Didn't care for SEVICHE

sooooooo 90% was excellent or the best you've ever had, but the eggs were overdone on one dish out of several so you didn't care for Seviche? You are one picky dude.

I guess you won't be eating anytime soon honey!!!!

And what the H
does that comment mean?

According to Rob and Gretchen, if someone disagrees with the majority opinion, the thread should be locked or expunged.

Pure bull sh!!t.

I have been to Seviche and think it is good, but that doesn't mean that that should be only valid opinion.

well sure, Steve...but his comments aren't adding up. He's not making a lot of sense.

According to Rob and Gretchen, if someone disagrees with the majority opinion, the thread should be locked or expunged.

Pure bull sh!!t.

I have been to Seviche and think it is good, but that doesn't mean that that should be only valid opinion.

I agree, but in the case of the current thread MikeSpaceG posted his opinion of Seviche to poke a stick in the eye of those who dared to criticize his beloved El Mundo. He chose to criticize a restaurant that is roundly praised here just for spite. Despite his post of details of his visit, I don't believe he's actually been to Seviche. The details in his post are easily obtained from Seviche's website menu (the fried egg in the Bistec de Casa dish is mentioned) or by running a simple search here using "Seviche and bartender" (the only post resulting from the search mentions Adam's name). MikeSpaceG is affilitated with El Mundo.

I guess you won't be eating anytime soon honey!!!!

And what the H
does that comment mean?

It was his version of "I know you are, but what am I?"

According to Rob and Gretchen, if someone disagrees with the majority opinion, the thread should be locked or expunged.

Pure bull sh!!t.

Steve, you are not understanding my comments as I intended. There are sometimes negative comments posted on this forum about restaurants I love. I do not request that those posts be removed simply because I, or the majority of forumites, do not agree with the poster's opinion. I stated my belief that this was a "drive by shooting" to Seviche, based on the following:

"'Mike G' and 'Evan G' both joined [the forum] in the last two days and managed to post within two minutes of each other about their [negative] feelings regarding Seviche."

THAT is SUSPECT, AND this post appeared to me to be ambiguous, uninformed, and malicious in nature.

When apparently genuine negative comments are posted on this forum towards restaurants which I love, I will typically choose to dine there ASAP to show my support and then post my own positive comment. You can see that this was my reaction to a negative comment regarding Palermo Viejo just last weekend.

I would appreciate the courtesy of you trying to understand the intent of a person's comments before you judge them as being "Pure bull sh!!t." I believe, according to the forum description on the index page, that this forum is supposed to be "a civil place for the intelligent discussion of the local restaurant scene" (emphasis added).

Merry Christmas!

[Robin Garr]

this forum is supposed to be "a civil place for the intelligent discussion of the local restaurant scene" (emphasis added).

Excellent advice. Thanks, Gretchen.

Merry Christmas!

That, too!

this forum is supposed to be "a civil place for the intelligent discussion of the local restaurant scene" (emphasis added).

Excellent advice. Thanks, Gretchen.

I believe that I have been "civil". My statement was against the quick call for censorship and not against anybody personally. I don't know if the original poster had a bone to pick or not, but he stated an opinion and should not be condemned for it without being sure of his intentions, not guessing.

I don't believe in censorship and I do think it is bull sh!!it unless absolutely necessary.

As far as "intelligent", all tests have shown that I am at least close to Forest Gump.

[Robin Garr]

I don't believe in censorship and I do think it is bull sh!!it unless absolutely necessary.

You may have noticed that I am also loath to censor unless it is absolutely necessary, and it almost never is. But jumping into a public discussion with comments involving references to bovine scatology rarely passes the "civil" test, and it tends to look kind of dum bass as well. Just sayin' ...

Bloosh!

I have to agree that the prices sure did change from Jicama to Seviche.
The food at Seviche is good, but the portions were small for the prices. I paid $24. for a pork chop and the appetizers were very small portions.
What wrong with writing in negatives about restaurants? That is what this forum is all about, along with the positives.
Doug Chin

Doug,
There is nothing wrong with writing negative comments when warranted. There seems to have been questions as to the validity of the comments in this thread. The poster is accused of posting as a response to negative comments about another establishment.

I don't know what the actual circumstances are, but can teel you from my experiences at Seviche that although it is a bit pricey, it is excellent in both food and service.

I didn't find the appetizers small at all. The mussels were outrageously good and plenty of them. Best in Louisville. I had to share. I can't remember NOT taking leftovers from Seviche. I do think it's possible to just order the wrong dish or get an "off" night. It happens. It's also a highly personal thing. That said, I think it's only fair to go back again and give it a try especially when your opinion seems to be in the minority. I mean that about ANY place unless you're treated badly.

I've never had anything that wasn't fantastic at Seviche and every person we've taken there has loved it.

I have to agree that the prices sure did change from Jicama to Seviche.
The food at Seviche is good, but the portions were small for the prices. I paid $24. for a pork chop and the appetizers were very small portions.
What wrong with writing in negatives about restaurants? That is what this forum is all about, along with the positives.
Doug Chin

There is nothing wrong with it, but by the same token, there is nothing wrong with disagreeing with a negative review either.