588509 Fri Jan 16 17:58:10 -0800 2009 15 59 CHOW Feedback 0 4333499 After reading the poor excuse for a confession from Ms. Echlin, and her ongoing advice which is questionable at best, I would like to know (in the words of the late Issac Asimov's Black Widows club), how she justifies her existence, at least on this website. She has advocated pilfering goods, had to get a lawyer to tell her it was not ok to steal fruit, recommends lying to guests about ingredients, and believes bringing home lunch will forever bar you from the executive lunchroom. And now showing up unannounced on someone's doorstep. Even in Emily Post's day people would put notices in the paper or hand out cards saying when they would "be home to visitors." She grudgingly admits that calling from 5 minutes away could be a good thing. Have you noticed the opinion is running 4 or 6 to 1 against her? In short, her advice ranges from moderate to poor. What is she still doing here? Fri Jan 16 17:58:10 -0800 2009 57890 KaimukiMan 1 4353907 agree. in my opinion, her conduct and advice are ethically "challenged" and, at the very least, socially un-graceful. Sat Jan 24 11:23:44 -0800 2009 4333499 105717 alkapal 1 4354015 At this point, I'm actually assuming she's part of some sort of hoax. It seems like, for every single question posed, she gives the exact OPPOSITE of the sensible answer. Obviously her column is some sort of prank. R-right? P-please say yes? Otherwise, my hope for humanity is...dashed. Sat Jan 24 12:13:25 -0800 2009 4333499 101357 janetmweiss 2 4354018 get on your "dash-ee" uniform. Sat Jan 24 12:14:11 -0800 2009 4354015 105717 alkapal 1 4355306 On my short time on CH, I've found her column perfect for sh**s and grins. If I take it seriously, I'm pissed off (what? push the annoying and unwanted guest onto everyone you know? seriously? a decent host would minimize the damage, not foster it!). As long as I keep it as such, my demeanour is far removed from outrage. It's really funny to see what others consider acceptable behaviour, but that is a double-edged sword. I wouldn't want the advice given to be followed and then acted out to me with justifcation. Then again, just because something is on the internet, or published, or penned by a famous person, doesn't mean that it's true. Sun Jan 25 02:52:47 -0800 2009 4333499 224238 Caralien 1 4358048 With the number of people reading over every single inch of CHOW web site/CH community, I think we can safely assume that CHOW columns are submitted, reviewed, posted and appear with stamps of approval. Table Manners has developed into a hot topic area. Readers rant in all directions (myself included) and we each have the choice to read it and respond. What bothers me is suggesting that someone should lose their job on a CH's say so. I tend to believe that an advice column would have it's critics no matter who was writing it. We've evolved so much as "humans" that the dear Abby's of this world will get called to the carpet by the very readers they are trying to reach out too.. Since CHOW permits comments of greater heat than CH Boards, the "taste" level cuts both ways. I can't think of any place other than the Internet where a reader can so specifically call out a writer's work and suggest they lose their position. Too far a buttton pushed in my (humble) opinion. Mon Jan 26 06:58:39 -0800 2009 4333499 36312 HillJ 2 4358075 Both Abby and Anne were called out for poor advice a number of times, and made their retractions. As I mentioned earlier, I find her posts humourous. From a revenue (advertisement) perspective, it's a goldmine, as it is popular, which provides job security to the column's author. CH is a site which is useful as well as entertaining and personally empowering (my opinion is just as valid as yours, dear writer and other CHers!). Mon Jan 26 07:11:29 -0800 2009 4358048 224238 Caralien 3 4358169 "Both Abby and Anne were called out for poor advice a number of times, and made their retractions. " like this: http://www.chow.com/stories/11475 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ And they (Abby & Anne) both went on to write columns for decades. They didn't get fired. Point taken Caralien, that opinions can be valid for any number of reasons. Calling an author out to the point of dismissal...based on a small number of vocal CH's... (in this case) bothered me. Mon Jan 26 08:00:12 -0800 2009 4358075 36312 HillJ 2 4358186 her advice sucks. i have every right to call out for her to lose her position. Mon Jan 26 08:04:44 -0800 2009 4358048 105717 alkapal 3 4358189 Great advice alkapal, I'll be sure to follow it. If Table Manners doesn't provide you with knowledge & entertainment that's certainly your right. I believe it's equally poor manners to suggest an advice columnist lose her position on your say so. Cheers! Mon Jan 26 08:06:18 -0800 2009 4358186 36312 HillJ 4 4358289 she entertains you? she provides knowledge? <shaking head in disbelief....> she's useless as a corporate asset. fire her! yeah, i said it, and i'll say it again. "upgrade and outplace." Mon Jan 26 08:28:51 -0800 2009 4358189 105717 alkapal 5 4358305 Bully pulpit. alkapal, my head is also shaking. But, carry on if you enjoy this sort of discourse. You have a great day. Mon Jan 26 08:33:11 -0800 2009 4358289 36312 HillJ 6 4358322 back at ya, hillj. Mon Jan 26 08:36:48 -0800 2009 4358305 105717 alkapal 5 4358311 I have to say that it is entertaining to find advice that is so counterintuitive; it falls into the "people actually believe and follow this crap?" point of laughability. It's not intentionally funny, which makes it even more hilarious. Mon Jan 26 08:34:48 -0800 2009 4358289 224238 Caralien 1 4414365 I must say that I think Helena's most recent column ("Single White Vegan ...") is extremely offensive, ignorant, and seems to be intent on spreading misinformation. Her characterization of someone who is a celiac as being someone who insisted on remaining "well within [her] restaurant comfort zone" implies that the person is futzy, controlling, unadventurous, manipulative, and so forth - instead of acknowledging that Celiac Disease is a disease, with potential long-term, life-threatening affects should the afflicted person consume gluten. There's been plenty of discussion on these boards about people who do / do not raise potential food allergies issues when at restaurants and then complaining about the results. Conversely, here is someone (based on the limited description provided) who is being responsible and dealing head-on with her disease - and she's being blamed for it? Then, to read in the comments, the facts from this person, who has had her relationship misrepresented and been painted in such a negative light? C'mon Chow and ChowHound - and Helena and her editor: step-up to the plate here and provide helpful, honest information - you're truly doing a disservice at this point and should be ashamed of your behavior. Fri Feb 13 10:05:50 -0800 2009 4333499 58039 ElsieDee 1 4414400 My take on her is that her goal is self-promotion, first and foremost. So often, she seems to derive her position from looking at long-held popular custom or wisdom on an issue of etiquette, and then whimsically tossing off a response that advocates the exact opposite. In return, she gets tons of attention. While I relish when people challenge convention, I don't relish when they do so in a way that steps on the rights, will, or pursuit of happiness of others, as so many of her columns seem to advocate. Like the recent generation of reality TV stars, she seeks not to produce anything useful, but rather to create a buzz around herself that will get her fame and/or wealth. Fri Feb 13 10:15:18 -0800 2009 4333499 186923 Cachetes