Kh2h Writes:

Most enjoyable, guys--the review, that is, if not the lunch. May I, just for yucks  (the laugh kind, not the lunch), offer a few critiques of your critique...

Your A and B format/grid is, at first glance anyway, confusing; looks too much like grades. I thought one of you was giving the restaurant an A, and the other a B. Good thing I read on! I also find the number grades, while unique, less accessible than stars--which people understand (and like) when it comes to hospitality things. Consider reaching for the stars!

 For guys who portray themselves as obsessed with eateries (and Cathedral Hill), one thinks you would be aware that Medusa closed months ago. The food press covered the ongoing saga quite amply--if you're not otherwise in "the loop." Yet who can keep up with all this? Few folks, fershur. Still, that made me wonder if you are true foodies who eat their brocoflower and do their homework, knowhatimean?

 Reading both reviews was, to this reader, (at times) unnecessarily redundant, repetitive, and repetitious. Really now, you don't both need to tell us the three sandwiches that you didn't even bother to sample--for instance. Is there some way to get the factoids you both like in--but only once? Busy readers would be pleased.

 As for Rod Grams, gosh, that's sad that he was eating alone. But suffice it to say that I may understand why you did not opt to invite him to your table to join you. And I'll just leave it at that.

Keep up the good work. I'll be back for seconds.

Cheers, 

kh2h

Editor Responds:

Thanks for that concise summation. We agree that there is some repetition but this is almost by necessity as A & B don't see each other's review until after publication. This also caters to readers who may only read A or B. The number rating scheme, confusing to mere mortals, is a throwback to the fact that they both (A & B) have an engineering background. Just remember that the lowest possible score (score is a combination of food and etc (every thing else: atmosphere, service, etc.)) is four (4). The highest score is twenty (20). We will consider adding stars to the reviews as well. Look for comments by A & B here soon.

A Responds:

We thank kh2h for a cogent metareview!

Our scoring system has flummoxed a few readers on first exposure ... we'll hide behind the "we're engineers, surely you don't expect our devices to be user friendly" excuse. But we will note that our format does have some appealing properties, at least in theory. It can accommodate guest reviewers easily (we'd just include "C" etc. on the grid), for example.

Living and working in Minneapolis, our coverage and knowledge of the other side of the Mississippi (more or less) is limited. In other words, we're pretenders when it comes to St. Paul ... and you've outed us (or at least me).

How can we avoid repetition? How can we avoid repetition? The problem is that our reviews are prepared and published independently, usually with deadlines already past. When time permits we'll do a scrub.

Rod Grams at our table? We'd be gone before he'd finished saying grace.

B Responds:

Thank you for setting A straight.

Rod Grams is a singularly bloody-minded fellow isn’t he? As far as I can remember he still hasn’t conceded the last election. George Dubya never calls with that Cabinet job so in the meantime he is destined to haunt Frost!