In this week’s issue, I gathered chefs, bloggers and restaurant critics to hash out issues of anonymity, Yelp and other matters that threaten our delicate balance in an Internet chat room. It was a long discussion, and what I couldn’t fit into the print version I’m including here. Like the print version, this text was edited for clarity and sometimes for spelling and grammar. The essence of the conversation remains the same, however, and I encourage you to keep the discussion going in the comments below.

Time Out Chicago: First of all, many thanks to all of you for carving time out of your day to do this. Before we begin here’s a reminder of who’s in the room. We’ve got two chefs with us: Graham Elliot Bowles from graham elliot and Phillip Foss from Lockwood. We also have two representatives from the Chicago Tribune: Monica Eng and Phil Vettel. And we have two representatives from the online world: Gary Wiviott, founder of LTHForum.com, and Michael Nagrant, founder and editor of HungryMag.com. (Nagrant is, of course, also the critic for NewCity and a contributor to other rags around the city, including this one.) Heather Shouse and David Tamarkin are representing TOC (we’re both represented here in the chat room as merely TOC).

TOC: This was Chef Bowles’s idea, so let’s start with him. Chef, you’ve been both an active participant on foodcentric message boards and a critic of bloggers. Ideally, what role would you like online food commentary to play with regards to your restaurant?

Graham Elliot Bowles: it’s been really interesting to see the online community evolve and gain momentum and credibility in the dining scene. I have always enjoyed reading diners posts, not only as a way to gather valuable feedback for my own restaurant, but also as a means to see what else is going on. with lthforum, egullet, mouthfulsfood, etc., it seemed as though the main objective was to share your experience whereas new groups such as yelp come across as "reviewers", which I think has a tendency to rub people the wrong way.

GEB: In the Trib piece, I mentioned that these sights were important in that they reach a large audience (19000 views of graham elliot on lthforum for example), and asked how many people read our review in the Trib. the model we’ve all been accustomed to of having one or two critics determine our success is slowly ending, and its a great and exciting thing. I also did mention that sometimes it seems a little overboard in detail, with people writing 1000 word essays about the lighting and how it affects their pictures and such, but that’s was just my opinion, I never said anything negative about all bloggers, and actually spoke at length to the rest of the chef panel about the insight you could get by reading some of the posts.

Phil Vettel: I’m not sure GEB was referring to individual bloggers in his earlier comments. He seemed to be using bloggers and posters as interchangeable terms (as I just did). I guess that’s incorrect.

Michael Nagrant: I think that’s an interesting idea….Phil, do you have any sense of how your reviews impact a restaurant today versus say the eighties when you started reviewing…is it true that all the other media diffuses your voice some?

PV: Generally I think a favorable Tribune review drives people to that particular restaurant. I don’t think that that has changed. Certainly there are other voices recommending (or slamming) restaurants, but I don’t think of those extra voices as something that diminishes my influence.

Monica Eng: Just as the Time Out story said, I think bloggers are changing the way we do our jobs. They–and all competition–spur us to be faster and better.

GEB: It seems as though "artists", be they writers, musicians, chefs and so forth, wear their hearts on their sleeves and are happy to share it with the rest of the world. however, once their work is critiqued, it becomes personal (at least for me). I’m sure that those of you who write amazing pieces for your magazines/papers feel the same sting when your editor turns you away and tells you to go in a different direction.

MN:Except that if you work for an editor you generally "have to switch directions", as the artist or the controller of your restaurant, GEB, you don’t have to switch directions do you…you can ignore the feedback if you don’t agree with it

TOC: Phil and Monica represent an interesting part of this equation%u2014one reviews restaurants for the print edition of the Tribune, the other reviews those same restaurants for the Tribune’s food blog, The Stew. Chefs, do you see an online review from Monica the same way you do an in-print review from Vettel?

ME: Actually the reviews Phil and I write are for both online and print. I just do smaller and more obscure places for things like first bites and cheap eats.

TOC: But when you do a First Look, doesn’t that just run on the blog?

ME: Yep. I have to say that the first day of Urban Belly was probably the craziest example of this yet.

TOC: How so, Monica?

ME: I was the first customer along with a couple of pals and within the next 10 hours there must have been five other reviewers there taking pictures and blogging

TOC: And you wrote about it for the Trib, right?

ME: Because I’m so lazy and busy I didn’t write and get it in the paper for another week. We don’t post cheap eats on the blog before print

GEB: You know what’s interesting is that the blogs are more relevant in a sense due to their constant updating of subjects. I’ve seen where someone writes about a dish we’ve served, or a chef moving to a new spot, and suddenly penny Pollack is writing about it in the Dish column…a lot of these writers are fishing for new articles in an effort to stay ahead. the funny thing is chefs are doing the same damn thing! you can go on egullet and see shots of food from michel bras, el bulli, etc. its no wonder that so many restaurants, from the 1 star gastropub to the 4 star mecca restaurant are plating their food in much the same manner.

ME: That’s really interesting about chefs plating things the same way. I guess what we are talking about is the speed and reach of the Internet in various areas of culture.

TOC: So going on the first day…is that something you do to compete with bloggers?

ME: We almost never went to places on the first day but it’s happening sometimes. But just for first bite reviews.

TOC: So Phillip and GEB, what do you think of first day or even first week visitors? Or I should say, reviewers as opposed to visitors.

GEB: I think there is a competition to be the first one to try the new place, and to either love it or hate it. the first to post photos, the first to get a sneak peek of the menu…

Gary Wiviott: Urban Belly was somewhat unique in Internet buzz, I was there the second day camera in hand. Not for the ’scoop’ but I was interested in trying UB and taking pictures and posting on LTHForum is part of my weekly, if not daily, routine.

MN: Isn’t Urban Belly the perfect example of a place that could be reviewed on the first day? There’s no table service, so no one has to hit their stride…shouldn’t the chef’s recipes be ready to go, do they need time to hit their stride too…so much is made about restaurant needing time, but in almost every other business we expect a product to be ready…no one says, oh, hey Apple iPod is going to get better so lets wait until the next one comes out to review it

ME: I think they SHOULD be ready but I think we all know they’ve rarely got their whole act together that day and so it might be an inaccurate representation to give a reader who is looking for an idea of what it will be like in general

PV: The old argument has been, "they’re charging full price on the first day, so first-day reviews are fair." The reason most print critics gave a restaurant more time to hit its stride is that we knew that that first review was likely the only one we’d write for a long time. So we wanted to get

Phillip Foss: On the one hand, if the doors are open so is the game. On the other hand, restaurant openings are very fickle and gigantic monsters. Very frequently, the true character of a restaurant does not come out for several months afterwards. Inside of the Palmer House, we inherited our entire team from within the hotel. It took a lot of effort to convert the mentality.

MN: It’s not an inaccurate picture for the folks who are paying their hard earned money for the first few weeks while the restaurant "works" things out…

PF: Very true Michael… Though it’s a double edged sword because most want to get the first column or review, the review may not be an accurate reflection of what the restaurant has to offer. In my opinion, blogger’s should post anytime. The printed article - depending on the size of the distribution - I believe should check back in a few months in.

TOC: Phillip, are you saying that a review in print should really wait "a few months"?

PF: No… come in when the doors open. What I believe though, is that a second visit should take place once some of the dust has settled.

TOC: Which would be at what point, roughly?

PF: In my eyes… 2-3 months.

TOC: And what do you mean about size of distribution?

PF: The amount of people who will pick up the article.

TOC: On the subject of anonymity, Monica and Gary are admittedly not anonymous, so I wonder how the experience changes when there is no cloak of anonymity. First, Monica do you notice a difference in your service—do chefs come out to chat when you are reviewing a restaurant for the First Look that appears on Stew? And second, for Gary (and possibly also Michael), do you notice that your treatment at a restaurant becomes a bit more attentive once you or someone at your table starts taking pictures or mentions the site’s name?

ME: Well that is becoming a problem. The anonymity thing. I really didn’t expect Bill to be cooking on the first day of UB. and one of the reasons I didn’t want to do Province recently is because I’ve interviewed [Randy] Zweiban.

TOC: So what’s the solution? Does somebody else go or do you just risk it?

ME: I think I will happily stick with places where no one reads the Tribune or speaks much English. The food’s usually better there anyway. No offense to the Tribune or chefs.

MN: I didn’t review GEB, and instead did a feature, because we know each other’s faces from previous interviews

GEB: I spent many a day and sleepless nights at avenues fighting panic attacks and anxiety, wondering if we would get 4 stars, what our reviews would say…when we went to open GE, we realized that achieving those things did nothing to make us happy. therefore, we made a conscious decision to not worry about any of the major critics and/or reviews. we also knew we would constantly be changing the restaurant, menus, etc., and if you look at what was written (Trib, Chicago Mag, Time Out, Sun Times were all in our restaurant in the first 4 weeks) at the beginning vs. where we are now, not much of it is still relevant. I’m not saying people should wait to review a place, I’m saying it doesn’t matter because a place will succeed due to other factors

TOC: Michael, when you take photos in a restaurant (and this is for Gary, too), doesn’t the attention increase? Do you feel that your experience is different than the person next to you who doesn’t show that they have the power to blog about their experience?

GW: I’ve been taking pictures in restaurants since pre-digital camera days, only recently has this seemed to indicate something more than simple enthusiast. Now it’s not uncommon to be asked if this, meaning the pictures,  are going on the Internet.

ME: My cover for photos–which I try to take discreetly–is that I’m Asian and that’s just what we do.

MN: I rarely take photos when I’m on official review of a place for another publication, and even for Hungry, I tend to send someone after the fact sometimes…if I do it, I try to be discreet. I try to be discreet, because I agree with the premise that yes it can draw attention…sometimes you just don’t have the option of a separate photog….and frankly I think this an issue for big media too, why should Monica have to take photos, she’s a writer, not a photo, I know budgets are limited, but if you’re going to cover something, do it right with a good investment.

ME: I sure wish we had a photo staff to shoot all of our stuff but we just don’t anymore

GW: Far as anonymity, I often get good service in a restaurant, pre Internet, post Internet, waiters, chefs, tend to recognize true enthusiasm and respond positively. Everyone likes it when someone evidences genuine interest in what they are doing, be it chef, plumber or politician.

GEB: its weird, I remember seeing the first posts/reviews online and thought it could affect us negatively, but everyone who comes in talks about all the "great press" we’ve been getting (without a PR company no less). I guess its hard to see the reach a blog or review has, but we’re full every night so somehow I’m ok with everything

TOC: Gary - not everybody appreciates it. Recently a few restaurants in New York have taken measures to prevent bloggers from coming into their restaurants or at least coming in and acting like bloggers (taking photos, etc). I’d like to hear whether the chefs have been tempted to enact bans on cameras, or something like that, in their restaurant.

GEB: I’ve never had any issues with people taking photos in the restaurant…be they reviewers, foodies, or what have you. in the restaurant world, you are always looking for and are excited to cook for "people who get it"; that meaning they are not going to order the split Caesar and beef well done, sauce on the side. if a guest shows enthusiasm and wants to take notes, ask questions, shoot pics, more power to them.

TOC: GEB, to your point that print reviews are irrelevant - The old axiom is that there’s no such thing as bad press. But that axiom was coined before blogs existed. Does anybody think that the plethora of online reviews can actually hurt a restaurant, perhaps more than a print review can?

PF: I think it’s absurd to prevent any enthusiast from not dining - or to prevent photos from being taken.

MN: Why do we even "review" anymore? Are people really waiting with baited breath to hear about our dining experiences? I’d argue that review dollars should instead be spent on sussing out good artisans and chefs and focusing more on telling their stories and the craft behind the food…you can still be anonymously initially to get a bead on things, but use those second visit dollars instead on good photos or more reporters.

GEB: My sentiments exactly MJN…

PF: Michael - I do believe people are waiting to hear about your dining experiences.

TOC: Phil, do you think the concept of a chief restaurant critic is an outdated one?

PV: Gosh, I hope not. Obviously websites can get the word out faster than I can, but I think there’s still something to be said for non-anonymous reviewers who pay for their own meals.

GEB: I think another thing that is upsetting is when someone comes in to the restaurant expecting something extra, or that the chef/servers are going to jump through hoops simply because they say they’re going to "blog" about their experience…that attitude before you even sit down simply makes the team wanna throw you out the door…

MN: I think you should throw them out of the door

MN: Same with establishment writers who try to get free stuff….

GW: I agree with MN, that is simply crass.

TOC: Do you see that often, GEB?

GEB: Self important foodies or throwing them out? we call it "breaking up with the table", and give them the "its not you, its me" speech. we can’t be all things to all people, and we’ve had times where guests expect something more high end, more creative, less loud, etc

ME: Okay, establishment writers who try to get free stuff: I’ve heard about these people. I really didn’t think they existed until that Mariotti thing came out.

MN: Mariani?

ME: Right. It gives us all a bad name.

PF: Agreed.. and not an honest opinion for the reader.

PV: I get calls from restaurants from time to time wondering about people who’ve tried to cadge free meals. It’s disgraceful, not only for the handout but for the implied blackmail. Some restaurant owners are afraid to deny those people, because they fear the mean-spirited posting that’s likely to follow.

PF: I twinge when a ‘critic’ comes in announced. It sincerely cheapens the review. Then again, there are chefs who offer their staff bounties for recognizing anonymous critics. Although the advantages to knowing your critic are obvious, it is much more rewarding to be positively reviewed by an anonymous visit. Also, it keeps you on your toes with all the guests.

TOC: Phillip, can you give us an example of a critic who came in announced?

PF: Not off the top of my head… but be assured that it has happened.

GW: In general LTHers post simply for the ‘love of the game’ not for recognition, free stuff or any other self important reasons.
   
GEB: Do you see the world of print going the way of the dodo? This year’s James Beard nominations have a category for blogging, so obviously the world is changing whether writers/chefs want it to.

PV: I think what we’ve seen with print and its diminishing influence may continue, but I doubt we’ll ever go away. I don’t really see a great deal of difference between bloggers and print journalists in terms of restaurant reviews. I respect some and dismiss others, generally via the same criteria.

GW: What irks me are people who post, one or two words and/or sweeping generalizations. If I never read the words suck or meh again I will be a happy man.

PV: My favorite empty phrase is, "you really don’t get much for what you spend." The sign of a true incompetent…

TOC: Do you guys think that such posters ("meh" posters) are the ones that will keep online criticism from taking over for print?

ME: Print journalism in general is going the way of the dodo. I just hope the bleeding will stop at a certain point. but, as with any kind of criticism, I hope that readers will start to identify with and trust a certain reviewer and base their faith on that, regardless of the venue

MN: One of the big elephants in the room is the dwindling budgets for reviewing….one of the reasons free stuff is more imperative is that media operations have reduced their budgets just like they have photogs etc…early in my career, I did eat the Avenues foie dinner for free on the premise that it was a feature story and I couldn’t afford to cover it otherwise…I regret that decision and it felt dirty…it was a big turning point for me…the way I look at now is you wouldn’t ask a painter to give you a painting for free or Bruce Springsteen to play a free concert, so why expect it of a chef and a restaurant

ME: The weird thing is we DO accept free Bruce Springsteen tickets for our [music] reviewers. But restaurants are a different animal–at least for newspapers

GEB: Chefs/restaurant people I know trust a select group of critics/bloggers/reviews, and if they come in announced or unannounced, it doesn’t matter, we’re generally excited to cook for them and show them what we’re about.

PF: I think people will always appreciate having the dining section in their hand. They are certainly the one’s who take much credibility away from the dedicated internet criticism.

PV: The only thing that will make online criticism take over for print is if the quality of online criticism is better. I’m not an online critic as we’re defining it in this forum, but all my stuff is online.

GW: Like all things in life, the Internet in particular, one must separate signal from noise. Food discussion seems particularly egregious in this regard, LTHForum less so than most online sites.

PV: That’s because everybody eats, and everybody has opinions about what and where they eat. Not everybody can get a column in the Trib or TOC or Chicago Magazine, but they can get online. Which is fine, when they have something coherent to say. But as Gary points out, there’s a lot of noise mixed up with the signal.

GW: I am on the Internet hours a day, but still get, and have no plans to stop, the Tribune, Sun Times and Time Out, along with Chicago Magazine, delivered to my house.

TOC: So Gary, can you respond to many of the LTH members assertion that everything they read in print was lifted from the site?

ME: Really? That’s one of the assertions?

TOC: Often.

GW: TOC, please scroll up and read what I said about sweeping generalizations. <smile>

MN: Phil or Monica or anyone who reviews, do you feel a responsibility to the restaurant at all or just the readers? Ruth Reichl famously said she had no allegiance to a restaurant.

ME: I have to admit that I’m a bleeding heart sometimes and if there is a little Ecuadorian guy busting his hump to turn out some fantastic food and the place is nearly empty, I will push to get the review in sooner. in that way I do think I have a responsibility to a restaurant. but its really a responsibility to tell readers about it before it closes.

PV: I agree with Ruth. The person I imagine I’m writing for is the reader who has an interest in dining but finite resources with which to do it. I’d rather face the ire of a chef who feels I underrated his restaurant than face the person who dropped $150 on a restaurant that I overpraised just because the chef is such a swell guy. Hopping up to an earlier comment, are some LTH members really claiming that print critics are stealing their observations?

TOC: I (Heather) often get suggestions from freelancers for Save This Restaurant candidates that include the disclaimer "I didn’t get this off LTH" mainly because they read the boards and some members are particularly vocal about staking their claim. Especially when it comes to little ethnic dives, "hidden gems."

MN: Mediocrity borrows, genius steals….even if you cop a lead, it’s what you do with it that counts. Mike Gebert covering head to tail eating is nothing new, but the way he does it on Sky Full of Bacon video is utterly original….

TOC: Gary, I hear you about sweeping generalizations, but wouldn’t you agree that there is a bit of a "us against them" mentality with online "amateur" reviewers who might resent print critics

MN: I sometimes think it’s the other way around…imagine jealous journalist who says " Hey I get paid to do this, who is this upstart person who scooped me?

GW: Heather, some view it as a competition, which you surprisingly seem to, I simply view it as enthusiasts sharing information. There is cross pollination in all the media outlets, LTH, TOC, Hungry Mag etc. In some instances LTHForum, simply due to the number of people posting, 5000 registered members at present, is on the leading edge of new restaurants, in particular those without press agents and in out of the way locations. Though I often find out about restaurants on more traditional channels as well. Internet discussion of restaurants provides a moving target, reviews, observations come in real time, a fixed media (print) is a stationary target, a point in time.

MN: Phillip or GEB, you can tune service to some extent, but can you even really tune the food much? You guys do such much prep before hand at the high end, almost everything is really cooked already to some extent? I’ve heard the guys at Alinea assert this many times…i.e. if they wanted to, it would be tough to adjust anyway

GEB: Exactly! we cant even change the service really…you get sat in a servers section, the critic can look around him and see who is serving who, what their food looks like, so forth and so on. I always thought it would be funny to have a mag/paper book two resos and have one table take notes, talk into their mics, go to the restroom constantly (giving off the idea that they’re critics) and have the quiet non descript table be the actual review (sitting at the lesser desired table, getting the usual experience).

ME: I appreciate that as chefs you are in a bit of a pickle when a critic comes in because you don’t know which want to be treated like everyone else and those who will be offended if they are treated like everyone else. but it once happened to me, not because I was noticed but because the woman I was dining with was our Sunday magazine food writer. and the well known chef–who was weirdly working behind the bar (it was a bar lunch story)–pretended not to recognize her but kept sending out free crap. we sent it all back and scrapped the review.

PF: Much at Alinea is done under sous-vide and thermal circulators which takes much of the guess work out of their amazing work. The food here at Lockwood is very much a fine tuning process even though the mise en place that goes into it isn’t altering that much. It is not unusual however for a dish to go through a fine tuning phase in presentation as I consider more completely how a guess can more enjoy it.

GEB: recently we had a certain someone (older, bearded, Santa looking) review our place and he proceeded to get wasted at the table…wonder how that affected our review.

MN: I think chefs with integrity cook like every meal is for a critic and that’s the only way you can do it…it still might not always work, but when you make adjustments and don’t compete against your own internal standard, that’s when things go wrong.

MN: So Phil dresses up like Santa now? JK.

GEB: Wuick question…what would happen if a photo of a critic made its way to the internet? Say frank bruni,Michael Bauer, Phil V? Would the gig be up?

ME: I can vouch that Phil has not taken to dressing up like Santa. He is dealing with an interview tho. I think his latest disguise is Obama, tho.

MN: There is a photo of Bruni, albeit outdated…

ME: GEB, that’s a good question. Would it be up? I mean from a restaurants point of view?

TOC: GEB: Well, would it change the way you cooked for Monica if she came to eat at your restaurant, knowing what she looks like? Or Michael for that matter?

GEB: Would the paper have to put someone new in charge of reviewing?

ME: I’ve heard rumors that restaurants have tried to get his picture and make sure everyone knows it but on this side of the table we never know what’s true.

MN: An axiom to that would be, should restaurant reviewers rotate? Phil has been doing this for quite some time, and I know he works with integrity, but people start to figure you out

TOC: That’s what we do. We have to alternate because there are certain people that definitely know what I look like and in that instance, David reviews it. Vice versa.

MN: And it’s no secret that almost everyone knows Pat Bruno….at least that’s what I’ve heard.

GEB: Word on the street is that the Times are going to name a new critic…seems four years or so is the average

PV: I think we explored this earlier. If I get recognized the second I hit the door, the chef has only limited ability to enhance my dining experience. If he amps up the service end of things, chances are good I’ll notice. If he remakes all the sauces and sends out for better fish, dinner will take 9 hours and I’ll definitely notice. That said, I try mightily not to be recognized, and to make it harder for people to spot me. I really wonder how many people really know Pat Bruno. He’s been less careful about his image than me–he once appeared on Fox’s morning broadcast with only a lowered hat brim shielding part of his face–but it’s a lot easier for people to say they "know" Pat when perhaps they don’t.

GEB: Has anyone noticed that bloggers have been reviewing/commenting on more inexpensive places due to the economy. it seems a few years ago L20 is all anyone would be chatting about right now…

PF: I really don’t want to know for exactly those reasons. the tension level goes up for everybody and over compensation can become an issue.

ME: I would hope that a high end chef wouldn’t change their food for me if they saw me in a restaurant because it wouldn’t do them any good. Phil reviews those places. And it’s counter productive, of course.

PV: True. I remember being spotted in a restaurant, and the owner wouldn’t come near my table, even though he visited everybody else (sometimes the lack of attention is the tipoff you’ve been spotted). I asked him much later if he preferred knowing that I was in the dining room, and he said he wished he’d never known. "I was a nervous wreck," he told me.

MN: That’s true…one of the few times I’d been made (because honestly I have 27 readers most of the time I write and no one cares if I’m in the dining room), actually ruined my dining experience

TOC: Phillip, Graham: Both of you have an online presence (Graham on eGullet, etc, Phillip on your own blog). Do you feel that being online is a necessity for a chef these days - a way to defend yourself, or even just to contribute to the conversation?

GW: TOC, Graham interacts on LTHForum as well, though not so much as owner of Graham Elliot, but as a respected poster and fellow enthusiast.

ME: Michael Bauer, I’ve been told justifies his lack of anonymity with the fact that EVERYONE knows what he looks like and so it’s a level playing field.

MN: I think that reviewing even at the establishment level should consider going more toward lower end and ethnic….everyone knows about L20 or Alinea or whatever, and many of those folks have the opportunity to budget….it’s more of a service to readers to point them to the places they might not find on their own and it also I think encourages a market for very excellent food that struggles to make it otherwise because of certain barriers. I meant the big guys have budget for advertising etc. That’s where LTH is an impeccable resource and also Time Out for sure. Because they always get reviewed.

PV: Actually, you’ll notice the real big guys almost never advertise.

ME: Indeed, on the LTH and Time Out finding smaller places.

ME: I used to feel all alone trying to find those places but I’m pleased to have so much company and to be able to learn about new places through you guys.

GEB: When the Trib piece came out there was a sudden rush to vilify me (at most partly deservingly) and I made the decision to stay out of it as opposed to trying to defend myself with people who enjoy typing more than I do. I feel that as a new restaurant owner, it can easily come across as self promotion, so I’m always available to answer questions, but I am uncomfortable with trying to justify what I am doing.

PV: Just to clarify, Michael Bauer still reviews incognito. He knows he gets busted a lot, but I’ve been to restaurants with him and he doesn’t use his real name.

MN: I believe Gary has a Monica Eng shrine in his basement in tribute to your pre-LTH sleuthing.

PV: People who enjoy typing more than I do.

GW: Monica, you are no slouch on the smaller ethnic places yourself. Your original Dumpling Zone Trib columns held me in good stead long before I had an Internet connected computer.

PV: Nice line.

ME: You guys are too kind.

TOC: Monica: Have you noticed an increase in print media highlighting the little ethnic spots you’ve long been a fan of since the introduction of sites like Chowhound?

GEB: It seems there is more tension between modern media and internet blogging than chefs and reviewers.

MN: Shouldn’t Bauer move to features then and have someone else step in? Isn’t it indulgent to continue, even if you try to maintain your anonymity, when you know your getting made all the time?

GW: Monica, Michael is only slightly exaggerating. <smile>

ME: I have noticed it and I think EVERYONE benefits from highlighting these little places. Readers find new inexpensive places and some of these places stand a chance of staying in business.

PF: No it is not a necessity, but I find it interesting how many people have paid attention to my site. Even the more obnoxious comments. Overall, it has drawn a lot of attention to what I’m doing here and that is good whether the opinions are agreed with or not. I really am amazed at how much attention it has drawn. Aside from checking out the press we’ve been receiving I never really spent much time on forums like this until my sous chef prodded me and built the format for the blog. The rest has required plenty of time, but I enjoy it and the feedback it has received.

ME: As I’ve gotten busier I’ve had fewer chances to comb every neighborhood and stop in every little place but I still love reading and writing about them. You guys are great at that.

TOC: GEB, you suggested this forum as a way to clear the air between critics, bloggers and restaurants. We’re getting close to wrapping it up - have we covered what you hoped we would? Anybody have a point to make that they haven’t yet?

MN: The thing is, I’d still like to read Monica’s take on the place even if she didn’t discover it, and that’s where the real value is…not important to be first as it is to be best

ME: And vice versa Michael.

MN: Thanks

GEB: I think we’ve done a good job at scratching the surface, and hopefully everyone has a better understanding of where we’re all coming from. I know what all of you look like so don’t feel intimidated when you stop in for dinner ;)

GW: I am always surprised at the emphasis on "discovery" Who the hell cares who discovered what, if there is a little joint on Archer Ave doing the best Carne en su Jugo I’m going to be there no mater where the info cam from.

PV: Ha! I was in last night and you missed me!

TOC: Snap!

PV: Actually, I wasn’t.

GEB: Dammit!

ME: I think if people are honest and their criticism comes from the right place and they have a grasp of the food and they can write entertainingly, the more the merrier.

GEB: I always assume someone wearing nerd glasses, a backpack, western style shirt, etc works for Time Out

TOC: I know a certain chef who started wearing those nerd glasses….

GEB: I’m switching to flannel, torn jeans, and long hair to get ahead of the rebirth of grunge that’s due to arrive any day

PV: I dress as Pat Bruno. Seems to work.

MN: Hahaha.

PV: Except they make me wait in the bar for an hour..

MN: You must have to eat a lot of Italian food

PV: Pat, wherever you are, I kid because I love.

For more on the effects of online critics on chefs and professional critics, read "Amateur hour" and "Eating their words" from our blog critics feature, and David Tamarkin’s recent piece "The critical condition." For a discussion with arts critics on these same issues, read our online chat from last year.