23:54:15 UTC
Permalink
In article <hhr1t1$nue$***@news.eternal-september.org>,
Peter Lawrence <***@aol.com> wrote:

> Steve Fenwick wrote:
> >
> > It's odd. In the Bay Area, we have almost no social life. In Ashland, we
> > have parties every week.
>
> It's interesting that you mentioned this, because I've noticed that when I
> I'm in Oregon, the people there are more into throwing parties on a regular
> basis versus people here in the Bay Area. Maybe it's because there are more
> social activities one can avail themselves here in the Bay Area than in most
> parts of Oregon.

Could be, although there seem to be a proportionate amount here--bars,
churches, movies, restaurants, etc. We're actually at the extreme end as
best I can tell for big parties (6-20 guests), where others are in to
small parties (potlucks, go to a movie, that sort of thing). A lot of my
acquaintances in the Bay Area are into outdoors activities, and I'm not.
Or children-centric activities, and I'm not into those. And the whole
party-with-coworkers never worked for me.

Steve

--
steve <at> w0x0f <dot> com
"Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to
skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, chip shot in the other, body thoroughly
used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
Steve Fenwick
2010-01-03 20:27:18 UTC
Permalink
In article <hhqskf$476$***@agricola.medieval.org>,
***@medieval.org (Todd Michel McComb) wrote:

> In article <nospam-***@nothing.attdns.com>,
> Steve Fenwick <***@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> >Not a big fan of "banquet" functions that have big tables, either.
>
> Why else would you go to a banquet? Or are you there grudgingly
> in the first place? I hope that didn't come out as hostile; I just
> don't understand this point of view.

Weddings are fine; I generally know most of the people involved (cousins
or close friends).

We will go to some organizational functions (e.g., dinners for a
charity) when we know some of the other people there. But we skip the
ones where we know no one from prior association. We're there to show
support for the organization or individual, not to meet others.
Sometimes we just write a check or send a card.

There's all sorts of folks with different temperaments for socializing,
from complete hermits to those who go to any function or activity ust to
be with others.


> I wouldn't want to sit with randomly selected strangers every meal
> I eat out, but I think it's often fun, especially when they aren't
> so randomly selected.

Except at many of the venues discussed, they are completely randomly
selected.

Steve

--
steve <at> w0x0f <dot> com
"Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to
skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, chip shot in the other, body thoroughly
used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
Todd Michel McComb
2010-01-03 20:35:58 UTC
Permalink
In article <nospam-***@news.eternal-september.org>,
Steve Fenwick <***@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>Except at many of the venues discussed, they are completely randomly
>selected.

Well, I have to say, this part amuses me a bit. I often have a bit
of a choice, in communal environments, on where to sit or whom to
welcome. It's in a continuum of control. Even when a host totally
decides who is sitting where, I think you'll find that if you watch
what they do, it's not quite random. ;-)
Steve Fenwick
2010-01-03 20:42:12 UTC
Permalink
In article <hhqv3e$4ce$***@agricola.medieval.org>,
***@medieval.org (Todd Michel McComb) wrote:

> In article <nospam-***@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Steve Fenwick <***@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> >Except at many of the venues discussed, they are completely randomly
> >selected.
>
> Well, I have to say, this part amuses me a bit. I often have a bit
> of a choice, in communal environments, on where to sit or whom to
> welcome. It's in a continuum of control. Even when a host totally
> decides who is sitting where, I think you'll find that if you watch
> what they do, it's not quite random. ;-)

Until someone else sits down next to you...

Steve

--
steve <at> w0x0f <dot> com
"Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to
skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, chip shot in the other, body thoroughly
used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
Todd Michel McComb
2010-01-03 20:48:29 UTC
Permalink
In article <nospam-***@news.eternal-september.org>,
Steve Fenwick <***@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>Until someone else sits down next to you...

This would be someone completely oblivious to where they're sitting,
I take it?

I think we might have different ideas of random.
Steve Fenwick
2010-01-03 23:47:19 UTC
Permalink
In article <hhqvqt$4er$***@agricola.medieval.org>,
***@medieval.org (Todd Michel McComb) wrote:

> In article <nospam-***@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Steve Fenwick <***@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> >Until someone else sits down next to you...
>
> This would be someone completely oblivious to where they're sitting,
> I take it?
>
> I think we might have different ideas of random.

You wrote:
> Well, I have to say, this part amuses me a bit. I often have a bit
> of a choice, in communal environments, on where to sit or whom to
> welcome. It's in a continuum of control. Even when a host totally
> decides who is sitting where, I think you'll find that if you watch
> what they do, it's not quite random. ;-)

I replied:
> Until someone else sits down next to you...

My point is that once you've sat, unless you're willing to move, a new
patron may sit/be seated next to you, and you had no choice or control
over that. Someone else may *want* to sit next to someone already
seated, because they're at the more-social end of the socially open
spectrum, or it's gotten more crowded since you sat.

Steve

--
steve <at> w0x0f <dot> com
"Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to
skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, chip shot in the other, body thoroughly
used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
Pete Fraser
2010-01-03 15:40:19 UTC
Permalink
"Peter Lawrence" <***@aol.com> wrote in message
news:hhphto$mui$***@news.eternal-september.org...

> [communal tables] work best at more casual and social eateries like sports
> bars, hofbräus, burger and BBQ joints. I don't think they would be too
> popular in more upscale settings.

I've sat at communal tables at many of my favorite local restaurants,
and they usually work well for me. If you want to be left alone folks
usually get the hint.

These restaurants tend to have a casual atmosphere, but good to great food.
Examples include A Cote, Cesar, Pizzaiola, Barlata, Camino, etc.
spamtrap1888
2010-01-03 17:59:43 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 2, 8:57 pm, Steve Fenwick <***@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <hhorqn$***@agricola.medieval.org>,
>  ***@medieval.org (Todd Michel McComb) wrote:
>
> > In article <dmartinich-***@text.giganews.com>,
> > Don Martinich  <***@att.net> wrote:

> > >7. The communal table
>
> > I would like more of these.  They seem rather rare.
>
> Really don't like these. Tried one once at Slanted Door and really
> disliked the random "camaraderie" that could not be fixed when two
> couples really wanted just to talk among themselves and not with the
> rest of the table.

This can work if it's truly communal and everyone expects it to be. It
works at church festivals and local Oktoberfests. Lou Mitchell's
breakfast place in Chicago has a couple, which act as a sort of
counter where you can face your breakfast partner.

Shared tables (for six) at Suppenkueche didn't work the first time we
were there: the other couple didn't even look up when we were seated
with them. They work if the other couple is younger and more flexible.

I hate sharing small tables and the forced bonhomie of bed and
breakfast joints. At least at Lou's cross-party conversation is
limited to "Could you pass the marmelade please?"
>
Steve Fenwick
2010-01-03 18:25:02 UTC
Permalink
In article
<61d2e7b6-81af-490a-8dd2-***@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
spamtrap1888 <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> I hate sharing small tables and the forced bonhomie of bed and
> breakfast joints. At least at Lou's cross-party conversation is
> limited to "Could you pass the marmelade please?"
> >

Ya, even though there's one B&B I like (because we know and like the
owners), I rarely liked the morning table. If the food hadn't been so
good, we'd probably have slept in.

Steve

--
steve <at> w0x0f <dot> com
"Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to
skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, chip shot in the other, body thoroughly
used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
Todd Michel McComb
2010-01-03 20:00:09 UTC
Permalink
In article <61d2e7b6-81af-490a-8dd2-***@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
spamtrap1888 <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>... which act as a sort of counter where you can face your breakfast
>partner.

I've seen a couple of remarks about sitting side-by-side or across
from a partner. My partner and I prefer sitting side-by-side. Not
you?

>They work if the other couple is younger and more flexible.

Why the asymmetry?
Steve Fenwick
2010-01-03 20:31:21 UTC
Permalink
In article <hhqt09$499$***@agricola.medieval.org>,
***@medieval.org (Todd Michel McComb) wrote:

> In article
> <61d2e7b6-81af-490a-8dd2-***@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
> spamtrap1888 <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >... which act as a sort of counter where you can face your breakfast
> >partner.
>
> I've seen a couple of remarks about sitting side-by-side or across
> from a partner. My partner and I prefer sitting side-by-side. Not
> you?

Both work; side-by-side is better when there's a view, or in a noisy
environment.


> >They work if the other couple is younger and more flexible.
>
> Why the asymmetry?

Because us old fogies are stuck in our ways, and the ear trumpets only
work from the front :)

Steve

--
steve <at> w0x0f <dot> com
"Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to
skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, chip shot in the other, body thoroughly
used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
cph
2010-01-05 18:25:24 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 2, 8:57 pm, Steve Fenwick <***@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <hhorqn$***@agricola.medieval.org>,
>  ***@medieval.org (Todd Michel McComb) wrote:
>

> > >4. Foam
>
> > I'm ambivalent.
>
> As with molecular gastronomy, if it's done well and has a purpose that
> adds to the dish/meal, I have no problem with it. If it's just added
> because the CIA-fresh chef thinks it's needed to be "haute cuisine",
> then it's as useless as any pointless frill.
>

Remember Marcel on Top Chef? Everything he cooked was "foam" this and
"foam" that....
Loading...