quote:
Originally Posted by Vera L.
Well, I don't know. Did you see the list and the "reserve" list? I think it would mean you could send them a wine that they scored horribly low before, but the same wine now gets an award. I know you think the WS is great, but Brian any which way you want to turn this fiasco, it simply shows how disingenuous that entire silly award program is and to me at leat, the entire WS. As others have pointed out, there is some useful information in that mag and all the gossipy wine stuff can be fun at times, but as critical wine journal it has zero credibililty and this sting was just one very visible proof of that. You obviously disagree and I am not particularly fond of these type of sting operations either, but the proof is in the pudding...or apples...or whatever.
SD-Wineaux's good response.
quote:
Disingenuous?!? You want to talk about being disingenuous while being tucked safely within Squire's site while you (and others) cast aspersions on WS ratings of wine over this 'sting'?
I've personally called into question the value of the WS awards program for restaurants (SD-Wineaux over there, in case you're interested). But to stretch this into questioning their credibility as a wine journal is ridiculous. Does Parker purchase all of the wines that he reviews or does he charge the wineries for the cost of their wines to submit them? Does he conduct research to ensure that the submitted wines represent what is available to the general public and don't come from Parker-barrels? No, and neither does Spectator.
The degree of homerism in this thread is appalling. Up to now, I've only ever posted in the Offlines section (and yes, just one offline so far at that). If this post costs me the opportunity to offline with more of you, then I can live with that.