And they continue to beat up on the guy in the comments: "You represent everything that is wrong with the food industry in Los Angeles."
Can you imagine that? Who is he, Stalin? (I'm giving Hitler the day off.)
Can you imagine that? Who is he, Stalin? (I'm giving Hitler the day off.)
Everyone thinks their opinion is important because the internet has made it easy for people to broadcast their complaints to the world (and yes, I realize I'm literally doing this right now). Review sites like Yelp exacerbate this by making everyone think they're a damn food critic.
Throw in a heavy dose of entitlement and its a recipe for disaster.
I haven't seen the negative reviews, but I read the article declaring Alma best new restaurant, and the article is focused a lot on the humble origins and surprisingly very little on the food. The author talks a bit on how some of the pairings were surprising, but more so because the author wasn't expecting it to be this good.
I'd like to see some of the actual negative reviews, but if that's the article that brought people in, it's not hard to imagine how some might take the declaration of "best new restaurant" as a challenge instead of as a claim.
If they all say this food is underwhelming then that's a wake up call to owner. Its tough feedback but it's real.
At the same time people do have a responsibility not to be a jackass. Don't name call, back up general comments with specifics, don't forget to point out what went well, etc.
The best example of these food nuts gone wild can be found in "Mexican" restaurants all over the country. Once a small cabal of folks decide that a place isn't "authentic" or not, forget about it... They'll be whining about the lack of fish tacos or whatever forever.