fine dining

"Bobo Bonobo®" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

You say that facetiously, but I think that tobacco smoke indicates a
pigsty, not a restaurant. Only a pig would smoke in a restaurant in
2007.

Perhaps, but it is still allowed in many restaurants in some states. Nevada
comes to mind, and in places that are not what you'd call fine dining, but
very good dining. I've gone into places not thinking there would be smokers
and ended up near them.

sf said:

Quoted message said:

I don't care about their perception. They are wrong, wrong, wrong. Being
the best around does not make it fine dining. If a chip wagon is the only
food vendor for 100 miles it is still a chip wagon, not a fine dining
establishment.

Agreed, not fine dining - but in some areas, that's all there is.
Some places have a diner out in the middle of nowhere where locals
have a tradition of gathering on a certian night. It's a nohost party
where people can meet, eat and catch up on life.

Sure. It is the finest they have...... but it is not fine dining.

sf said:

Quoted message said:

But is it "fine dining" if there is nothing better around?

Does a tree make a sound in the forest if no one is around to hear it
fall?

Yes..... but no one hears it :-)

sf said:

Quoted message said:

I am sure that she must be a truly discriminating diner if she would rather
eat at a fast food joint than catch a whiff of tobacco smoke.

That's her choice. It would be mine too. I don't want to be around
smoke and smokers.

Fair enough. You and she can have the crappy food and the screaming kids.
I'll put up with a little smoke.

Bobo Bonobo® said:

You say that facetiously, but I think that tobacco smoke indicates a
pigsty, not a restaurant. Only a pig would smoke in a restaurant in
2007.

Would 1997 be a better year to smoke in a restaurant?

Do you draw the distinction between years just because society
and the government has progressively deemed it disgusting to
smoke cigarettes, anywhere, over the last 15 years? Would your
opinion have been the same 20 years ago?

-sw

Edwin Pawlowski said:

Perhaps, but it is still allowed in many restaurants in some states. Nevada
comes to mind, and in places that are not what you'd call fine dining, but
very good dining. I've gone into places not thinking there would be smokers
and ended up near them.

Do they not have separate smoking and non-smoking sections?

I can see how that if you're not used to being ion a municipality
that allows smoking, you're not used to having to specify smoking
or non.

That happened to us here in Austin the other night, where I've
lived for 7 years and never knew they allowed smoking. We went
to a restaurant and were seated in the non-smoking section
totally unaware that they actually *have* a smoking section.
Had we known, we probably would have chosen the smoking section.
This was one of only 2 or 3 restaurants in town that somehow
escaped the ban and were grand-fathered under the old laws.

-sw

"Brian Christiansen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The other day, I was listening to a talk radio program. The topic of
discusssion was smoking laws.

A caller called in to say that because of the smoking laws in her town
being too lax (I think), she could not go to "fine dining" restaraunts
like Chilis or Applebees, and was forced to go to fast food joints.

Perhaps my standards aren't very high because I have no problem eating at
places like that, I even have no problem eating at fast food joints, for
that matter. By the same token, I really don't think of places like
Applebees, etc. to be "fine dining," and that they are really only perhaps
a half-step to a step above fast food joints. Even a good part of that is
because they have nicer decor.

Eesh. Two restaurants you couldn't pay me to eat at are Chilis or
Applebees. Tried each one once and that was enough. Can't say that I care
for Olive Garden either and I don't think I would go to Red Lobster either.
I consider none of these places to be "fine dining". More like family
restaurants. But perhaps if you live in a small town, that might be the
best you can get.

I also am not fond of many "fine dining" places because I don't like so much
to dress up and I don't generally like the kind of food they serve. In this
area, steak and seafood seem to be the big things in those types of places.

My idea of fine dining starts with the menu. It is not laminated plastic
and does not have colorful photographs of the food on it. But there's more
to it than that because there are plenty of diners and greasy spoons with
menus that have no pictures.

The tables will probably have cloths on them and the napkins will most
likely be cloth. Flatware and dishes will be high quality. Lighting and
music (if any) will be subdued. The majority of the food will be made from
scratch. And the service will generally be at a somewhat relaxed pace. In
other words you won't feel like you need to get in and right back out again
the minute you've finished your food.

"Dave Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

sf said:

Quoted message said:

I am sure that she must be a truly discriminating diner if she would
rather
eat at a fast food joint than catch a whiff of tobacco smoke.

That's her choice. It would be mine too. I don't want to be around
smoke and smokers.

Fair enough. You and she can have the crappy food and the screaming kids.
I'll put up with a little smoke.

I'd rather never eat out if I had to put up with crappy food, screaming kids
or smoke. But one doesn't always know if the food is crappy and the kids
are screaming.
Why settle for it?
Dee Dee

"Julie Bove" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

My idea of fine dining starts with the menu. It is not laminated plastic
and does not have colorful photographs of the food on it. But there's
more to it than that because there are plenty of diners and greasy spoons
with menus that have no pictures.

Oh, that just cracked me up.

Quoted message said:

The tables will probably have cloths on them and the napkins will most
likely be cloth. Flatware and dishes will be high quality. Lighting and
music (if any) will be subdued.

I've been to a few fining dining establishments, they would fit into
this description. I'm more comfortable in relaxed settings, truth be
told, though steak houses are fine with me.

nancy

"Julie Bove" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:VVlHi.1864$fz2.1842@trndny03...
Can't say that I care

Quoted message said:

for Olive Garden either and I don't think I would go to Red Lobster
either. I consider none of these places to be "fine dining". More like
family restaurants. But perhaps if you live in a small town, that might
be the best you can get.

Red Lobster and Olive Garden are about the best you can get where we live --
and then it isn't exactly cheap for what you get. When they first opened
up, we went once to both. I've already written my review of my problem with
both, but I noticed today as we were driving by that although previously the
parking lots have been full up and brimming over into other businesses,
today they had plenty of spaces.

The same as happened somewhat to Chili's, although it has taken a little
longer. They still get a good business. Now I see there will be a TGIF
coming. Our town is growing a lot, but there are no bistro-type
restaurants; just chains.

That's fine with me -- everytime I buy something for my kitchen, I consider
it just the price of a meal out -- not extravagance.
Dee Dee

Dave Smith said:

sf said:

Quoted message said:

But is it "fine dining" if there is nothing better around?

Does a tree make a sound in the forest if no one is around to hear it
fall?

Yes..... but no one hears it :-)

Smart man.
--

History is a vast early warning system
Norman Cousins

Dave Smith said:

sf said:

Quoted message said:

I don't care about their perception. They are wrong, wrong, wrong. Being
the best around does not make it fine dining. If a chip wagon is the only
food vendor for 100 miles it is still a chip wagon, not a fine dining
establishment.

Agreed, not fine dining - but in some areas, that's all there is.
Some places have a diner out in the middle of nowhere where locals
have a tradition of gathering on a certian night. It's a nohost party
where people can meet, eat and catch up on life.

Sure. It is the finest they have...... but it is not fine dining.

Agreed again, but I think in the OP (which I didn't see and can't find
via google) "fine dining" was said with sarcasm, not in ignorance.
--

History is a vast early warning system
Norman Cousins

Quoted message said:

Fair enough. You and she can have the crappy
food and the screaming kids. I'll put up with a
little smoke.

I consider myself fortunate to live in a state where it's illegal to
smoke in restaurants. This way I don't have to go to McDonalds to
get away from smoke. FWIW, I have nothing against people who smoke.
I just don't want to breather the stuff with what's left of my lungs.
:^)

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

=============================>
Bass Home Electronics
941-925-8650
4883 Fallcrest Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34233
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
=============================>

<sf> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 22:25:34 -0400, Dave Smith
<[email hidden]> wrote:

Agreed again, but I think in the OP (which I didn't see and can't find
via google) "fine dining" was said with sarcasm, not in ignorance.

Yes, it was, but I think that "fine dining," or something like that was the
term that the caller used. I live in Tucson, AZ where just recently, a
referendum was passed that outlawed restaurants even having seperate rooms
as smoking sections, so I really don't have to make that choice.

I do not remember where the caller to the radio show was from. I am not
even sure what show it was. Incidentally, this is the Original Poster.

Brian Christiansen

Brian Christiansen said:

<sf> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 22:25:34 -0400, Dave Smith
<[email hidden]> wrote:

Agreed again, but I think in the OP (which I didn't see and can't find
via google) "fine dining" was said with sarcasm, not in ignorance.

Yes, it was, but I think that "fine dining," or something like that was the
term that the caller used. I live in Tucson, AZ where just recently, a
referendum was passed that outlawed restaurants even having seperate rooms
as smoking sections, so I really don't have to make that choice.

I do not remember where the caller to the radio show was from. I am not
even sure what show it was. Incidentally, this is the Original Poster.

Brian Christiansen

Thank you, Brian.
--

History is a vast early warning system
Norman Cousins

"Robert L Bass" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:FlnHi.2677$io2.933@trnddc06...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Fair enough. You and she can have the crappy
food and the screaming kids. I'll put up with a
little smoke.

I consider myself fortunate to live in a state where it's illegal to smoke
in restaurants. This way I don't have to go to McDonalds to get away from
smoke. FWIW, I have nothing against people who smoke. I just don't want
to breather the stuff with what's left of my lungs. :^)

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

I think the contents of the cigarette must've changed. I can't recall that
awful odor until the last 25 years.
Dee Dee

Steve Wertz said:

Bobo Bonobo® said:

You say that facetiously, but I think that tobacco smoke indicates a
pigsty, not a restaurant. Only a pig would smoke in a restaurant in
2007.

Would 1997 be a better year to smoke in a restaurant?

Do you draw the distinction between years just because society
and the government has progressively deemed it disgusting to
smoke cigarettes, anywhere, over the last 15 years? Would your
opinion have been the same 20 years ago?

He may have worded it badly, but cigarettes and food do not mix. My
opinion was no different 20 years ago. His probably hasn't changed
either.

--

History is a vast early warning system
Norman Cousins

In article said:

Dave Smith said:

Brian Christiansen said:

The other day, I was listening to a talk radio program. The topic of
discusssion was smoking laws.

A caller called in to say that because of the smoking laws in her town
being
too lax (I think), she could not go to "fine dining" restaraunts like
Chilis or Applebees, and was forced to go to fast food joints.

Perhaps my standards aren't very high because I have no problem eating at
places like that, I even have no problem eating at fast food joints, for
that matter. By the same token, I really don't think of places like
Applebees, etc. to be "fine dining," and that they are really only perhaps
a
half-step to a step above fast food joints. Even a good part of that is
because they have nicer decor.

I am sure that she must be a truly discriminating diner if she would rather
eat at a fast food joint than catch a whiff of tobacco smoke.

That's her choice. It would be mine too. I don't want to be around
smoke and smokers.

It ruins the taste of the food.

Fortunately, more and more cities are banning smoking in public places.
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a [censored]" -- Jack Nicholson

In article <[email hidden]>,

Peter A said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden]
says...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'm talking about people's perception. In their experience that might
well be their idea of fine dining ... hard to argue that one since the
woman
in question thought so.

I don't care about their perception. They are wrong, wrong, wrong. Being
the best around does not make it fine dining. If a chip wagon is the only
food vendor for 100 miles it is still a chip wagon, not a fine dining
establishment.

Exactly. Well, perhaps not exactly - peoples' perceptions are important
to them, but that does not make them right. There are millions of people
who think that Rush speaks the truth, that OJ is innocent, that Jesus
saves, that the world was created 6000 years ago, that astrology
predicts the future, that Bush is a great president, that women are
inferior to men, that Velveeta tastes good, and that Appleby's is fine
dining.

You forgot "and the earth is flat".

;-)
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a [censored]" -- Jack Nicholson

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave Smith said:

sf said:

Quoted message said:

I am sure that she must be a truly discriminating diner if she would rather
eat at a fast food joint than catch a whiff of tobacco smoke.

That's her choice. It would be mine too. I don't want to be around
smoke and smokers.

Fair enough. You and she can have the crappy food and the screaming kids.
I'll put up with a little smoke.

Smoking is like Masturbating.
It really should be done in private.
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a [censored]" -- Jack Nicholson