It’s no secret the Post & Courier‘s restaurant critic Hanna Raskin has her detractors. What critic doesn’t? But one miffed reader has taken their frustration public by creating a website, hannaraskinisagiantdouche.com. The site’s creator, Nate Elkins’ writes on hannaraskinisagiantdouche.com that he made the site after the Post & Courier deleted his comment on Raskin’s review of Stereo 8, “Rhythym is missing in Stereo 8’s menu, delivery.” 

On hannaraskinisagiantdouche.com Elkins writes:

With this little corner of the web all my own, now not only can I call her bluff as much as I want (and stay tuned for more actual restaurant info, not just some superfluous flowery language to stretch 5 sentences about 2 dishes into an entire page), but I can provide you with an actual service, that I don’t get paid for at all (so I have nothing to gain), that I actually like doing (because let’s face it, making fun of idiots is a blast). So, sit down and enjoy… It’ll be a hell of a ride.

And now, the horrible banned comment from the article here!

Do you find it hard to type with your nose stuck so far up in the air? That reply couldn’t be more condescending if you tried. It also, still, couldn’t be more wrong. At what point in time will you admit a fault? The man plainly said in the article you wrote incorrect ingredients, and you didn’t so much as acknowledge it. Instead, you took your 5 minutes on the soapbox to attempt to explain why you should still be relevant. And, if you truly wanted to “contextualize the experience”, as you put it, you probably should have interviewed the owner and written a comprehensive article, instead of skipping everything that makes the place so great, and playing drama hour instead. You might very well take the potential influence of your reviews seriously, but it’s plain to see from just this one review that you don’t take your process seriously at all. How many other great restaurants in Charleston have been railroaded by your lack of effort?

The funny part is, you’ve given us all the reason that you’re useless right in your comment here.

“In the end, my opinion is just one opinion, based on my experiences and facts gleaned from your staff. As you know, it’s exceedingly uncommon for a negative review to do in a restaurant, since the critic is generally just pointing out problems that are apparent to guests.”

You are but one, and though you obviously believe you are high and mighty, it seems as though all that bravado vanishes once someone calls you out on it, replaced by the air of snobbery and condescension to try and maintain some kind of moral high ground. And if you’re just “pointing out problems that are apparent to guests”, why do none of those problems repeatedly appear in the guests’ reviews?

I’m seriously disappointed. As a professional, I would have assumed that some grace, humility, and at least acknowledgement (if not apology) was warranted in this situation. Instead, you helped us all out by confirming what we knew from the start.

Elkins, who writes that he’s also created stickers and business cards, shared the site on a 5,324 member local food industry Facebook page, Chucktown F&B Collective, this morning. Within an hour, the post had 34 comments but was quickly pulled down.

The website creator could not be reached for comment. Raskin declined to respond. However, Mitch Pugh, Post & Courier‘s Executive Editor did respond to the accusation that Raskin deleted comments on the site that were critical of Post & Courier. He writes:

“The Post and Courier has the right to remove any comments that violate our terms of service. In addition, because we use a Facebook plug-in, readers can report objectionable comments to Facebook for review and/or removal. Only our digital editors and Facebook have the ability to remove comments from our site. The comment in question appears to have violated our Standards clause in our terms of service, notably 2C and 2E.”

To that end, the Post & Courier‘s terms of service regarding comments are as follows: 

2. Standards: You agree not to submit any content that: (a) infringes on any third-party intellectual property, publicity, privacy, moral (droit moral) or other legal rights; (b) violates any applicable law or regulation; (c) is defamatory, threatening, harassing, obscene, harmful to minors, or child pornographic; (d) is false or misleading; (e) promotes physical or emotional harm in any way; (f) contains any viruses, Trojan horses, worms or other harmful components (including, but not limited to, computer programming routines that may damage, detrimentally interfere with, surreptitiously intercept or expropriate any system, data or personal information); (g) is commercial in nature, other than as specifically solicited by this Site; (h) constitutes unsolicited junk or bulk email (“spam”); or (i) is tortious or criminal.