Comments and Feedback
Please email comments or questions to: jackjackson@gotakeanap.com.
- Archived On Food feedback January 31, 2011
A note regarding my Goldberg’s review from one RM (2/12/2010):
“Isn’t a pity that you wouldn’t know a good hamburger if it mooed you to tears? And isn’t it a pity that a raw yellow onion would be just that? And isn’t it a pity that a bustling, profitable restaurant looks empty to you-clean your glasses buddy. Thankfully your opinion is the minority. Goldbergs offers great food, great service at a great price. Get a clue and a real job. Oh and maybe new glasses.”
I stand corrected, RM. However, I would love a good hamburger to moo me to tears.
And some correspondence about Blue Downtown.[Email chain is in reverse chronological order, starting with JJ last response to AH]
—————————- Original Message —————————-
Subject: RE: Restaurant Review
From: jackjackson@gotakeanap.com
Date: Wed, August 26, 2009 6:18 am
To: “[AH]” [email address removed]
————————————————————————–
If you had actually read my email, you would have read that I don’t consider it an excuse, just an explanation. You would have also read that I was eager to fix the mistake. You would have also read that I’m glad you pointed it out.
As for the signs, they are illuminated with lights at night. Those lights were not on when I went. I don’t consider that an excuse, but it was the case. That review has been up for a long time and no one else has bothered to correct me or else I would have fixed it a long time ago.
Why do you care so much? Do you own the restaurant? Or do you just like to argue all the time?
[AH next response to JJ]
Quit making excuses. Those signs are not illuminated. It is a board that comes off the building, as well as the flat letters not illuminated against the wall on the front of the building. I just looked at the website. Also, it says Blue on their menus. Oh yeah you ordered things off the menu.
[JJ next response to AH]
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 19:51:48 -0700
Subject: RE: Restaurant Review
From: jackjackson@gotakeanap.com
To: “[AH]” [email address removed]
If you had actually read my email, you would realize that I said the sign was not on. I’m sure they had a sign.
[AH next response to JJ]
I went to Blue downtown during their grand opening week and had a discussion with one of the owners about how their sign and others downtown were so small. He informed me that it was the only size acceptable downtown, which I found interesting. I will end it at this because this just shows that you are fairly untrustworthy and make things up, saying they did not have a sign. You were just trying to cover yourself up, because they certainly had a sign when you were there.
[JJ next response to AH]
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 17:06:07 -0700
Subject: RE: Restaurant Review
From: jackjackson@gotakeanap.com
To: “[AH]” [email address removed]
It’s up to you whether you proofread your emails, but when I receive emails from strangers with typos in them I’m left to conclude that they either don’t care how to spell something or don’t know how to spell something. You clearly don’t care and may even not know how to spell, which makes me take you less seriously, especially because I don’t know you. And I can say from experience that most people will take you less seriously if you send emails full of typos, especially if they don’t know you. So, you can act like you don’t care, but maybe you should.
I don’t have a problem with fixing my mistakes. But when you email people you don’t know and want to raise an issue with them, you might try a less aggressive approach. If I had found a mistake in a review and felt compelled to tell the reviewer (I have yet to feel so compelled), I would’ve first said that I read their review, thought there was a mistake in it, and then would proceed to share my thoughts about how I disagree with the substance of the review.
I do not wish to make any excuses for getting the name of Blue wrong, but I was misinformed that it was another Baby Blue, like a franchise, and I went when the sign was not on. It was a simple mistake. I’m glad you pointed it out. I was eager to fix it.
That makes me different from you. You apparently don’t care that you make mistakes (at least in your emails).
I am not going to respond to every issue you wish to raise about my reviews. I don’t know you and I don’t have time to respond to everyone’s emails if they disagree. I would appreciate, however, if you would continue to point out any mistakes I have made and more politely inform me of them.
But to answer your concerns this time:
1. I can hold any restaurant or bar to a drink standard even if a particular drink is not on a drink menu, and even if the drink has known variations. The Mai Tai served to me was not within acceptable variations. Imagine a drink like a Manahattan or martini, both of which have many personal variations, but no serious drinker would be happy with rum in their Manhattan or martini.
2. Sometimes I don’t discuss food at length in a review when other aspects of a restaurant stand out, or when the food is very similar to other restaurants of a similar style, or when I find the food unremarkable.
3. The staff at Nicola’s gave us the impression that they didn’t even want to _seat_ us, simply because we didn’t have a reservation. Everyone in our group agreed that the host was implying this. I’ve been to many restaurants with and without reservations, and this was the first time I’ve ever felt this way at a restaurant. Even if that was not the host’s intent, that was the message conveyed by the condescending tone, and that is enough for me to consider it bad service.
Like I said, I’m not going to respond to you every time you read something you disagree with. I write about my opinions and experiences, and you should, too. I’m sure your time would be better spent if you wrote your own reviews rather than emailing me about mine.
[First response from AH to JJ]
Should not be hard for you to interpret words that were quickly typed. I usually don’t proofread e-mails. But, what do you have to say for yourself about not knowing the name of the place you ate at and then reviewed it under a different name. Also, I ate at Blue tonight and looked for their Mai-tai on the menu. They don’t have one on the menu. If you google Mai tai, there are tons of different recipes. So, which recipe did you want them to make for you that is the “right” one. You can’t hold a restaurant to a standard that is not on their menu, especially when their are so many different ways to make it. Sincthe tase it was a food review, how was the food? There was not any mention of how the food tasted???
[JJ first response to AH]
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 17:19:29 -0700
Subject: Re: Restaurant Review
From: jackjackson@gotakeanap.com
To: “[AH]” [email address removed]
What is an “upsatirs” and what is a “retaurant”?
[Initial email from AH]
How do you review a restaurant when you don’t even know the name of the place???? I read your review about eating at Baby Blue. You actually ate at Blue downtown. Baby Blue does not have an upsatirs and is located on 170th and west center, totally different place. It is real easy just read the sign outside the retaurant you are eating at and you will know the name. Jack the JAckass!
[End email chain.]
- Archived Go Take a Nap! gossip feedback January 31, 2011
From: Mrs. J. M. Jordache
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 4:45 PM
To: Jack Jackson
Subject: Go Take a Nap!I am a loyal reader, first-time emailer, of Go Take a Nap! and wondered if I might make a suggestion? Your “editors” seem to have good, decent heads on their shoulders. Might they have their own forum, outside the penumbra of Go Take a Nap!, to share their views on the world? I oftentimes agree wholeheartedly with their comments; so wholeheartedly, in fact, that I am left humming the song (w)Holehearted by Extreme! while I peruse your ramblings, waiting for the next nugget of wisdom to be imparted by the editors. Perhaps you remember that song? “There’s a hole in my heart that can only be filled by you! And this hole in my heart can’t be filled with the things I do!” Well that, fine sir, is how I feel about your editors’ comments.
Thank you for considering my request.
Taking a nap!
Mrs. J. M. Jordache
From: Jack Jackson
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 4:00 PM
To: Mrs. J. M. Jordache
Subject: Re: Go Take a Nap!Dear Mrs. Jordache,
It’s always nice to receive nice emails from nice people who have nice things to say about nice things. I think that’s Really Quite Nice! [Read: Splendid!—Eds.] The Editors of Go Take a Nap! also would like to thank you [We would?—Eds.] for the nice email [The French call it “couriel”—Eds.] {The Brits call it “email”—Jack Jackson} [we know.—Eds.] {Stop bragging.—Jack Jackson}.
In response to your suggestion that the Editors get their own forum or column beyond the constraints [Stifling constraints.—Eds.] of GTaN!, much has been bandied about and ballyhooed and other fancy-pants-type-styled phrases but the focus groups maintain that it is still the thoughts of Jack Jackson and not the Editors what people want to read [That is an outright lie.—Eds.].
So, until the focus groups change their . . . um . . . focus, the Editors will continue to be relegated to editing [On a scale of 1-10, 1 being lowest and 10 being highest, how satisfied are you with the current email?—Eds.].
Sincerely,
Jack Jackson [Turd.—Eds.]
From: [Name removed]
Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 12:09 AM
To: Jack Jackson
Subject: Bob Barker and Chuck Norris!Chuck Norris was invited by the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences to present the Hall of Fame Award to Bob Barker because they are very good friends! Bob Barker took karate lessons from Chuck Norris many years ago, they have remained good friends ever since that time. Who should have presented the award to Bob, maybe Alex Trebek! Maybe, Mr. Jackson, you don’t consider Mr. Norris a “TV star” but he has done numerous television movies and happened to star in a television series that ran for 8 years. I’m pretty sure that Bob Barker was happy to receive his award from his good friend rather than someone who in your opinion had more prestige, but no connection with him personally. Maybe you should “go take a nap” until you can write about something you actually know about!
From: Jack Jackson
Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 3:17 AM
To: [Name removed]
Subject: Re: Bob Barker and Chuck Norris!Maybe I should hire you as my intern so I don’t make so many mistakes!
You must agree, however, that if Bob Barker were to receive an award for television, it should be given by someone who is more important than he is when it comes to TV. Let’s assume it was not Chuck Norris, or that Chuck Norris was not Bob’s friend. At that point, it would have no meaning.
My question is this: how did Chuck Norris even get to that position? It would make more sense for Bob Barker to have given himself the award, much like Napoleon or Charlemagne did when they crowned themselves emperor.
Think about it this way: Chuck Norris giving Bob Barker the TV Hall of Fame Award is like Henry Kissinger giving George W. Bush the award for Fascist of the Year. When you put it in that perspective, it should all become very clear.
Thanks for reading my column!
And [Name removed], Go Take a Nap!
From: Anonymous
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 3:08 PM
To: Jack Jackson
Subject: webpageI wandered across your webpage – I’ve found parts that I agree with, but this upsets me —
“Rosie O’Donnell is publicly defending Martha Stewart without any knowledge of the facts of her case. That’s smart. She said that women of America
shouldn’t let ‘them tear down one of the most successful female entrepreneurs in our country’s history.’ She didn’t say who ‘them’ were, and I’m sure the quote was taken out of context, but who cares? I think Martha cheated, lied, and stole her way to the top, and I’m not going to let ‘her’ get away with it! Having more than $100million needs to Go Take a Nap! No one gets that kind of money without being a royal bitch.”Rosie is correct -
I do agree with you; Ms. Stewart was very selfish in her actions. However, so was President Bush; He did the exact same thing!
Everyone is making a big deal about DUH!bya (my personal take on the nickname) not cracking down on the bigshots pulling these stunts … How can he do ANYTHING about it without being a complete hypocrite? Haven’t you heard what happened with his baseball team …? Anything he did while in charge of a huge corporation…?
Back to my original topic – Rosie. While her statement may have been taken out of context (I didn’t hear her make the comment, so I don’t know what
was said, either) people – I generalize this by saying “people”, as it’s not just egotistical men – don’t want to see a woman make it “to the top” .
Martha has done this, and it just horrifies the nation!That’s the end of my rant.
From: “Jack Jackson”
To: Anonymous
Subject: RE: webpage
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 15:28:39 -0600Hmmm…
I don’t know what to say to you, because I don’t really feel like responding at all. But here’s what I think about what you’ve said. You say you are upset. About what? That I don’t spend equal time bashing George Bush? If you didn’t notice, my webpage is devoted to bashing any and all celebrities. I avoid political discussions as much as possible.
Because I didn’t bash him doesn’t mean that I’ve implicitly approved of EVERYTHING HE’S EVER DONE. This works the opposite way. Just because I DID bash Rosie and Martha, doesn’t mean I bash EVERYTHING THEY’VE EVER DONE. Where is your logic? Is there any logic in what you’re saying? I think not.
You said you agreed. Well, what is so upsetting? Are you trying to make some sort of feminist argument that I need to spend equal time bashing rich
men and rich women? I bash men more often than I do women. I haven’t run a statistical analysis of my webpage, but I know that’s true. If you want,
go ahead and run the analysis yourself and let me know what you find.I guess I have no idea what in the hell you’re trying to say.
From: Anonymous
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 3:52 PM
To: Jack Jackson
Subject: RE: webpageI’m not stating you should be bashing anyone more or less. I just dislike hypocrisy! The point I (tried to convey) was Martha Stewart didn’t do anything our country’s leader hasn’t done, and if he can get away with it I don’t see why she shouldn’t be able to as well!
I wasn’t trying to start an argument… I wasn’t questioning your intelligence or “fairness”.
I was simply using my right to free speech by sending you a direct email. DO excuse me!
From: “Jack Jackson”
To: Anonymous
Subject: RE: webpage
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 19:11:39 -0600So where in my response did I say you didn’t have a 1st Amendment right to email me? And let’s look at what you just responded with, shall we?
You’re arguing that because one person gets away with lying, cheating, and stealing to gain a lot of money, it’s OK that Martha Stewart should get away with it too?
Or were you arguing that because our president did it, it’s OK for only Martha?
Or if anyone does it, so should anyone else be able to?
Or if just the president, then everyone?
No matter how I interpret your statements, you seem to be arguing the “my friend did it” defense that so many of our nation’s children offer to their parents. To which I respond, “If your friend dove off a cliff, would you too?”
And if you’re going to be sending emails to people that support such a theory that it’s OK to do what Martha did since our president did it, I would amend our Constitution to say that you, and only you, don’t have a right to free speech.
What would that be?
Amendment XXVIII
[Anonymous], by stating that it’s OK for Martha Stewart to lie, cheat, and steal her way to the top, has so offended the use of free speech that her right to free speech has been revoked.
