A good lesson learned: Self-Service but watch your portion...
Oct 15th, 2003 | 10:53 AM
#22
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,815
Likes: 0
Re: <i>We piled our plate with about 2 layers of appetizers, . . . Then when we were about to pay, they charged us double (10 euro) for that plate. They explained to us that the portion we had was for two persons.</i>
Like Natalia said, you did have two layers of food. This is one of those "letter-of-the-law" vs. "spirit-of-the-law" issues.
As far as the "letter-of-the-law" goes, as rquirk wrote, "<i>If that was the exact terms of the contract between you and the restauranteer I would say as long as it fitted on a plate then it should have cost 5 euros</i>", but as far as the "spirit-of-the-law" goes, I doubt they intended for people to put portions on that plate that went beyond "reasonable" while still paying only 5 euros.
Like Natalia said, you did have two layers of food. This is one of those "letter-of-the-law" vs. "spirit-of-the-law" issues.
As far as the "letter-of-the-law" goes, as rquirk wrote, "<i>If that was the exact terms of the contract between you and the restauranteer I would say as long as it fitted on a plate then it should have cost 5 euros</i>", but as far as the "spirit-of-the-law" goes, I doubt they intended for people to put portions on that plate that went beyond "reasonable" while still paying only 5 euros.
Oct 15th, 2003 | 11:11 AM
#24
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
I think your misunderstanding came about because you are used to Soup Kitchens or whatever they are called here in the USA, where you can pile up a foot high stack of food, eat it and then go back for more.
In Italy the appetizer is just that:to set your appetite for the meal to come, it is not the meal in itself.
It is just a culture clash and you have to respect the country you are in, I bet Europeans can't get the idea of all you can eat-pile it on the plate places here either. Expect some German nationals that I know, they have discovered one & now it is their favorite restaurant.
Live and learn about other cultures, that is the idea of traveling isn't it?
No one to blame, just learning experience, true?
In Italy the appetizer is just that:to set your appetite for the meal to come, it is not the meal in itself.
It is just a culture clash and you have to respect the country you are in, I bet Europeans can't get the idea of all you can eat-pile it on the plate places here either. Expect some German nationals that I know, they have discovered one & now it is their favorite restaurant.
Live and learn about other cultures, that is the idea of traveling isn't it?
No one to blame, just learning experience, true?
Oct 15th, 2003 | 11:42 AM
#25
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,623
Likes: 0
Ah, but capo, what if I am in good spirits and the restauranteur is in poor spirits, whose spirit applies to the law? What if I have just imbibed a plateful, or should that be a skinful, of spirits, what then? Does my version of the law then apply? 
Seriously, I think it would be premature to conclude either that the restaurant is intentionally trying to mislead or that the buyer was trying to take advantage. This goes even if you try to apply your spirit of the law argument. Sure, the restaurant might argue that the appetizers be purchased more or less as they would be served at table, i.e. one layer thick, but on the other hand if they were served at table, they might just as easily have been served on a full size dinner plate as opposed to what clok describes only as a 'small' (bread-and-butter? saucer?) sized plate. Even amongst Italians, who presumably are familiar with their own cultural norms, they still rely on standard units of measurement to avoid this kind of misunderstanding.
So I think both parties share the responsibility this time out.
Seriously, I think it would be premature to conclude either that the restaurant is intentionally trying to mislead or that the buyer was trying to take advantage. This goes even if you try to apply your spirit of the law argument. Sure, the restaurant might argue that the appetizers be purchased more or less as they would be served at table, i.e. one layer thick, but on the other hand if they were served at table, they might just as easily have been served on a full size dinner plate as opposed to what clok describes only as a 'small' (bread-and-butter? saucer?) sized plate. Even amongst Italians, who presumably are familiar with their own cultural norms, they still rely on standard units of measurement to avoid this kind of misunderstanding.
So I think both parties share the responsibility this time out.
Oct 15th, 2003 | 12:17 PM
#26
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 35,153
Likes: 0
I think some people are confusing the concept of "self serve" with "all you can eat" or eating too much or as much as two people. I've never seen that idea except in the US, so I think just letting people put their own stuff on a plate from an area for convenience or because they can easily pick and choose what they want while looking at it, does not mean a restaurant expects somebody to pile appetizers two layers high on a small plate. The folks who are talking about implied contracts etc seem to be thinking there was a sign about "all you can eat" or something, and there wasn't. I don't think the restaurant was ripping anyone off, that was too much food to take for an appetizer. Some people would probably then expect to share that with others who would then get a free meal or to not even pay or order a main meal.
I don't think the restaurant bears responsibility for not expecting someone to pile a plate two layers deep with food so that it contains two persons' amounts on one dish in a manner that would never be the way appetizers would normally be served. They probably expect most people to eat normally. What should they do, put up a sign saying five euro per plate but don't pile your food a foot high?
I've been to a couple cafeterias in France, but I don't think they handled it like that for the side dishes -- as I recall, they were already portioned out into small dishes in the ones where I ate, and then you ordered from a guy behind a counter for main dishes.
I don't think the restaurant bears responsibility for not expecting someone to pile a plate two layers deep with food so that it contains two persons' amounts on one dish in a manner that would never be the way appetizers would normally be served. They probably expect most people to eat normally. What should they do, put up a sign saying five euro per plate but don't pile your food a foot high?
I've been to a couple cafeterias in France, but I don't think they handled it like that for the side dishes -- as I recall, they were already portioned out into small dishes in the ones where I ate, and then you ordered from a guy behind a counter for main dishes.
Oct 16th, 2003 | 03:38 AM
#28
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Christina,
The folks who are talking about implied contracts etc seem to be thinking there was a sign about "all you can eat" or something, and there wasn't.
Implication does not fit the letter of the law (it starts with the letter 'I' not 'L'). The originator clearly stated along the lines that it was a statement of 1 Plate/5 Euros. Your understanding is almost libellous in that it calls my professional and accurate answer based on the established facts into disrepute. Count yourself incredibly lucky that I will not take you to the cleaners and demand 5 Euros compensation *THIS ONE TIME*.
The folks who are talking about implied contracts etc seem to be thinking there was a sign about "all you can eat" or something, and there wasn't.
Implication does not fit the letter of the law (it starts with the letter 'I' not 'L'). The originator clearly stated along the lines that it was a statement of 1 Plate/5 Euros. Your understanding is almost libellous in that it calls my professional and accurate answer based on the established facts into disrepute. Count yourself incredibly lucky that I will not take you to the cleaners and demand 5 Euros compensation *THIS ONE TIME*.
Oct 16th, 2003 | 03:51 AM
#29
Guest
Posts: n/a
nocinonut, a "soup kitchen" is a place where poor or homeless people go to get feed, usually by a church or charity group. They usually serve much more than just soup. I think it became a common term during the Great Depression.
What you are talking about is a "Buffet" and many of those are not "all you can eat". Often you are restricted to a single plate, but you can "pile it high" and not be charged double.
What you are talking about is a "Buffet" and many of those are not "all you can eat". Often you are restricted to a single plate, but you can "pile it high" and not be charged double.
Oct 16th, 2003 | 06:03 AM
#30
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,623
Likes: 0
Well, I love a good debate, so here I am again.
Christina, " All-you-can-eat" involves varying the discrete number of times a serving vessel can be filled. What people have been discussing is a continuous variable known as volume, i.e. the size of any given fill.
You and others accuse the tourist of deviating from accepted "normal" practice. I agree that piling plates isn't pretty, it's sloppy and Grandma most certainly wouldn't approve. Then again, Grandma wouldn't approve of charging guests for hospitality. In other words, this is about trading practices, not etiquette, no matter how much fun we all have giving lectures on protocol. ( And I agree, it IS fun. : - ) )
It is the restaurant that has deviated from the officially recognized national norms of Italy. The restaurant has rejected Italy's standard unit of volume (the litre/milliliter) in favour of improvising their own units. A plate is very arbitrary means of measuring food volume, since a plate is two-dimensional whereas food is not only three-dimensional, it varies in the third dimension depending on the nature of the foodstuff and how it is prepared. (Eggplant is rarely sliced to the same thickness as salami, for example.) It isn't so uncommon for restaurants to sell food by the plate, but if the restaurant then proceeds to delegate to their clients the task of serving out the food on sale, the restaurant can hardly reasonably demand that their clients be accountable for conforming to 'standards' that weren't there in the first place.
Even my own earlier suggestion that restaurant table service follows a consistent standard was wrong. When I thought about it I remembered that the 'one layer rule' doesn't seem to be followed when, for example, salami slices are served: these tend to be arranged on the plate such that each slice is overlapped by the next, or in other words, salami is served at table not in a single layer but multiple layers.
What should the restaurant do? Your saying that they have no reasonable alternative doesn't make it so. Pre-cooked food is sold all over Italy by weight, especially in pizzerias and those 'tavola calda' eateries. All the restaurant in this case need do is tare the balance to the weight of the 'package', in this case the appetizer plate.
As for poor clok, it is she who is left bereft of alternatives. You first try and convict tourists for wanting to have too much food on their plates, you then pass sentence on those who would share food, i.e. have too little on their plates. At this rate Christina it looks like we'll all just have to forego patronizing European restaurants altogether, and survive on canned tuna and the pre-packaged pretzels we stole from the airline. : - )
Christina, " All-you-can-eat" involves varying the discrete number of times a serving vessel can be filled. What people have been discussing is a continuous variable known as volume, i.e. the size of any given fill.
You and others accuse the tourist of deviating from accepted "normal" practice. I agree that piling plates isn't pretty, it's sloppy and Grandma most certainly wouldn't approve. Then again, Grandma wouldn't approve of charging guests for hospitality. In other words, this is about trading practices, not etiquette, no matter how much fun we all have giving lectures on protocol. ( And I agree, it IS fun. : - ) )
It is the restaurant that has deviated from the officially recognized national norms of Italy. The restaurant has rejected Italy's standard unit of volume (the litre/milliliter) in favour of improvising their own units. A plate is very arbitrary means of measuring food volume, since a plate is two-dimensional whereas food is not only three-dimensional, it varies in the third dimension depending on the nature of the foodstuff and how it is prepared. (Eggplant is rarely sliced to the same thickness as salami, for example.) It isn't so uncommon for restaurants to sell food by the plate, but if the restaurant then proceeds to delegate to their clients the task of serving out the food on sale, the restaurant can hardly reasonably demand that their clients be accountable for conforming to 'standards' that weren't there in the first place.
Even my own earlier suggestion that restaurant table service follows a consistent standard was wrong. When I thought about it I remembered that the 'one layer rule' doesn't seem to be followed when, for example, salami slices are served: these tend to be arranged on the plate such that each slice is overlapped by the next, or in other words, salami is served at table not in a single layer but multiple layers.
What should the restaurant do? Your saying that they have no reasonable alternative doesn't make it so. Pre-cooked food is sold all over Italy by weight, especially in pizzerias and those 'tavola calda' eateries. All the restaurant in this case need do is tare the balance to the weight of the 'package', in this case the appetizer plate.
As for poor clok, it is she who is left bereft of alternatives. You first try and convict tourists for wanting to have too much food on their plates, you then pass sentence on those who would share food, i.e. have too little on their plates. At this rate Christina it looks like we'll all just have to forego patronizing European restaurants altogether, and survive on canned tuna and the pre-packaged pretzels we stole from the airline. : - )
Oct 16th, 2003 | 06:27 AM
#31
Guest
Posts: n/a
I've just been waiting for an "all you can eat" buffet in Paris so I can drive those arrogant frenchies to the poorhouse (or is it alms-house in Europe?).
Of course, it would have to be in a very refined setting with outstanding service and only the very best quality food and wine. Hope springs eternal.
Of course, it would have to be in a very refined setting with outstanding service and only the very best quality food and wine. Hope springs eternal.
Oct 17th, 2003 | 04:27 PM
#32
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,749
Likes: 0
This thread has certainly gone off on all tangents. Meanwhile we haven't heard back from clok have we? More than anything else I'm still wondering if they only did the buffet as their dinner (hence charging more) or what they ordered in addition to this buffet -- if anything. To me, that makes all the difference in the world. The buffet was clearly set up as an antipasta buffet and was not intended to be a full meal, so I sure wouldn't blame a restuarant if they charged extra to someone who did in fact make it their meal.
And to those who claim that "all you can eat" is strictly an American thing, forget it. I've seen smorgasbords in Sweden where the locals piled up more food on their plates than you can imagine. I've also seen "all you can eat" buffets in Turkey, patronized by locals, and also in Spain.
And to those who claim that "all you can eat" is strictly an American thing, forget it. I've seen smorgasbords in Sweden where the locals piled up more food on their plates than you can imagine. I've also seen "all you can eat" buffets in Turkey, patronized by locals, and also in Spain.
