Dining al fresco with dog- rain starts!

[Tess]

Do you know how unpleasant being scolded by restaurant staff, is? If I had asked to hold my meal until we came back, the owner could have accused me of trying to leave without paying. If I asked to pack the meal to go he could have said he did not have the right containers or could not pack it properly.

So you made zero requests, based on things you imagined the restaurant mighthave done? I'm just trying to get this straight in my mind.

If I read your original post correctly, yes there are better things they could have done spontaneously, such as say, "Oh, I'm sorry sir. You seem to be stuck out here in the rain. Unfortunately health code does not allow animals inside, even this very nice animal. May we pack your food to go? [Or even: do you want to call it a day and come back courtesy of us?]" If they didn't act the least bit solicitous, that is not very polished service. Maybe you sat there in the pouring rain feeling like you were being laughed at a little, even. That could leave a very bad taste in the mouth-- sitting there in your predicament being ignored.

The one thing they really couldn't have done, though, is bring the dog in. Which makes it kind of silly that the focus came to be on that option.

[CaliPoutine]

1. It is a grievous Health Department violation to bring the dog into the dining room of the restaurant. Period. No rain, no spinning it differently, no anything. You might as well have asked the chef or the waiter to defecate and not wash his hands all in plain sight. They could be fined, shut down, etc. and as was mentioned upthread those reports are available online, as well as having that lovely notice posted on the door turning away/scaring off business indefinitely. It is absolutely not in their best interest to let the dog in the restaurant. Even for a minute.

2. Another customer could be seriously allergic to the dog, even if the restaurant was trying to be nice. Do you want to be responsible for setting off an asthma attack or fit of anaphylactic shock? Really

Unless of course its a seeing eye dog or therapy dog

[Tim Dolan]

By the way, to the intelligent question of why we could not leave the dog alone, he is too anxious and would have not have been well behaved had he been left outside. I think people think it just rained that night: it did not, it poured, and there was hail.

←

I was reading this thread when it was in the Philadelphia forum and I wanted to post about just how wicked that storm was. It certainly wasn't just raining, it was a seriously violent storm that materialized in the blink of an eye. Driving home from work on 76, I was looking at blue skies to my right and all the sudden these dark clouds came out of nowhere. That was an impressive display by Mother Nature.

As for your whole case, I think you just caught a really bad break. And it seems that you just inadvertently made the case as to why your dog wasn't welcomed inside. As the saying goes; sometimes you're the dog, sometimes you're the hydrant.

[Tri2Cook]

Tri2Cook, while I might be unfair in my expectation of better service from Meme, I am not sure how I did anything wrong.

←

I don't think you did anything actually "wrong". I just don't think this whole thing was necessary if you already felt the way you felt about the situation and had already decided on your course of action in response regardless of what was said here. As you said, where you decide to dine is your choice. You say you weren't seeking a boycott or to smear their name. You weren't seeking confirmation from the crowd that you were "right". You weren't going to be swayed if the crowd felt you were "wrong". You already decided you weren't going to return. I'm just confused as to what you were seeking here.

[TheFoodTutor]

By the way, to the intelligent question of why we could not leave the dog alone, he is too anxious and would have not have been well behaved had he been left outside.

The dog is too anxious to be left alone outside? So the answer to this is to possibly bring this "well-behaved" dog into the dining room? I'd make a comment about this point, but frankly, I'm speechless.

Incidentally, all of the "storage areas" in a restaurant, or at least every restaurant the I've worked in, are food storage areas. Yes, even the dry storage area has food in it, and other items that are meant to be clean enough to eat off of, such as table linens. These areas are all in the area technically known as the kitchen. Bringing a dog into the kitchen of the restaurant is a much more egregious violation than bringing one into the dining room, and I don't think that even the guide dog exception would help out here. The restaurant would very likely be shut down if the Health Inpector were there.

And Holly: Your comments regarding the Health Department allowing one incident to slide because of circumstances (possibly with a wink!) indicate to me that it's been at least 2 or 3 decades since you've actually dealt with a Health Inspector personally from the perspective of someone on the restaurant side of things. Health codes have gotten much, much stricter as of late, especially within the past year or two. I have been working in restaurants in the Atlanta area for about 12 years now, and I've worked with a lot of Inspectors, and many of them are even people I know. Never in those 12 years have I ever seen an Inspector let anything slide, not even if it was a very tiny infraction. The tiniest gap between the rubber seal on the back door and the concrete floor brings a write-up, even if no bugs or evidence of bugs is present. Meat that is thawing without cold, running water pouring over it is forcibly thrown in the garbage. I could go on and on, but the most amazing example was when an Inspector stuck a temperature probe into a hermetically-sealed packet of non-dairy creamer for coffee that was held in bowl with ice: The creamer inside was 1 degree higher than it should have been, which resulted in an 8-point violation for "food held at improper temperatures."

Seriously, after the things I've seen Health Inspectors pick at, I cannot in my wildest dreams imagine an Inspector knowing of a dog in a restaurant kitchen and then shrugging it off, saying, "Well, it is really pouring outside. . ."

[Meanderer]

Well, I'll bet from here on out you'll check the forecast before you decide to eat outside. This time of year in Philadelphia as well as in much of the rest of the country, the skies can go from blue to black pretty quickly but, ordinarily, the NWS can provide a pretty good idea about when eating out may not be such a good idea. We learned that lesson years ago when we were driven indoors one evening only to find the restaurant to be crammed to the gills. Fortunately, we only had to skip dessert but I don't know what the other fresh air diners did.

[brescd01]

Tri2Cook, I was just seeking others' opinions because I was genuinely interested! I am not from the "Communist" school of thought where I am only happy if the people I address are all clapping in unison to show there approval!

And Meanderer, you are quite right!

Tim, thanks for the acknowledgement! I make no assumptions about whether you agree with me or not, but the storm was impressively bad.

And any dog owner will tell you, pets can be like that, nervous one moment and well-behaved the next. A lot of animals have separation anxiety, my dog is one of them. Sorry.

Look, I will have to live with the fact that most people on this board feel that I thought bad thoughts unfairly. I hope that everyone here is equally critical of themselves when they need someone else's indulgence, but are not entitled to it!

[KatieLoeb]

Look, I will have to live with the fact that most people on this board feel that I thought bad thoughts unfairly. I hope that everyone here is equally critical of themselves when they need someone else's indulgence, but are not entitled to it!

←

I'm still not getting the sense that you truly understand that the restaurant could be shut down permanently for being "indulgent" of you and your pet, regardless of a sense of entitlement and regardless of a sudden nasty rainstorm. I'm not trying to give you a hard time here, but I'm not seeing any grasp of the real issue here from your side. You were asking the restaurant to risk their business in a way that reveals a pretty hefty sense of entitlement. I don't remember what it is that you do for a living, but try to imagine some scenario that could put your professional license/credentials/whatever at risk for "indulging" a client. I presume you'd refuse to do so. Do you still feel that client should have the right to now go badmouth you or take their business elsewhere?? Particularly if the circumstance leading up their requiring your "indulgence" was a result of their own unfortunate decision? You took your dog out to a restaurant knowing you'd have to eat outside. It rained. No one's "fault" but certainly not the restaurant's responsibility to risk their very existence because you feel they should "make it up to you" somehow. Seems pretty straightforward to me...

[brescd01]

Katie you are in the food industry. And I am not. So that I cannot really, truly "understand" the restaurant's side, is okay. I will always be just a customer.

I am not sure how I slammed Meme. I stated exactly what occurred. Everyone but one in this thread has felt that the restaurant behaved in an exemplary fashion, and that I am grievously at fault for even FEELING disappointment. So I think theoretically I have BOOSTED the restaurant, not slammed it.

In any event, as Meanderer pointed out, I will not go to a restaurant with outdoor seating with my dog, without checking the forecast, again, so no restaurant will ever have to experience my bad vibes again, at least for this reason.

Edited June 19, 2009 by brescd01 (log)

[Dave Hatfield]

brescd01, my advice is to move to France where they have a more civilized attitude towards dogs & restaurants.

Namely that well behaved dogs are welcome. Our dog, my avatar & a large standard poodle, loves going to restaurants. Two Michelin stars is his top so far. He knows how to behave, no fuss, no bother, no begging. Most restaurants will happily bring him a bowl of water.

I've seen both here & elsewhere far more badly behaved children in restaurants than I have dogs.

I know that the law makes it impossible for restaurants in the USA to allow dogs. That's a shame. We've met some very nice people via conversations that started with the dog. He's a great ice breaker.

Our old poodle now deceased was quite a presence and at one of our favorite restaurants he was always shown the greatest respect by the proprietress. "Would M. like a table by the window? A bowl of water perhaps M. and so on. Afterwards it was; "did M. enjoy his meal." "please come again." It was great fun for all.

And please nobody trot out the hygiene argument. Most dogs are as clean as a lot of people.

[philadining]

In David's defense, I don't think he was insisting that the only solution be that the dog come inside, just expressing his feeling that the place could have done something more for them.

Despite all the arguing back and forth here, it does seem that something resembling a vague consensus has emerged: the restaurant wasn't obliged to do anything, but it might have been good mojo if they'd gone above and beyond in some way.

I stick by my original post back toward the beginning of this thread that the circumstance was bad luck, and there's not much the restaurant could do about it. But I suppose i can see that point that it would have felt good, from the diners' perspective, if the restaurant had proactively offered something - I'm not sure what, but probably just offering to pack the food to go, or acknowledging that the customers were having a miserable time and offering some incentive to come back another time...

I'm reminded of a time when I dropped an ice cream cone as I as leaving the place I bought it. They noticed and insisted on giving me another one. It wasn't their fault that I dropped it, but they felt some sympathy, and I remember being very appreciative of the gesture.

And that place was: jeeze, I can't remember... it was a long time ago... maybe there's a lesson there too... but I do remember being impressed at the time.

In the end, no, it's not the restaurant's fault that the customers decided to bring a dog. It's not the restaurant's fault that it started raining. And hey, the economy's tough, I can see why the restaurant wouldn't feel like comping food over something that's not their fault. But making some sort of gesture as a nod to the fact that their customers had a miserable time sitting outside in the rain probably would have been a good move.

(For the record, this particular restaurant is really tiny, with an open kitchen right near the door, and there's no out-of-the-way place to stash a dog, even if they'd decided to risk violating the law. So they were very likely to annoy other diners if they'd taken that path. I happen to like dogs, but I've been in places that allowed them and ended up very annoyed. It's kind of cute to have a dog beg for table scraps if you're at a friend's house, it kind of sucks at a restaurant. Yes, I've had this happen. But even if it's properly controlled, I personally don't really want to share my dining-out experience with a stranger's damp dog, especially a nervous one in a thunderstorm.)

[boagman]

I stick by my original post back toward the beginning of this thread that the circumstance was bad luck, and there's not much the restaurant could do about it. But I suppose i can see that point that it would have felt good, from the diners' perspective, if the restaurant had proactively offered something - I'm not sure what, but probably just offering to pack the food to go, or acknowledging that the customers were having a miserable time and offering some incentive to come back another time...

Well, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree without being disagreeable, here.

In reading the OP's posts, I'm pretty much of the opinion that, had the restaurant boxed up his food for them, he'd have complained about that, too. "How dare they kick me out? We're not second-class citizens! Where are my pitchforks and torches?"

Really: even your ice cream analogy if pretty darned flawed. It's not like you brought along an "Ice Cream Dropping Machine" with you "because it was the perfect day for it". I find no small amount of amusement in the fact that you can't remember where it was that did that for you, too.

It's true: the OP was, in fact, a victim of extremely bad luck, and they paid a pretty stiff price for their transgression, but this is just as true: it was *their* price to pay, in full. I think that the OP is putting the restaurant in an absolute no-win situation, and chose to drag their name through the mud here on this forum, because the establishment wasn't willing to bend to his whim. He wants to punish someone *else* for *his* transgression, and almost to the person, he's been admonished for that.

Honestly, had he not named the restaurant, he'd probably had more in the realm of a discussion that he claims he wanted in the first place, but that isn't what happened here. He dragged their name through the mud to suit his whim, and he's been fairly admonished for trying to shift blame to the establishment.

[prasantrin]

Katie you are in the food industry. And I am not. So that I cannot really, truly "understand" the restaurant's side, is okay. I will always be just a customer.

←

Perhaps your inability to empathize ("understand") is why you feel so affronted by the restaurant's actions (or non-actions, as the case may be). It seems most people who have replied can empathize with the restaurant whether those people are in the business or not.

I don't recall you mentioning why you did not ask the restaurant to box up your meal. I remember you writing they should have, but then I also remember you writing that the weather was so bad you could not possibly have left the restaurant without getting soaked, so what would have been the point of having them box it up? But then you also wrote that you got soaked by staying, so I'm not sure what the difference would have been had you taken out your food, or stayed and eaten it.

I don't think you're at fault for any of what happened, although you were responsible for your dog and for accepting the conditions of eating at a restaurant with a dog. Had you just written your story as an anecdote and ended with the question "Is there anything they could have done for me?" you probably would have gotten more sympathy.

Edited June 19, 2009 by prasantrin (log)

[Holly Moore]

He dragged their name through the mud

"Dragged its name through the mud." Hardly.

My take on the Mémé, and I haven't been there yet, is that they handled one situation badly. And they did. Very badly. I hope the owners have read the thread and sense that they should have done more for the couple. What that more is - is not all that relevant - just something, at the very least stopping by the table and commiserating.

I had planned on giving Mémé a try. Nothing in this thread has dissuaded me, though if I end up adopting a dog I will likely leave it at home.

Something I like about Philadelphia's restaurants being able to set tables outside are the patrons, with their dogs, sitting at them. It helps complete the picture. Very European, the way I like to think of Center City Philadelphia. So many dogs - so many evening thunderstorms. I wonder if other restaurants have encountered similar situations and what they did about them.

One thing that has bothered me with this thread is the attitude that the restaurant was under no obligation to help - especially from those in the industry. I don't get it. Brings meaning to that joke about the waiter who was asked why he didn't Heimlick a diner choking on his food. "It wasn't my table."

I've had a restaurant owner drive me home, across town, because I drank too much and he didn't want me to have to take a cab. At a three star restaurant in France a chef ended my tasting menu with an incredible porridge because it became obvious to the waiter that as the meal progressed I wasn't feeling very well. A desk clerk in Savannah walked me to Walls BBQ because it was out of the way and he didn't want me to miss it.

No one was obligated to help me - just their nature to go above and beyond. That is a good thing and a pretty essential trait for those running a restaurant.

Edited June 19, 2009 by Holly Moore (log)

[KatieLoeb]

Katie you are in the food industry. And I am not. So that I cannot really, truly "understand" the restaurant's side, is okay. I will always be just a customer.

I don't think that most of the folks that answered are in the food industry either. "Just customers" seem to understand that the restaurant was in a no-win situation with you and the dog.

I am not sure how I slammed Meme. I stated exactly what occurred.

Here's how.

1.

The staff invited other diners indoors but not us, because we had our little dog. And we would not abandon him

Your choice, yes? You weren't being selectively persecuted, as you've implied. The other parties didn't have a "guest" with them that could get the restaurant shut down.

2.

No dishes were comped and no one graciously offered to pay to press my suit or anything like that.

Again, why should they comp your food because it unfortunately rained on you? Why press your suit for you? If the waiter spilled something on you, then absloutely they should pick up your dry cleaning and dinner. But they did nothing wrong. I'm certain the restaurant didn't want it to rain and keep other customers away...

3.

Our waiter specifically asked the owner if we could come indoors just for the duration of the storm and we were refused.

Because the owner didn't wish to risk his business. A kind word might have been in order, but other than that, there was little to be done given that the dog couldn't come inside, and you wouldn't/couldn't leave him tied up outside.

4.

The result was obvious, we were drenched and ate our dinner miserable and wet despite the awnings Vis a vis the food I did not enjoy my entree (swordfish) but I liked the appetizer (octopus).

I have to wonder what the review of the food has to do with anything. The caliber of your meal has little to do with your problem with the restaurant at this point, or the unfortunate rain, so stating that one item was not enjoyable, certainly could be read as a slam, even if it wasn't necessarily intended as such.

5.

So I ask the Board, did the owner act fairly? Can I be angry and bitter?

That pretty much answers it's own question, does it not? If you are questioning whether to be angry and bitter, it seems the emotions are already formed.

6.

But I doubt I will return.

Is there any bigger slam against a restaurant then to say you'd not return? It seems that you are shifting blame for an inauspiciously timed act of Mother Nature to the restaurant.

7.

...Everyone but one in this thread has felt that the restaurant behaved in an exemplary fashion, and that I am grievously at fault for even FEELING disappointment. So I think theoretically I have BOOSTED the restaurant, not slammed it....

...In any event, as Meanderer pointed out, I will not go to a restaurant with outdoor seating with my dog, without checking the forecast, again, so no restaurant will ever have to experience my bad vibes again, at least for this reason...

And now your just martyring yourself. Seriously.

Your experience sucked. No one likes to be wet and miserable. But I think perhaps a nervous dog with separation anxiety is not the ideal dinner companion regardless of the weather. Unless the weather is crystal clear, neither you nor the restaurant are clairvoyant. The second step of logic to bringing a dog (or small child for that matter) out to dinner is, "what would happen if something goes wrong?" Even the calmest most well behaved dog could turn on a child that teases them, or jump on a waiter carrying a yummy smelling steak (hell - I've almost jumped on a waiter carrying a yummy smelling steak if I were hungry enough and my food was taking too long!). They're DOGS ferchissakes! It's not like they understand the implications of manners and such. And by the way, I love dogs and wish I could have one, but my lifestyle does not allow it. I wish dogs (well-behaved ones, of course) were allowed in restaurants here, but they are not. And the penalties for flagrantly disregarding that are stiff. Again, I ask you to consider the scenario where your livelihood could be placed in jeopardy, and ask yourself what you'd do.

I don't think you're being malicious, but I suspect you're not understanding the tone of your post when it comes out of this side of your mouth. It's something we're all guilty of at one time or another. "But I didn't mean it that way..." are famous last words preceding many a disagreement.

I suggest you give Meme another try on another night that you leave the dog at home. And sit inside. No chance of anything ruining your dinner except a preconceived bad taste in your mouth. And if you pretend that none of that ever happened, maybe you can start from scratch and enjoy what is a truly lovely restaurant with a talented chef and very professional staff when it isn't pouring rain on your head.

[Tri2Cook]

One thing that has bothered me with this thread is the attitude that the restaurant was under no obligation to help - especially from those in the industry. 

←

I have the attitude that the restaurant was under no obligation to help because the restaurant was under no obligation to help. Would it have been nice of them to try to help in some way? Yes. Would it have been smart in a business sense for them to try to help in some way without violating health codes and offending other customers? Yes. The things is, those are things that could have been done and probably (I say probably because we're only getting one side of the story here) should have been done but they're not things that anybody is obligated to do.

I have no problem with his being unhappy over the situation and the decision to return or not is his to make. My problem is that he named the business, played up the we-were-singled-out-and-mistreated angle, asked for opinions and then, when most of them didn't support his opinion, he switched it over to a "I was only looking for a bit of tea and sympathy but I guess everybody hates me and my dog" thing.

[docsconz]

One thing that has not been considered in the context of this discussion is what may have prevented the owner from speaking with you directly? May he have been dealing with other issues at the time, trying to placate other customers because of the sudden squall or was he just standing there looking simply to stay dry? He may have had any number of other on-going issues at the time preventing him from dealing with the situation described. We simply don't know, because we do not have that side of the story. I prefer to give the benefit of the doubt.

[chezcherie]

No one was obligated to help me - just their nature to go above and beyond.  That is a good thing and a pretty essential trait for those running a restaurant.

←

i think this is the basis of the problem. the restaurant was not obligated to do anything, but it would have been nice if they had.

woulda, coulda, shoulda.

it seems to be that this is a case of obligation vs. entitlement.

while i'm sure the OP is a perfectly lovely person, the post had a distinct air of entitlement. (obviously, the day started out bad and got worse...and went all the way to worst. been there, had those.)

i'm not in "the industry", per se, unless you consider a cooking school "the industry".

i do always try to go the extra mile for my clients, and do so most happily. but it's hard to want to do so when that sense of entitlement creeps in, because it doesn't feel so voluntary anymore. perhaps that was the case here? i dunno. i wasn't there, and we only have one side of the story.

[brescd01]

This thread should not be about me but what happened. While everyone has been quick to tell me what poor judgment I used bringing my dog and how Solomon-like the restaurant's owner was, restaurants in Philadelpha with outdoor seating have no problem taking the money of dog owners eager to share a meal with their pets.

By the way, when I wrote that I was "angry and bitter," that was tongue in cheek. I got my suit cleaned and I am already looking for more restaurants. A lot of them in the neighborhood have outdoor seating. Only a few steps from Meme there is Pub and Kitchen, Ten Stone, Meritage, Mama Palma, Dmitri's, all with outdoor seating, all welcome pets, all want my loyalty and hard-earned cash in this recession. Which shall I chose? The one that "fulfills its obligations?" Or the one that goes the extra mile?

[TarteTatin]

I agree with you Dave.

The first time we went to La Tour D'argent in Paris, there was a finely dressed older lady at the table next to us by the window. She was seated at a two top with her poodle on the chair opposite her. The poodle had its own plate on the table. It was very well mannered, you didn't even know there was a dog there.

This is/was a top restaurant, very classy, and it didn't bother us at all.

And, none of the other patrons blinked an eye.

We would have done so, had the poodle a glass of wine at their place setting!

Edited to say: Responding to Dave Hatfield.

Edited June 20, 2009 by TarteTatin (log)

[KatieLoeb]

This thread should not be about me but what happened. While everyone has been quick to tell me what poor judgment I used bringing my dog and how Solomon-like the restaurant's owner was, restaurants in Philadelpha with outdoor seating have no problem taking the money of dog owners eager to share a meal with their pets.

By the way, when I wrote that I was "angry and bitter," that was tongue in cheek. I got my suit cleaned and I am already looking for more restaurants. A lot of them in the neighborhood have outdoor seating. Only a few steps from Meme there is Pub and Kitchen, Ten Stone, Meritage, Mama Palma, Dmitri's, all with outdoor seating, all welcome pets, all want my loyalty and hard-earned cash in this recession. Which shall I chose? The one that "fulfills its obligations?" Or the one that goes the extra mile?

←

So will you be checking the weather forecast for thunderstorms and purposefully bringing the pup in tow, to see if those other pet friendly neighborhood restaurants "go the extra mile" when it starts to rain? Does that seem a fair criteria to judge them on? Will they risk their livelihood and business to see if they can impress me?

Of course they're happy to take the dog owners money. And the cat owners money, and the ferret owners money and the pot bellied pig owners money. And if it starts to rain they won't invite any of those people and their ark full of animals inside either. I doubt the conditions for that particular storm are repeatable, but even if they were, it seems that perhaps you haven't really taken anything away from this experience except an intransigent belief that the restaurant was "wrong" and you are "right".

Edited June 20, 2009 by KatieLoeb (log)

[Dave Hatfield]

I agree with you Dave.

The first time we went to La Tour D'argent in Paris, there was a finely dressed older lady at the table next to us by the window. She was seated at a two top with her poodle on the chair opposite her. The poodle had its own plate on the table. It was very well mannered, you didn't even know there was a dog there.

This is/was a top restaurant, very classy, and it didn't bother us at all.

And, none of the other patrons blinked an eye.

We would have done so, had the poodle a glass of wine at their place setting!

Edited to say: Responding to Dave Hatfield.

←

Yes, exactly. Although we don't allow our poodle to actually eat while in the restaurant he knows that he will get a treat once we leave.

Fortunately he doesn't like wine, but he does enjoy the very occasional bowl of beer at home. I say fortunately because I don't like sharing my better wines.

I find the no dogs in restaurants laws in the states and in other countries to be very narrow minded. Why I ask?

The vast majority of dog owners that would if allowed take them to restaurants are those with well behaved animals who are clean. In our experience the dogs seem to realize that they are 'on sufferance' are behave accordingly. Our guy for instance finds a place to curl up under or alongside out table and quietly watches everything that's going on. Most of the time other patrons don't even know he is there. If approached by others he is very subdued and polite in his greetings. He is not unusual in this, most dogs seem to behave this way. As I said earlier I've seen far more badly behaved children in restaurants than I have dogs.

The health reasons just don't wash. After all many of us live with dogs and manage to stay healthy. Allergies? Well yes, but lots of people are allergic to perfumes and/or after shave. Should we ban those who wear them?

[brescd01]

No Katie, you are wrong, I dont think I was "right" and the restaurant "wrong." I don't think morality enters into it. The restaurant business is not a question of morality, but of money, and where diners spend it. They can spend it where they choose.

You are very determined that I should "admit" I was "wrong," though since this tale was of two parties, restaurant and customer, both of whom did nothing, I am not sure what I would be "wrong" about, except how I felt. You feel strongly about my views because I published them in a public forum. But most customers will never tell you why they will not come back to your restaurant, and their reasons will probably be more trivial than my own.

In fact, while I appreciate other people's opinions on this thread, a lot of posters (particularly Boagman) have made assumptions about the kind of person I am or how I would have behaved had there been other circumstances. I don't think that is fair. I was very polite. I tipped generously. I did not make a scene. I was dressed nicely (as was my wife) and our dog always draws attention because he is very striking looking, like a Ferrari in front of a hotel. In short I was the ideal customer. Except I did not feel treated that way.

[boagman]

In fact, while I appreciate other people's opinions on this thread, a lot of posters (particularly Boagman) have made assumptions about the kind of person I am or how I would have behaved had there been other circumstances. I don't think that is fair. I was very polite. I tipped generously. I did not make a scene. I was dressed nicely (as was my wife) and our dog always draws attention because he is very striking looking, like a Ferrari in front of a hotel. In short I was the ideal customer. Except I did not feel treated that way.

I'll cop to this. However, I did have help: like it or not, your posts in this thread have embedded in them a sense of entitlement that most have seen, and many have commented on. Have I been a bit harsh in pointing that out? Sure. I guess that's just part of my personality, and one of my hot buttons, so to speak.

You could be a great guy, an excellent customer, a friend of restaurants in general...that's a very real possibility. What happened here, though, in this instance (and I'm referring to the action at the restaurant and the act of posting about it here), doesn't reflect that attitude at all.

I think it best that we just assume that I'm kind of a jerk sometimes, just like everyone else is. Not that I'm referring to you, here.

[KatieLoeb]

The restaurant business is not a question of morality, but of money, and where diners spend it. They can spend it where they choose.

That's true. And I suspect you won't be missed if you choose not to dine at Meme again. I think it's a shame that you're choosing not to dine there again simply because the waiter either didn't come out and hold an umbrella above you for the entire duration of your meal or the chef was too busy to come out and personally say how sorry he is that it's raining. Given the circumstances, that was about all that could have been done and there was a dining room with other dog-free diners that needed tending to as well.

But most customers will never tell you why they will not come back to your restaurant, and their reasons will probably be more trivial than my own.

This is true. But I doubt most of those diners made a conscious choice to do something that effected their service and dining experience should they be caught in circumstances out of their control. So their reasons seem far less trivial, and certainly much less vindictive, should they choose not to return.

In short I was the ideal customer.

Says you. I'd be curious what the waiter's take on all this was. That would be the other side of the story I think would be most illuminating.

Except I did not feel treated that way

You've made that abundantly clear. But again, I'm just not sure what wasn't done except for perhaps more fawning and apoligizing for the two things that were out of their control. It was not the restaurant's fault that you chose to bring your dog. In fact, they could have refused you service, even outside. Not all restaurants with outdoor seating are dog-friendly. And it wasn't their desire that it rained and drove away other potential customers. So again, what was it that wasn't done? Sounds like just a lack of options on their part due to a decision you made and an unfortunate set of meterological circumstances.

You are very determined that I should "admit" I was "wrong," though since this tale was of two parties, restaurant and customer, both of whom did nothing, I am not sure what I would be "wrong" about, except how I felt.

(emphasis added)

I'm more concerned about your dogged (pun totally intended) insistence that the restaurant didn't treat you like a king when there was little to be done, and complete lack of recognition that you were responsible for the end result because you sealed your own fate by bringing the dog. What I'd like to see is an admission that you learned something from this experience other than to be punitive toward the restaurant. Some sense of personal responsibility in all this. A little humility would go a long way, but that's hard to see past the unnecessary comment about your entree, your dog resembling a Ferrari, etc. How the dog looks or the fact that you were well dressed bears no impact on the end result. A couple in jeans and T-shirts with a butt ugly dog wouldn't have been allowed in either. Just like all the other pet owners I described in my last post. Regardless of whether they tipped appropriately. Perhaps the mythical couple with the ugly dog would have asked for their check, paid up and left. And not put the restaurant in the untenable position of trying to "go the extra mile" to impress you when it seems a near impossible task to do so. Perhaps a hard look in a mirror and an analysis of your own actions might reveal something other than a well dressed, low maintenance, dog owning restaurant patron.

I'm waving my white flag on this discussion.