121–130 of 374 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
OP found no correlation between railway proximity and quality
Actually OP found a very small correlation between railway proximity and Google rating . The study didn't actually measure "quality"... Also, the lowest scoring outliers were the closest proximity, which I think is noteworthy.
LOL we may need to update the title of this post, half the top level comments right now are assuming the study confirmed the hypothesis. > With a mighty Pearson's correlation of 0.091, the data indicates that this could > be true! If you ignore the fact that the correlation is so weak that calling it 'statistically > insignificant' would be quite generous.
Easy fix: just add a ? to the end.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> how much do the exceptions contribute to the discussion? A fair amount, if the number of exceptions are such that the rule of thumb isn't useful.
Do you know what "rule of thumb" means? Did you think you were being helpful?
A broadly accurate guide or principle. If there are enough exceptions that it is not broadly accurate, it's not a good rule of thumb.
> Did you think you were being helpful?
By doing what?
On a slightly related note, what’s with the terrible quality kebabs in the UK? You go to Germany and it’s almost a completely different food.
Many years ago I came up with a rule of thumb. Restaurants have three basic strategies, be a known quantity (chain), have a good location, or be actually good. I've found some gems by looking for the third category. Given that "near the train" is a good location, that would support this theory.
This supports the inverse square rule for seafood restaurant quality vs. being near the ocean. There are good places, but right on the water? Universally bad.
Kebabs are like cheese steaks; the best one is whichever is closest to wherever I am.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My rule of thumb: if it has the name of the country, i expect the food to be at best sub-par i.e "Great Indian" (gave me wild food poisoning). Second rule of thumb: if the milkshakes are good, the food will be good - almost never fails me.
There’s a bizarrely good place in Dublin called China Sichuan (double whammy; country _and_ region), located in, basically, a business park 20 minutes from the city centre in a tram. It has no business being any good; combo of name and suburban location should condemn it to mediocrity at absolute best. (They’ve also clearly spent a lot on the decor, which, again, is normally not a great sign in a restaurant. And yet…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not true -- restaurant reviews have a lot of signal. Generally an average score is quite reliable once you hit 100 or so reviews. Even 50 reviews is a pretty decent signal.
not always... the data is skewed by non natives, e.g. a high concentration of americans will typically result in junk food scoring too high, high scoring asian food in the west tastes nothing like what it should, for authentic tastes the scores will be quite mid
That's not skew. That accurately reflects "non-native" clients, who are people too.
> a high concentration of americans will typically result in junk food scoring too high
You do realize that America has the highest number of Michelin-starred restaurants per capita? Way to stereotype
> high scoring asian food in the west tastes nothing like what it should
Are you also going to criticize Japan for not making American BBQ like "what it should"?
You're showing yourself to be extremely prejudiced against all sorts of other nationalities, and against the creative outcomes when nationalities mix. But people have different tastes from whatever you think is "right", and that's OK.
Many years ago I came up with a rule of thumb. Restaurants have three basic strategies, be a known quantity (chain), have a good location, or be actually good. I've found some gems by looking for the third category. Given that "near the train" is a good location, that would support this theory.
My only rule is that restaurants in hotels are usually mediocre to bad, which fits with your theory. If they have some built-in customer base they don’t have to work as hard at being good.