Review of local restaurant missed the mark

After reading [an] Oct. 23 restaurant review regarding Figaro’s Pizza and Pub (EDITOR’S NOTE: Referring to an article that appeared in the Bowling Green Daily News), I became rather irritated at the reviewer’s unawareness. It also seemed, to me and other respected members around the community, that this was more of an attack that a review. I feel the need, as patron of this restaurant, to point out some facts to the restaurant-goers of Bowling Green that this critic so haughtily overlooked.

The thing that struck me first was the comment about overall aesthetics and how shabby the inside had become since it was Tedesco’s. The reviewer most likely sat in the same ripped seat, which he criticized, when it was Tedesco’s because all the booths were acquired from the previous owner. The picture hangers that stood bare were obviously due to the theft of athletic apparel that lined the walls several weeks earlier.

The broken fence which was barely standing was quite obvious and hopefully will be fixed soon, but what about the 44-inch plasma television that hangs above the new bar which sits in the middle of the pub? Maybe the “gaudy” beer signs were too much of a distraction for these minor details to be noticed.

I hope the next time this critic evaluates a pizza place, he or she will at least eat the pizza. One last question: Has anyone’s inertia ever kept them from walking out of Cracker Barrel when they noticed the paper menus? It seems to me that they strive to offer a nice, dinner-type atmosphere just as Figaro’s does.

Wimal Wijenayake

Henderson senior

Bottom line: the system just isn’t broken

Why change a system that is not broken? This adage applies to the current discussion regarding plus/minus grading. I have read with interest the recent articles about the proposed new method of grading.

Given Western’s current economic situation, unneeded changes are in poor taste. Modifying the current information system to properly account for the new grading structure will cost us precious funds. To make such a change is essentially wasting funds given that the change is NOT necessary.

It is unfortunate that an economics professor has ignored this basic cost/benefit analysis. The costs exceed any suggested benefits. The claim that a change will encourage students to push themselves is erroneous. I suggest asking the students it will affect.

Our tuition just increased mid-academic year. It is irresponsible to spend money on a system that is NOT broken. I will close by saying that it pleases me to know that Bowling Green rejected this professor’s bid for city (commission). Otherwise, he could be suggesting we waste those limited funds as well.

Donald Fox

Nashville senior