Best of Louisville awards

Stephen D -
I didn't read Tim's comments the same way. I think he's just saying "go make up your own mind and enjoy doing so." At least that's what I read ...

Stephen D -
I didn't read Tim's comments the same way. I think he's just saying "go make up your own mind and enjoy doing so." At least that's what I read ...

Ok, I'll take that...

I apolagize Tim, if I offended you with my misinterpretaion of your comment.

Stephen D -
I didn't read Tim's comments the same way. I think he's just saying "go make up your own mind and enjoy doing so." At least that's what I read ...

Ok, I'll take that...

There I go, always Mr. Optimist!

Best Chef In Louisville: Second Place (Geoffrey Heyde)

And one of the most sincere, nicest person you will ever meet !

Winning awards is nice, ( like Roger ) I make it a point to recognize the staff on both the back of the house and front of the house for them
We do a majority of the "awards" banquets like others,,,'Best of Louisville"...'Taste of Louisville / Derby"...numerous events at local charities.,..etc..
Takes more than your fair amount of planning, prep, labor, product..etc..also, if you cost one of these events out they are not cheap considering you are giving away goods to 400 to sometimes 1000 people, but the charities they benefit are well worth it in the end.

On a another note we participated in the Phoenix Hill Chili Cookoff for the first time this year and won !
Obviously a much more shirt tail out relaxed atmosphere and honestly at least for right now that trophy has had more attention from patrons, customers and staff than anything else

P.S. Marsha, if you are out there thanks again for the advice and knowledge .There is a barstool on the river waiting on you !

[Robin Garr]

Robin freelances his reviews for both the LEO and the Tribune.\

I don't think Tim T meant what you thought he meant either, Stephen.

Just for the record though, off on a tangent, LouisvilleHotBytes.com, Robin and Mary's small Internet creative company, provides restaurant reviews to LEO and the Voice-Tribune under contract. It's a bit different than traditional "free-lancing." Everything else you said is true, though.

My daughter's employer won a "Best Of " award, so she got to go and had fun. Seriously, people vote for who they've heard of most of the time. Best Dry Cleaner? Pardon me but....bwaaaaaaa. Anyway, I made a joke about Blind Pig last year and he wasn't amused, but I got a boatload of LOL remarks in my email. Have never been to the Village Anchor, but my husband took a client there and was hugely disappointed. We now stick to the ones we know are consistently excellent before taking a client out. I don't think they should be "proud" of their awards, I think anyone who doesn't earn an award the honest way should admit to being crooked or "an inventive marketer"

I worked for LEO for years. This is all I will say...
Please know that the editorial side of the paper has NOTHING to do with the counting of ballots or the operations of the LEO awards at all. It is purely a sales and marketing gimmick. Some of the staff writers MAY come up with some suggestions for categories ( and you can usually spot those) but other than that it all rests in the hands of the sales department. You know, the guys that sell advertising. I will also add that the tallying of ballots AFTER John Yarmuth sold the paper was never done in any sort of consistent manner for the years I was there. . (When John owned the paper the votes were counted and tallied by folks not in the sales department. The sales department THEN frequently pulled their hair out after seeing the results. ) And this was my experience as of 3 years ago. Perhaps since then they have invested in software that can automatically tally all the on line voting results and the write in ballots. Hell, I don't even know if they still have write in ballots. Should you base your dining decisions on the ballot results? (Shrugs)

The man behind the curtain quote was reference to the earlier posts about ballot stuffing and hanging chads or any other electioneering process we have all probably dealt with before. Not specifically about LEO which I enjoy reading for a perspective not gained from watching Fox news.

The comment about the board was tongue in cheek but with a grain of truth, because people on this board care about food.
Best of reeks meant that so many dining award lists (one locally comes to mind) result in ludicrous winners.Favorite Pizza is always won by a (bad) chain.

Lastly. I did mean to eat, have fun and decide for yourself. I have a little twisted outlook on things, but that's not one of them.

Stephen, apology unnecessary but accepted.

Stephen D -
I didn't read Tim's comments the same way. I think he's just saying "go make up your own mind and enjoy doing so." At least that's what I read ...

Ok, I'll take that...

I apolagize Tim, if I offended you with my misinterpretaion of your comment.

I feel that some of the award winners are massivly overrated (village anchor) and some of the best places are no where on the list, Holy Grale. As soon as I read this years awards I swore off putting any thought into them again in the future.

I feel I need to highlight something that Carla said above: It is purely a sales and marketing gimmick.

Heck, newspapers and magazines of all ilk have been doing this since the stone age. At least for a few issues a year ad revenue gets bumped up while the "winning" businesses trumpet their achievement. And stuffing the ballot box is pretty easy, too. Especially for online polls.

What is really outrage-worthy is when an outlet that considers itself a legitimate news source has its editorial decisions swayed by advertisers. Or political parties.

Next: Are "special advertising sections" really special?

I feel I need to highlight something that Carla said above: It is purely a sales and marketing gimmick.

Heck, newspapers and magazines of all ilk have been doing this since the stone age. At least for a few issues a year ad revenue gets bumped up while the "winning" businesses trumpet their achievement. And stuffing the ballot box is pretty easy, too. Especially for online polls.

What is really outrage-worthy is when an outlet that considers itself a legitimate news source has its editorial decisions swayed by advertisers. Or political parties.

Next: Are "special advertising sections" really special?

I agree totally but I want to reintegrate... the editorial side of LEO has (had, I don't know what's going on over there now) nothing to do with the marketing side. LEO has always had great, objective editors non-swayed by the advertising side of the paper. Publishers are of another ilk. Editors want to get the news out, publishers want to rake the money in. I imagine its an on going, constant struggle in most legitimate newspapers.

Publishers are of another ilk. Editors want to get the news out, publishers want to rake the money in. I imagine its an on going, constant struggle in most legitimate newspapers.

That must explain the article about a psychic in this week's edition

LEO has always had great, objective editors non-swayed by the advertising side of the paper. Publishers are of another ilk. Editors want to get the news out, publishers want to rake the money in. I imagine its an on going, constant struggle in most legitimate newspapers.

My beer column in LEO ended because this presumably iconoclastic publication informed me I was not permitted to make disparaging reference to mass market swill. These references would be edited out, something later explained by the vapid reasoning that such rhetorical flourishes detracted from my content. Coincidentally, mass market swill advertises heavily in LEO. Someone was swayed by something.

LEO has always had great, objective editors non-swayed by the advertising side of the paper. Publishers are of another ilk. Editors want to get the news out, publishers want to rake the money in. I imagine its an on going, constant struggle in most legitimate newspapers.

My beer column in LEO ended because this presumably iconoclastic publication informed me I was not permitted to make disparaging reference to mass market swill. These references would be edited out, something later explained by the vapid reasoning that such rhetorical flourishes detracted from my content. Coincidentally, mass market swill advertises heavily in LEO. Someone was swayed by something.

I agree Roger. But the publisher signs the pay checks not the editor. I thnk everyone would agree that LEO was a very different paper when John Yarmuth owned it and Blanche Kitchen was publisher.
And BTW, it sucks major that your column was cut. I always enjoyed it.

My beer column in LEO ended because this presumably iconoclastic publication informed me I was not permitted to make disparaging reference to mass market swill. These references would be edited out, something later explained by the vapid reasoning that such rhetorical flourishes detracted from my content. Coincidentally, mass market swill advertises heavily in LEO. Someone was swayed by something.

I assume it was you who pulled the plug on said column. If so, I admire your adherence to your principles.