Post #222192 by joefla70 on Tue, Mar 21, 2006 12:40 PM

On 2006-03-21 12:22, hodadhank wrote:
I had planned to mention that I am part of an international comunity of Tiki Enthusiats who routinely travel great distances to patronize exotic resturants and bars. I would express my concearn that shortly after we became aware of and began to participate in the [b}The 10 best landmark restaurants in South Florida[/b] online poll, our votes for and reviews of the Mai Kai had been purged. I would clearly note that none of our members are professional reviewers nor are we associated with the Mai Kai in any way.

Do you think that is a good idea? I think this is the very reason why the votes got purged in the first place. They probably thought that a large number of people got together and decided to vote for the Mai Kai in order to get it to be the #1 South Florida landmark restaurant... which is kinda what happened.

On 2006-03-21 12:22, hodadhank wrote:
I might have even asked if the Sun-Centinal is purposely continuing the time honored South Floridaian tradition of purging legitimate votes.

I agree with you 100% if all the votes were actually legitimate. The Sun-Sentinel / southflorida.com certainly did purge many votes and reviews that were legitimate... but were they all legitimate? It seemed to me that the idea brought up earlier in this post was to get Mai Kai voted as the #1 South Florida landmark restaurant... not to have TC members vote which of the restaurants on the list is actually worthy of being #1. If all the TC members who voted have actually been to the Mai Kai, that's one thing. But if they have never been there -- and they have never been to any of the other resturants in contention-- then there is no basis for the vote. That is probably what the editors suspected. However, I don't know how the sun-sentinel / southflorida.com editors could know which votes, for any restaurant, are "legitimate" and which ones are not.