There are restaurants that I’ve given bad reviews to, and that I’ve clearly said “I will have to give them another chance”. Those, I can visit again. If I get tossed, I can tell them “um, I was going to give you guys another chance but if you won’t have me, you have EVERY right to refuse to give me service”. Which I believe, they do.

And I will not be pouting about it. If that happens, I brought it all on myself.

The reason why I use myself as an example is because I don’t know Alexandra Gill well enough, but if it had been me, I would have known that a scathing review can lead to refusal of service.

On a side note – I have never tried Fuel but friends of mine have and they say it’s awesome, so I’ll have to try them when I come back to Vancouver.

Although you’ve baited the hook generously, I can only offer you a nibble.

Ignorant yes, slut perhaps, but I rarely read too much into things, quite frankly that just smacks of effort. Suspicions aside, you’re quite correct. It is completely situation specific and I would imagine it won’t happen again.

Now that I get to sit in the armchair and qback from the sidelines, I’m the biggest fan of those ‘tin cup’ moments that light up the industry’s imagination. And, like foie, feenies and freedom fries, this qualifies as such.

The first volley has been launched, and the casualties are minimal, but will the next upstart restaurant to brave Ms.Gill’s saucy quill be collateral damage?

Maybe, just maybe, it’s this adversarial approach that is the wetnurse to writers like AA Gill, and celebrities like Gordon f’ing Ramsay, nurturing the animosity and disdain until the lines are finally drawn in the sand and it all goes Feenie on us.

I could be reading far too much into it, sure, but isn’t that the point? Don’t writers, bloggers and editors get goosebumps about food fights and ego’s that go bump in the night? It’s the grass you graze on, the teat you suckle and the bacon you bring home.

Stories that engage us, force us to ask difficult questions, and challenge what we currently hold dear, these are the lifeblood of any writer. This story is the whole raison d’etre of this website, and the millions like it. It exists to feed us with the kibbles and bits with which we form our opinions on the industry. And it does it well (yes, i’m sucking up).

That being said, however, just because we want to rise above it all doesn’t mean we don’t want to watch a little. If I’m giving it too much Don King and not enough Tom Brokaw, then I apologize, but really, who can look away from a pillowfight like this?

What part of that is even possible? Sean, you ignorant slut. :-)

I think you’re reading way too much into this. This wasn’t the beginnings of a city-wide restaurateur revolt. It was an isolated and situation-specific incident, one that – despite your suspicions to the contrary – Fuel has not been bragging about (at least to me).

As much as they were probably atwitter at doing what most of us wish we had the stones to do, I think it’s simply poured more Fuel on the fire.

A clever marketing tool, clearly, complete with the requisite ‘leak’ moments later. I can’t help but imagine the chef hi-fiving the brigade as they all pat themselves on the back for landing a blow for all the poor embattled restaurateurs.

But what were they thinking? Fighting fire with fire maybe? That strategy could only mean that they were answering bad press with worse press, and feed this ‘tiny group of restaurateurs and hangers ons’ with the same such tripe, gossip and innuendo as Mz Gill herself dishes out in the Globe.

I remember when a local restaurateur called me up to form a group to march on city hall and battle the liquor board head on. As I sent him off with a hearty handshake and a ‘have fun storming the castle!’ I remember thinking, damn. . i’m sure glad someone’s doing something and I’m even more glad it isn’t me.

Perhaps Fuel has landed a blow, but to what end, and what are we fighting for? This type of circus mentality only further degrades the dialogue, draws lines in the sand and legitimizes the fact that Ms. Gill’s articles read more like S.i.t.C. than a serious food column.

I can’t help but feel happy for Fuel, they got what everyone wants, a chance to give it back to a critic and be the alpha for a change. Clearly, Alex has a thick enough skin to deal with it professionally, but I wonder, what if she was going back to make good on that first review, and deliver a stunner of a serious article, bringing to the national spotlight a bright beacon of inspired West Coast cuisine? What if she’d already had it in her mind she’d been rough on them, and finally had some column inches to devote their way as way of apology?

I’d feel pretty awkward then, but thankfully, we’ll never know, and the beat goes on.

fuel was #1 on my to-dine list.

WAS being the operative word. a restaurant so terrified of criticism is never one that i would support with my hard-earned dollars.

*cough*

Not funny, at all, but very.

Best bet: stop reading the Globe.

Tom