ZOMG! Rating system – revisited

So in light of recent um… issues… I think it’s high time I give my rating system a little tweak. I’d modeled it after the NY Times’ 4-star system for dining reviews, only instead of stars, I had the letters ZOMG. But as Emily pointed out, it would be better if I didn’t group bad and mediocre together. That’s a pretty wide range to encompass.

And so here’s my new system, better modeled after the NY Times’ system, as they do give zero star reviews.

Continue reading “ZOMG! Rating system – revisited”

Schocolat – Part III

Dear readers, your regularly scheduled review of the rest of the Schocolat chocolates appears below the break. But first, a story. Just scroll down and click “Read the rest of this entry” if you want to skip straight to the review.

The box of chocolates came from Rita’s mom with a request that I pass the reviews onto the proprietors of Schocolat. About a week ago, I sent them the three links to the three reviews, with a note that each link would go live the day that it was scheduled to run. Here’s part I and part II.

Yesterday, I received the following email:


Thanks? Maybe you will find chocolate covered fruit gushers more pleasurable.


I was initially offended and pretty hurt. Then I thought, maybe I’m jumping to conclusions and being overly sensitive. Maybe she was suggesting that I try another product of theirs, these “chocolate covered fruit gushers”? But I didn’t see those anywhere on their site, so I guess Susie was referring to actual Fruit Gushers after all.

So that’s my story. You can interpret it as you wish, and I’ll bet you can guess how I ended up taking it.

And do click through and read today’s review. It’s exactly what I wrote a week and a half ago – in other words, I didn’t change anything after Susie’s email. As I told Susie when I wrote back, “I don’t have to like anything or everything that I review. I do have to be honest with my readers.
Continue reading “Schocolat – Part III”