Jump to content

The Bruni Thread


Guest Aaron T

Recommended Posts

So you do or you don't think all types and levels of dining options get "equal consideration" when the Restaurants critic decides what to review?

Clearly they don't, since Bruni has reviewed only two delis in over 3½ years on the job.

 

 

1. that simply doesn't follow at all. all that it says is that there aren't very many notable delis. well, yeah.

 

2. Freeman's is very popular and has a lot of buzz (and had even more so). it was and is a notable restaurant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 7.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

since you have decided to agree with us, you are now correct.

 

I thought we weren't supposed to be children.

 

Nathan, as I've just shown, it's impossible for anyone who isn't inside your head to actually know what your view is. It seems you can't be bothered to explain it. I still have no idea whether I agree with you or not.

 

I don't agree with Sneak, who is...well...sneaking the concept of special considerations in through the back door.

Link to post
Share on other sites
since you have decided to agree with us, you are now correct.

 

I thought we weren't supposed to be children.

 

Nathan, as I've just shown, it's impossible for anyone who isn't inside your head to actually know what your view is. It seems you can't be bothered to explain it. I still have no idea whether I agree with you or not.

 

I don't agree with Sneak, who is...well...sneaking the concept of special considerations in through the back door.

 

 

"in practice" = "de facto"

 

what do you think "de facto" means? what do you think I've been saying all along?

Link to post
Share on other sites
So you do or you don't think all types and levels of dining options get "equal consideration" when the Restaurants critic decides what to review?

Clearly they don't, since Bruni has reviewed only two delis in over 3½ years on the job.

 

 

1. that simply doesn't follow at all. all that it says is that there aren't very many notable delis. well, yeah.

It does follow, unless you imagine that the result is the outcome of Bruni dining even-handedly at delis and at "(restaurants which are the) work of serious chefs or ambitious restaurateurs whose efforts pique the curiosity of food lovers and cry out for assessment" (Bruni).

 

It would be heart-warming to think that he does that. We all know he doesn't. He's not going to look at a deli unless something sets it dramatically apart from the pack.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So you do or you don't think all types and levels of dining options get "equal consideration" when the Restaurants critic decides what to review?

Clearly they don't, since Bruni has reviewed only two delis in over 3½ years on the job.

 

 

1. that simply doesn't follow at all. all that it says is that there aren't very many notable delis. well, yeah.

It does follow, unless you imagine that the result is the outcome of Bruni dining even-handedly at delis and at "work of serious chefs or ambitious restaurateurs whose efforts pique the curiosity of food lovers and cry out for assessment" (Bruni).

 

It would be heart-warming to think that he does that. We all know he doesn't. He's not going to look at a deli unless something sets it dramatically apart from the pack.

 

that's because we all know delis generally suck. and that they're most likely to be notable for historical reasons. well, he's now covered the notable ones. an equal playing field doesn't mean it's a tabula rasa. NO ONE has been saying that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
"in practice" = "de facto"

 

what do you think "de facto" means? what do you think I've been saying all along?

Thanks.

 

If you read back over the last page or so, you'll see that the principle of (what I now call) "special considerations" appears starkly in what Sneak intends to be a statement of (what he'd like to be) the de facto approach.

Link to post
Share on other sites
that's because we all know delis generally suck. and that they're most likely to be notable for historical reasons. well, he's now covered the notable ones. an equal playing field doesn't mean it's a tabula rasa. NO ONE has been saying that.

 

That's not true.

 

Sarge's, for example, doesn't suck. For what it is, it's good. But it's in no way a review candidate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
"in practice" = "de facto"

 

what do you think "de facto" means? what do you think I've been saying all along?

Thanks.

 

If you read back over the last page or so, you'll see that the principle of (what I now call) "special considerations" appears starkly in what Sneak intends to be a statement of (what he'd like to be) the de facto approach.

 

 

yeah, I don't know what he was saying there. please note that I did not say that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
that's because we all know delis generally suck. and that they're most likely to be notable for historical reasons. well, he's now covered the notable ones. an equal playing field doesn't mean it's a tabula rasa. NO ONE has been saying that.

A tabula rasa is a blank page - or tablet, if you prefer. The term comes down to us from Locke (just in case you think I'm floundering).

 

If you do attach any meaning to "equal consideration", perhaps you'd tell me what it is. Because I have no idea what you mean. (I do, of course: I think you want it to mean both a level playing field and a playing field on which everyone knows special considerations apply to cheap/causal/genre places. But that's not very coherent.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
that's because we all know delis generally suck. and that they're most likely to be notable for historical reasons. well, he's now covered the notable ones. an equal playing field doesn't mean it's a tabula rasa. NO ONE has been saying that.

 

That's not true.

 

Sarge's, for example, doesn't suck. For what it is, it's good. But it's in no way a review candidate.

 

 

good or excellent? (across the menu.) especially notable for anything? (like Katz's or 2nd Avenue)

 

edit: I said "generally suck"....I stand by that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If you read back over the last page or so, you'll see that the principle of (what I now call) "special considerations" appears starkly in what Sneak intends to be a statement of (what he'd like to be) the de facto approach.

 

Yeah. But if you don't think that the way you put things is of enormous importance in rulemaking/principlestating, you're nuts.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
good or excellent? (across the menu.) especially notable for anything? (like Katz's or 2nd Avenue)

 

edit: I said "generally suck"....I stand by that.

 

 

Good across the board. Not excellent in anything.

 

Ben's also doesn't suck.

 

I don't want to revive this argument, but since until yesterday you didn't know what a Jewish deli was, how can you claim to have eaten in enough of them to be able to say that they "generally suck"?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...