We've spoken about so many different aspects re: dining in this forum. Not just the food quality but the level of service, piercings (yeah or nay on your server), noise level, lighting, and right down to the ice level in your soft drink. Today I am asking about the size of your table at which you are seated.
Personally I've had several excellent dinners ruined (at least for me) because we were shoe-horned into a tiny table with too many other tables right under our elbows. I realize restaurants want to maximize their dollars per square foot but geez Louise! My Thanksgiving meal was darkened because of this practice. We were a three top, one of which was a tall well over 6 foot tall male, seated at a deuce set for three with another 6 top and a 4 top right at out elbows. I had to excuse myself to the woman sitting at the table behind me just so I could pull out my chair in order to sit down. That is too close. Every time someone walked to the buffet line we had to scoot our chairs forward and lean over the table. We ate our entire meal this way. In fact, our table barely held our three plates, three bread plates , glassware and silverware. And it wasn't just us, all the diners were crowded. This is no way to enjoy a meal. The food itself was excellent but the dining experience was so uncomfortable I am not likely to return. And that makes me sad indeed because in my mind it's the cooking that's the most difficult to master. I think everyone in the restaurant would have had a far better experience had about 3 four tops been removed. That would have reduced the seating in the dining room from roughly 115 to 103 ( give or take.) .
So, anyone else find this disconcerting or do I just need to get a grip and stop complaining? Is it enough to pay to eat well or are we also paying for a pleasant dining experience?