San Francisco Blog

In a time when websites like EaterSF feel it's OK to criticize a restaurant's paint color choice when the exterior is still boarded up, this seemed within the bounds of reason to us. (Note: we love EaterSF! We love Yelp! Free expression reigns!)

Still, I sympathized with Tiara N., who began her August 13 post with a little spanking: "Before I start, may I just say it is a pathetic tragedy when people can't wait until a place opens to review it. Jason, your three star review for a place you 'have the scoop on' is tacky and unnecessary, and while it was full of a lot of name-dropping, it's still, well, tacky and unnecessary."

"We are all glad you've seen the kitchen and you know the power players behind the scene, but you still haven't eaten there yet. I dub your 2 cents worth null and void until you have something to back that review up with..."

You go, girl!, I thought. Until I read what followed her heartfelt "Now that that's out of the way!":

"We were of [sic] the lucky few to attend the soft opening last night."

Hello! That means, uh, free food. Dished out to a select group ("lucky few") of friends, family, and tastemakers who the restaurant hopes will spread good word-of-mouth among the hoi polloi who will follow and actually have to pay for their meals. (The unlucky many!)

The restaurant, knowing this - after all, it's invited the attendees! - is on its best behavior. Reviewing not only what comes out of the kitchen but the service at such an occasion is, well, kind of a fool's errand. But Tiara N., so disdainful of Jason's connections (although we must assume she had some of her own, to be "of the lucky few" at what she knows enough to call "the soft opening") and opinions, forges ahead, undaunted:

"While there was no alcohol being served yet, I knew the fruity drinks we had would be so much better with a little vodka. This will be the new spot for fresh cocktails!"

Reviewing cocktails without alcohol seemed kinda like, oh, I don't know, reviewing a restaurant that hasn't yet opened. I won't comment on what Tiara N. said about the food, because she didn't have much to say about it, as it turned out. But the service! Well, "it was completely over-the-top. Our team, KJ and Gloria, made sure every moment of our experience was fabulous..."

In a meek voice, I will merely mention that the service at my first meal at Urban Tavern was, well, kinda sucky (long, long waits for everything, some of which, of course, can be laid at the kitchen's feet, trying to serve lunch to a full house plus a full private room, but some of which can not, like the forgotten sauce for the fish main course which had to be asked for twice), and at the second meal, a whole month later, the service, while earnestly, slightly awkwardly, obviously trying to be topnotch, still kinda clueless.

And speaking of clueless: Tiara N. gave Urban Tavern 5 stars (out of 5). Based on a free meal consumed before Urban Tavern was open to the public. Forget (as we all have in this Interweb age) waiting for a month or six weeks, for the kinks to shake out. (Which is OK, in its place. Which is, I guess, online.)

I looked in vain for the post from Jason D. addressed to Tiara N. that began "Before I start, may I just say it is a pathetic tragedy when people can't wait until a place opens to review it. Tiara N., your five star review of a place that wasn't open to the public yet, based on a free meal, is tacky and unnecessary..." and ended "I dub your 2 cents worth null and void until you have something to back it up with."

But Jason D., whose profile boasts 27 Firsts (honesty compels me to add that only 8 of them are for restaurants), was probably busy elsewhere, walking through another restaurant that would eventually open its doors to the world.