Ah, ok.

“Stop trying to imbue with some meta-philosophical truism about life.”

Yes, I’m sure about that. While (in the general sense) it is legal to take photos in public, a restaurant is considered a public space on private property. It is 100% legal for a property owner to disallow photography on their property.

I don’t think you know what the term “name calling” means. Seems someone who has been on this planet for 30 whole years (WOW!!!) would have been able to figure it out.

.

“if you’re so anal retentive and ADD that your meal is ruined by someone at another table quickly snapping a photo of their meal before eating, the restaurant should cater to you?”

“you’re over here telling them that it’s legal”

“I’ve literally never seen anyone stand on a chair to take a photo of their food.”

“Whether the restaurant has a right to expect the patrons to follow their policies doesn’t have anything to do with whether the policy itself is reasonable.”

“I have a right to call them an asshole for making [the rule]”

“who cares?”

“Sometimes a policy is just stupid. This is one of those times.”

“I have no idea.”

“I’m not arguing that it’s not the restaurant’s right to have and enforce such a policy.”

“if I’m spending $300 a person at a restaurant, I expect to be able to do whatever the fuck I want with my food.”

Thinking you have the right to do whatever you want on someone else’s property (when you do not) based on the cost of the food (or for any reason) is what’s fucking stupid.

“Taking food photos harms no one” / “(It helps) folks who want to try to replicate a dish at home.”

Sounds perfectly reasonable.

“its not worth the time you took to look all this up.”

I don’t think I’ve ever seen such an obvious example of a commenter so likely being the letter writer as Streetcar here - they are just completely enraged over the issue, and posting replies all over the place.