Citing “Nazi-like censorship practices” on CHOW’s sister site Chowhound, the New York City–based blog Eater announces its intent to publish all “Banned on Chowhound” posts.
Quite a few posts on Eater have expressed irritation and confusion with the way Chowhound chooses to police their boards. Take a gander at “Banned On Chowhound: Thou Shalt Not Derail the Morimoto Express” and “Banned on Chowhound: Chowhound Explains! (Sort Of),” which are two of the more recent pieces on the subject.
Eater isn’t the only blog to take issue with Chowhound. Last April Gastronomie highlighted some examples of singular Chowhound moderation and concluded:
I’m not saying all this to bash Chowhound, or to tell you not to frequent the site. Because, really, it can be a good resource (obviously, since I’m still using it for research). Just be aware that you may be getting a somewhat narrow, “houndish” view of the restaurant world.
Her follow-up post in October showed that she continued to give Chowhound a chance but was now, in her words, “so sick of Chowhound.”
Sam at Becks & Posh wrote in September of 2006 that she was perplexed why one of her posts had been deleted and came to the following decision:
Because I do not know why I was deleted—I am not sure how to continue from hereon in. Time is precious. Maybe they are planning to delete all my future posts. Who knows? I can’t run the risk of wasting my time trying to find out by putting effort into trying to give my time to a community that simply shows me their scissors and goes snip, snip, snip. No worries. Although I liked the very casual way I could make recommendations on Chowhound, I can just as easily continue to write my restaurant reviews here, on this blog. And I shall. Goodbye, from me, Chowhound.