saltshaker

I'd have to disagree on La Vineria, and virtually everyone I know who's been there would also disagree - it's pretty, but the food is mediocre at best. If you're into the molecular gastronomy thing, Moreno is a far better option quality-wise, though admittedly far more expensive. And if you're just looking for really good, creative restaurants, there are many that are far better - Pura Tierra, Urondo, Sucre, Thymus, Tegui and Casa Cruz among them, and all for roughly the same price, or less.

The point, and clearly you both don't agree, but so be it, is that by claiming that you agree to be bound by a set code of ethics that's laid out there for everyone to see, it is more likely that someone will go after you for violation of that code than if you've not stated it. No, it doesn't change what they could do under the law in terms of filing a suit (at least within U.S. law), but that badge is akin to painting a target on yourself - not always the best move, you know? From your perspective, the code makes it less likely that people will be sued, or whatever form of castigation we may wish to conceive of, from my perspective it makes it more likely. Perhaps it's because we live in different cultures and things are done differently (and, U.S. laws are not the only ones out there - you didn't propose this as a code of ethics only for bloggers in the U.S.). Look, none of this may come to pass. Steven, you may be correct and that the badge or code of ethics here will more or less come to nought outside of the eGullet world - and obviously, I hope that's the case, no offense intended. But I think it's disingenous of you to pretend that you're not really hoping for it to come to more than that and that you don't expect something to come of it - otherwise, why bother to present it at all? Though we don't know each other, you've never struck me as someone who just blurts out ideas haphazardly with no intent other than to show that he can - in which case, logically, you're hoping that what I've suggested indeed does come to pass. If all you were hoping for was that people would think about what they post, you could have done it as a discussion thread of those ideas rather than a code with a proposed badge.

In regard to your last paragraph, absolutely. People "ought" to think about what they write before they hit the publish button. It's much the same as all the media attention that social networking sites have gotten about how many people publish intimate or bizarre details about themselves or their workplaces or schools on places like MySpace of Facebook without thinking about the consequences. And again, I don't have a problem with people being ethical and thinking about what they're about to write, or anything related. My concern is not at all that - people can choose to be as ethical or as responsible as they like, and sure, I'd love it if many of the folk out there were more so than they are.... My concern is that eGullet, or the young ladies who've published the other code proposal (curious publicity timing just before they release a book, no?) are inadvertently setting themselves up to be a de facto reference standard that will appear to the public to be some sort of official or professional standard that an individual blog is either "living up to" or not. It's irrelevant that neither intends to be that, it's simply whether or not their mere existence creates that impression. Badge or not, there will always be those who hold themselves to a more professional standard and those to a lesser, but the badge shouldn't take on the appearance of a seal of approval... which, if it catches on at all, it likely, and unfortunately, will. I also think that bloggers who take on the badge or whatever code they officially state, are setting themselves up for many of the things you mention - one of the things that professional journalists, restaurateurs and chefs, and others have been lamenting for the last few years is that by virtue of the fact that bloggers are amateurs and not beholden to an ethical code, they are basically untouchable for their subjective comments. Publicly state that you agree to be held to professional standards and just wait for the first restaurateur or chef who gets slammed to decide to sue for defamation or loss of revenue (whether accurate or not) - it's happened to professional food critics, who often have the pockets of a paper behind them to cover legal expenses, and generally win, but how many bloggers could handle that?

This, I think, is pretty clearly not true. ← Steven, I fully understand that your intent, and that of most of those who support the idea, is completely honorable. And I do think that any good blogger ought to state to their readers, openly, what can be expected of them - though I wouldn't require them to do so. But there's reality to live with. If you, or someone else, especially with what will appear to the casual reader to be an "Organization", creates a "badge" or some other sort of way to denominate your blog or site as one that subscribes to the ethical standards of eGullet, it will, by virtue of the way that things happen, become a negative for anyone who doesn't have it. It's unavoidable. It's the nature of "badges" or "tokens" or anything of the sort - those who aren't privy to what went into the creation of it will make the assumption that it actually means something. The new reader of food blogs will see on some sites "I subscribe to the eGullet food bloggers ethical code" and have no idea that eGullet is simply a forum where a bunch of us get together and have a good time chatting about food. They'll not see it on 2 out of 3 or 4 or 5 sites and the natural, human reaction will be "oh, this guy doesn't subscribe to The Ethical Code". You have good intentions, but we've all heard about what road those lead down. As someone who is a professional journalist, what I like about the blog format is that it is the opportunity to not have to hold myself to those same standards as in my paying work. It doesn't mean I won't be honest and upfront with my readers, but I like reserving the right to be snarky, catty, or downright rude if I feel like it (maybe it's that Amer. vs. Brit or other countries journalistic standards thing), and not have to apologize for it. It doesn't make the information I provide less valuable as long as I'm clear that that's what I'm doing, but my blog, far and away beyond any of my professional writing, is intended to be a completely subjective spot, with no pretense at objectivity - and I'd venture to bet that most food bloggers created their blogs for the same reason. And I'd stand by my statement that there is no real peer pressure on the average blogger out there. Here on eGullet or similar forums, of course, there's the simple fact of moderation and commentary. But just exactly what effect do other food bloggers have on what I, or anyone else, writes on my blog? Or are we out to create a bunch of blogs that criticize other people's blogs for their standards? Will eGullet or someone else start publishing a list of "unacceptable blogs"? I would hope not. As to media attention - yes, there's a general attention to the blogging world, but in terms of any one blog in specific, no, I simply don't agree that there's any pressure to conform to standards - except self-inflicted by those who feel like they're not being taken as seriously as they want to be, because they think that their blog ought to be recognized for the sheer brilliance that they're quite sure it contains.

Oakapple - I don't misunderstand the intent that our "Fat Guy" has - I think it's an honorable proposal for what goes on within eGullet itself, I distrust that it could ever possibly be implemented fairly and honestly on the basis he proposes outside of these "walls". First, your first statement - while it's true, that someone who follows a code of ethics, be it this one, or the one posed over on new Food Ethics Blog site (which came out a week ago now), or someone else's, has those ethics (again, assuming they're not just paying lip service, but actually doing so), it's 1) that set of ethics, not the only set possible (the proposed one here, for example, is different in several ways from the one proposed on the site I mentioned), and 2) how does that make them more ethical than someone who has a higher ethical standard but never happened to hear of eGullet, or one of the others, or chooses to simply not sign their name to a statement? My point isn't whether or not people should be ethical and subscribe to a code, but it should be their own code, and one which they've stated for their own readers, at least outside of eGullet. Here, within these forums, I have no problem with the idea of a code that people are asked to follow - though we still get back to the second part - which is, just because someone says it doesn't mean they follow it. Outside of a moderated forum like this, there is no peer pressure or media attention on the average blog/amateur writer - so no, I don't think there's anything out there that would stop someone from claiming they follow some code of ethics, posting a badge, and simply not abiding by it. Regulating the blogging world (or other types of privately owned/written sites) by imposing rules on what people are allowed to write about and how they write it is what I find chilling - isn't that what we all had a big blow up about a couple of years ago when there were rumors going around that the FAA or someone like that was going to start being a watchdog to the internet and what people could post? Who says a private, non-proft, arbitrary organization will do any better at the job? And when it comes down to it, I (as many bloggers do) pay for my own site - why should I have to be penalized because I choose not to display a badge from an organization that has set itself up to be the arbiter of ethics? My own readers know what they can expect from me, I've stated it myself, and the lack of whatever lovely little piece of graphic work someone here comes up with shouldn't become something that new readers or the media (if they care) or anyone else can point to and say "he's not following the code, he's not a real food blogger" - and they will.

It's fascinating that anyone thinks that by someone stating that they subscribe to a "code of ethics" (interesting timing, too, on this post, coming less than a week after the controversial "Food Blog Ethics Code" site hit the 'net) and displaying a badge either here or on their own blog or website, that that somehow makes them more credentialed, more ethical, or more worthy of reading. The problems with the idea are so obvious that it's ludicrous: 1) anyone who feels like it can make the claim and post the badge, and still be a completely dishonest, unqualified hack - and there's not anything anyone can do about it if the badge is simply a piece of graphic that they're posting (at least outside of eG), and 2) it will, despite any other intentions, leave anyone who doesn't subscribe to and post the badge, looking like a "lesser" writer - while longterm readers won't disappear from their sites, attracting new readers without jumping on the bandwagon will become less and less likely. When it comes down to it, if a writer writes well and provides consistently good information, they earn their credentials, signatory to a code of ethics proposed by a random organization or no, and badge or no. If they don't write well or provide information that repeatedly shows up to be false or copied or what-have-you, people stop reading them - and those sites tend to disappear quickly. Blogging and forums are market driven, and should be, the very suggestion that a self-appointed arbitrary organization takes on some sort of oversight capacity is, for the internet, a chilling prospect.

As noted, "asado de tira" is a long strip of crosscut ribs with the meat and fat holding them together. The "bife de tira" is almost the same, but it's the strip of meat cut away from the bones, running along one side of the ribs.

From a restaurateur perspective, the manager flat out dropped the ball. You never should have been charged for the entrees, regardless of whether she offered you something extra. Many's the time over my years in the busiiness that I've comped an entire meal when someone is truly unhappy with their food or service - that's good business, and unlike someone suggested above, it's not remotely likely to put us out of business - it's far more likely to result in a return visit from that customer, and good things said. That restaurant is lucky that the original poster hasn't posted the name of the restaurant here and elsewhere along with the story.

I'm not sure I'd try - Il Matterello is certainly one of the best Italian restaurants in BA - I'm not sure I'd go for anywhere outside of Italy, but it's a great place to eat here. Sottovoce is excellent, but overpriced. Really overpriced. Filo in the downtown area by Plaza San Martin has very good food, fair prices, and is a great place in that area for lunch. Primafila in the BA Design Center, which is a strange spot to find a good, actually very good restaurant (given that its neighbors in the center are things like the Hard Rock Cafe and an Irish burger and beer pub) - but it's there, and they serve up great Italian food. Again a bit pricey, though not excessive, and a well selected wine list. If you want to just have a great time at an Italian spot that is casual, and has a sort of Little Italy (NYC) feel to it - though better food than most of those places, Pinuccio e Figli in the Congreso area is top of the heap.

You might want to look back at some of the previous threads where we've talked about these recommendations at length. But, in short, to answer your questions - Sucre is a great place, lunch better than dinner unless you like a really noisy, busy atmosphere - which it tends to be at night. You'll have a good, solid local meal at the Palacio de las Papas Fritas - nothing to write home about, but good. For better - I'd go to El Trapiche, Don Julio, El Yugo... Las Cabaña las Lilas, as we've discussed at length is good, though not great, and by BA standards it's overpriced.

Although the menu isn't 100% Yucatecan, Mi Cocina in Manhattan at the corner of Hudson and Jane Street has been owned and run by Chef Jose Prud'homme, who is a native of the Yucatan, and he always has a good number of specialty dishes from the region. Ate there the other night and had a delicious camarones al ha-sikil-pak which is a great spicy shrimp dish!

Well, although I didn't reach him, I did finally track him down to the Dallas Culinary Institute where he's now teaching. Unfortunately by the time I found out, it was late Friday, he'd left for the day and won't get my message until Monday... ah well, such is the way life goes some times. Thanks to all for the help in digging into this!

Yeah, unfortunately, not there either anymore - tried there, tried the N9NE group where he used to be... he seems to have simply disappeared from the local food scene... perhaps he's just not in Dallas anymore.

Hmmm... thanks for the shot at it, but Kevin hasn't been the chef at Patrizio for more than a year... and couldn't find anyone who seems to know where they've all gone off to. Ah well, I leave tomorrow, but it was worth giving it a shot.

I'm going to be visiting Dallas next week and have an old friend from the NY restaurant scene who last I heard was working as a pastry chef in Dallas. His name is David Brawley, I've lost track of him, the last place I know he worked was as pastry chef for the N9NE Steakhouse and Nove, but they don't know where he's moved on to. Hoping someone out there knows where he's gotten himself to...? Thanks!