What are they wearing under the cloak?

My dad was working as a parish priest.  In Denmark that means wearing a somewhat silly cloak like this:

I remember him telling me that people often jokingly asked if they were wearing trousers under the cloak.

This weekend I was invited for a catholic wedding in Malacca Malaysia.  Some Australian guy marrying a local Malaysian girl (obviously from Malacca).  The church from the 18th century was actually quite nice and I managed to shoot this picture from my cam phone:

Now - let me try to zoom in a bit on this picture:

Well, trousers perhaps, but it would appear that catholic priests in Malaysia don't really bother with shoes.

Now, please don't get me wrong.  Personally I actually think this is very very cool, but I am willing to bet almost anything that the Aussie guy - as far as I know first time in Malaysia - did NOT expect to be married by a barefoot priest :)

Google

It's a Mad Mad World

I walk into a cafe and pull out my trusty netbook.  It is actually rather small, it is light weight, it's got a very very nice almost full-size keyboard (we're talking Lenovo quality here - which they didn't invent but inherited from IBM), it can run for ages without a charge, it is hugely quick and I can do just about anything on it that I can on my desktop (albeit on a slightly more cramped display), can run flash, can run java - can run anything I choose.  Two years back that was the hottest thing, now people actually stare at me like "why the fuck is he carrying around that antique" (no, the pic is the same model - it's not mine - I wouldn't dream of running Windows).

All around me people are sitting with their iPads, Samsung Notes, Galaxy Tabs and what have you not, awkwardly trying to hold the device while typing on the screen, joggling around a cup of latte and a cigarette - not an easy task apparently. Inevitably some of these get fed up trying to joggle all this at the same time and put the damn thing on the table with some stand containing a bluetooth keyboard.  And they got what?  Two devices that combined together still haven't got half the functionality that my netbook have, cost about 4 times more and is a hell of a lot more awkward than my netbook - that has been designed quite well to stand unaided on a table in front of me leaving my hands free to do whatever I want.

It's a mad mad world.

I Give Up

I was supposed to help a 9yo with her science homework.  Being an engineer (albeit the electronics kind) I felt pretty confident that I would be able to handle this task.

The homework was all exercises from this book:

More particular, it was about springs

Springs essentially work according to Hooke's Law, that, according to Wikipedia, states:

As long as they are not stretched or compressed beyond their elastic limit, most springs obey Hooke's law, which states that the force with which the spring pushes back is linearly proportional to the distance from its equilibrium length:

where

x is the displacement vector – the distance and direction the spring is deformed from its equilibrium length.

F is the resulting force vector – the magnitude and direction of the restoring force the spring exerts

k is the rate, spring constant or force constant of the spring, a constant that depends on the spring's material and construction.

Coil springs and other common springs typically obey Hooke's law. There are useful springs that don't: springs based on beam bending can for example produce forces that vary nonlinearly with displacement.

Now, it's been 25 years since I studied these things, and I am ready to admit I forgot the name of Mr. Hooke and the exact wording of his law.  However, I did actually remember  that springs essentially work in a linear fashion.

So let us look at the actual questions.  The overall question is:

Question one:

Excuse me, it is as far as I can see absolutely impossible to answer that question based on the information given.  One would have to make some serious assumptions in order to answer. If we assume that those two springs have the same spring constant, that they are shown in equilibrium and that none of the "weights applied" will stretch the spring beyond it's elastic limit, then the correct answer would be that they will stretch exactly the same.

Even forgetting everything I know about forces I would find this one hard to answer.

The same goes for the rest of the questions.  Since there is absolutely no information about the spring constant, one would have to assume it's the same.

In other words it is as far as I can see impossible to answer any of these questions, or it would require some serious assumptions to do so.

Poor Hubbies

Creative Ways of Pissing off Your Customers

I have written before about restaurants in Kuala Lumpur with poor service, poor quality, poor hygiene and general poor value.  Don't however think for one moment that Malaysian companies will limit themselves to such simple means of pissing off their customers.

La Bodega seems to take this to a whole new level.  For the past year or so they have literally bombarded my email inbox with spam advertising.  We are not talking an occasional email - we are talking in average about 8-16 a month - no kiddin'.  They all end with this disclaimer:

The Privacy Policy link, which at least appears to be working, will display the following page:

It appears that the owners of La Bodega is using some third party service, and they claim not to be spamming.

I have written emails to aliya@gastrodome.com.my, I have written emails to postmaster@gastrodome.com.my and I have clicked on the links to no avail.  I am STILL receiving countless emails.  In fact I got a sneaking suspicion that each time I click those "click here" I just get more emails as a result.  I sincerely hope that "aliya@gastrodome.com.my" end up in every single spam filter on this planet (and I have reported this to spamcop for a start).

I have also written several times to info@gastrodome.com.my - the email listed on their web-site, but I guess they already got so much spam on that one that it is a waste of time to even mention that here.

The first link with their privacy policy, appears to be working:
It mentions that you can write to abuse@weblite.com.my - I have done that too.

Trying to get removed result in a page like this:

Well - it state that I have been successfully removed, however take a look at the top left corner.  I would not go so far as to claim that was a success.  And notice the campaign named "LB Set Menu 090712".  What is the point of getting removed from a campaign that you already received the spam from, when apparently a few weeks later they make a new one and put your email into that too.

Trying to get removed completely is even worse:

This time TWO SQL errors - and need I say - the emails keep coming.

I tried to call the phone number in the email, only to be asked to call another number to talk to the people responsible for marketing - someone named "Shani".  However, Shani was conveniently on leave.  I did however talk to some assistant who informed me that when people call to complain she would "USUALLY" (I am not kidding - those were her words) remove them from the database manually.  In other words - I am not the first and they are very aware that their system does not work.  I asked the assistant how Gastrodome intended to compensate me for my wasted time - but to this she had no reply.

Well - screw that - I will punish them by never again spending any money in any of their outlets.

Update July 10, 2012:

After 2 calls and still receiving spam I published this blog post and send them the link.  THAT at least provoked a response.  I received the following mail from them:

RE: Link
 From: "Aliya"
 To: "'Lars Boegild Thomsen'"
 CC: "'Matthieu Lartigue'" , "'shanee'"

Hi Mr. Thomsen,
Your email has been removed from our database. You will no longer receive
any email from us in the future.
Thank you.

To which I replied:

Re: Link
 From: Lars Boegild Thomsen
 To: "Aliya"
 CC: "'Matthieu Lartigue'" , "'shanee'"

On Tuesday 10 July 2012 11:15:55 Aliya wrote:
> Your email has been removed from our database. You will no longer receive
> any email from us in the future.
That would be appreciated, but it is simply not good enough.  I just counted
and I have received exactly 473 spam mails from you over the past 3 years
although I can guarantee you that I have never signed up for anything.  473!!!
I have on several occasions clicked on the "Remove link" which have failed for
years.  I have on several occasions written to you, to info@gastrodome.com.my,
to postmaster@gastrodome.com.my and asked to be removed, I have for the past
weeks copied your messages to spamcop.net - all to no avail whatsoever.
Not until I made a blog post (for all - AND Google to see) and spend time
calling you (which I had to make several calls since calling the number on
your web-page I was asked to call another number) did I get a reaction.
YOU are sending unsolicited mail - a.k.a. SPAM! and you are doing so using a
broken system that will not allow the recipient to get removed automatically.
That is NOT responsible and ethical email marketing practices as you claim in
the email.  It is annoying and it's a huge waste of time for the people you
want to attract as customers.  I have now wasted more than an hour on this
crap and I expect to get compensated significantly.
And the fact that you - during our conversation on the phone - said that you
have received many emails asking to be removed, and that you usually do so -
strongly indicated that I am not the only person you have annoyed to no end.
Responsible and ethical email marketing practices my butt - irresponsible and
unethical is what it is - period!
//Lars

It is just not good enough!

Customers? Well, Fuck 'Em

I wrote yesterday about the incredibly inconvenient convenience stores of Kuala Lumpur.  Today, when out for lunch, I saw another good example.  This time it was the local 7-Eleven receiving new stock:

There is plenty of space to park a little to the side, so that potential customers doesn't have to squeeze by the truck (the door is behind - very close behind), but no way the staff would be that considerate - screw the customers - they are obviously not very important.

Most Inconvenient Convenience Store (or: Fraud in Broad Daylight)

A few years back there was a few 7-Elevens around in KL and some typical Chinese "convenience stores" but not much else.  For some bizarre and completely incomprehensible reason, 4 or 5 years ago, new ones started popping up everywhere.  I would guess I currently have at least 15 of them within 5 minutes walking distance.

They all have one thing in common: they are all inconvenient.  A common trait seems to be that they are staffed with complete morons and the managers are appointed from the least moronic of these.  The staff is without exception rude, slow, lazy and the shop managers wouldn't dream of ordering new stock before they have run out of the old one - with the result they are constantly out of the most popular items (but got plenty of whatever crap nobody want to buy).

However annoying these shops are in general, a few month ago a new one opened about 50 meters from where I stay and this one appears to have taken the "inconvenient" part to a whole new level.

I don't even know exactly where to begin.  On the surface they are exactly like the rest of the shops, and yet - they appear to have somehow managed to find staff that are even more clueless than the usual stock.  A few weeks ago I entered the shop and they were playing music so loud the staff couldn't hear what I was asking them.  Instead of taking that as a clue to turn down the volume, instead the staff tried to make me shout my order.  The only thing I shouted was asking them to turn down the volume, but the staff shouted back that the manager had told them to play at this level.  Needless to say I gave up and walked to the nearby 7-Eleven (which at least don't play music at nightclub levels - that one only stinks like a sewer).

Another thing I noticed in this shop was that they always gave wrong returns, but up until yesterday I never really thought about it.  Out of general habit I always make an estimate in my head and if the amount requested is more than a few Ringgit of my estimate I know something is wrong.

Yesterday is the first time I figured out the staff's approach.  Notice the following receipt:

The first 3 items on this receipt was from the previous customer.  In other words - the staff punch in the items and have the cash registry show the sub-total, then they let that sub-total carry over to the next customer.  If it works - presumably they pocket the money from both transactions - if not they just apologize and alter it (if the owners ever read this check the security tapes - the exact time is on the receipt above).

Immediately following the above example I was talking to a French couple who just left the shop - and they had been cheated in exactly the same way several times.  I have also seen people be short changed - and as mentioned - I have experienced it myself a number of times (only - yesterday is the first time I kept the false receipt).

If this had happened once or twice over a long period, it could possibly be considered an honest mistake, but not so - let me stress that this happens often and consistently.  It is absolutely amazing that a scam such as this can run for as long as it has run already.  The before mentioned French couple had contacted KK several times through their web-site with no obvious results.

I will send a link to this blog entry to KK and see if they get back to me.  If they do I will add their comments here - if they don't (which is more likely) I will mention that too.

Update July 10, 2012:

I did send them an inquiry through the web-site.  Apparently it just generates an email of which I received a copy and the other copy went to: enquiry@kkgroup.my. Needless to say that now, after 1 week, I have not heard anything back and by now it's probably too late to check the security cameras anyway.

Better than Sex!

I just bought a new wireless router and I noticed this on the box:

Little did I realize that a 150 Ringgit router could possibly bring "unlimited joy" - but there you have it.  It's on the box so it must be true.

Nice Waste of Time

A few month back I ordered a Kindle.  It was a gift to someone so I had Amazon ship it direct to the recipient.  Amazon did add the expected import duty to the bill at the time.

Today I received the following email:

Now that is awfully nice of Amazon - really it is.  Not quite like Christmas but almost.

Pretty Pointless (or: Mad Marketing Hype)

Just noticed this electrical plug:

Excuse me - an "unbreakable fused" power plug!  Well - that's pretty damn pointless isn't it?  I thought the whole point of a fuse was that it would break the circuit in case of an over load.  Unbreakable fused - well - that basically means unfused - a basic plug in other words.

I couldn't help myself but take it apart and inside I found.....

Well, don't know about you - but that looks like a normal breakable fuse to me.  Not sure what is so unbreakable about it.  It's a fuse.  Put more current through it than it was designed for and it will break.  It's that simple and no marketing hype will change that.

Just Can't be Bothered (read: Make it Someone Else's Problem)

From the Malaysian news:

The fun part is when the Energy, Green Technology and Water Minister (that has got to be the most bizarre title in history - do they have a Brown Technology Minister too) say:

"Chin said it was not difficult for petroleum companies like Shell and Petronas to install charging stations into their existing branches around the country"

Hmmm, I guess he is somewhat correct, it wouln't be difficult to do that.  There is however a few problems clearly illustrating that Chin hasn't got a freaking clue about the things for which he is the Minister.  First of all - charging electrical cars isn't really the core business for petroleum companies (the clue is in the bloody name).  Most important though is the fact charging isn't exactly instant.  I am not sure how fast you can charge a car, but I reckon it'll take 4-8 hours at least.  According to this link:

Some types of batteries such as Lithium-titanate, LiFePO4 and even certain NiMH variants can be charged almost to their full capacity in 10–20 minutes. Fast charging requires very high currents often derived from a three-phase power supply.) .  

I guess it'll be just about impossible to buy petrol from those petrol stations, since there will be cars parked just about everywhere.

Extremely Limited Reach

The world is full of franchises and most are in my personal opinion utter rubbish.  There is a few though that I find agreeable and one of these has been "Au Bon Pain" that really have some quite descent sandwiches and market themselves as a casual bakery:

Pay close attention to "no request beyond our reach" from their web site.

On Phuket however they don't quite grasp this concept.  Yesterday I went there to have one of their smoked salmon sandwiches and - they were out of bread.  I am not kidding - a bakery that didn't have any bread.  That's a bit like a MacDonald that is out of hamburgers - in other words completely pointless.  It was 8 pm at the Jung Ceylon shopping center on Patong Beach and every other place was crowded with people.  Au Bon Pain was quite empty.  I guess I wasn't the only one who discovered that they didn't really have anything to sell.

See No Evil

From today's news:

What is interesting here is why on earth this is news worthy.  Just outside KFC on Bukit Bintang is a police truck parked just about 24 hours a day - just across the street from a shop selling loads of fake jerseys.  Go to Petaling Street or Central Market and they could shut down every single shop - they are ALL selling fake goods of various kinds.  Go to Sungai Wang (large shopping mall on Bukit Bintang) and you can't kick your way through the place for "Angry Birds" branded fake goods.

I am not complaining about the fake goods - I couldn't care less, but I do find it amusing when an article like this pop up in the local news.  What they are really saying here is that someone forgot to pay.

Priority Problems

From today's newspaper:

So let me get this straight.  Some village idiot is running around selling various kind of "medicine" and Malaysia is concerned that they got obscene pictures on them.  Someone need to get their fucking priorities straight.

Fair Use?

Yesterday I wrote a rather lengthy post about Michael Schumacher's reaction after having rammed his car into Bruno Senna.

A few hours later, I received the following in my Gmail inbox:

Dear lbthomsen01,

This is to notify you that we have removed access to your video,Schumacher the Idiot (Slow Motion), as a result of a notification byFormula One Management claiming that this material is infringing.

Please Note: Accounts determined to be repeat infringers may be terminated. To avoid this, please delete any videos to which you do not own the rights, and refrain from uploading infringing videos.
For more information, please visit our Copyright Tips guide.
If you believe this claim was made in error, or that you are otherwise authorized to use the content at issue, you may file a counter notice.Please note that under Section 512(f) of the Copyright Act, any person who knowingly materially misrepresents that material or activity was removed or disabled by mistake or misidentification may be liable for damages.

Sincerely,
- The YouTube Team

I actually received two emails both send at approximately the same time.  The other read:

Dear lbthomsen01:

We have disabled the following material as a result of a third-party notification from Formula One Management claiming that this material is infringing:

Schumacher the Idiot (Slow Motion)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfls8VLYZr0

Please Note: Repeat incidents of copyright infringement will result in the deletion of your account and all videos uploaded to that account. In order to prevent this from happening, please delete any videos to which you do not own the rights, and refrain from uploading additional videos that infringe on the copyrights of others. For more information about YouTube's copyright policy, please read the Copyright Tips guide.

If one of your postings has been misidentified as infringing, you may submit a counter-notification. Information about this process is in our Help Center.

Please note that under Section 512(f) of the Copyright Act, any person who knowingly materially misrepresents that material was disabled due to mistake or misidentification may be liable for damages.

Sincerely,

— The YouTube Team

For some odd reason, the link to the video appear to still be working, so I'll try to link it here too:



So it would appear that the Formula One Management is seriously pissed that I used 4 seconds of their footage to prove a point (and does that footage actually belong to them since I lifted it of ESPN/Star Sport broadcast - which I paid for).

Let us examine what I have done here.  Out of a 1 1/2 race that was broadcast on ESPN/Star Sport, I have "borrowed" exactly 4 seconds of footage.  I have then removed the sound track (since having Steve Slater babble makes no difference whatsoever) and I have reduced the frame rate to 25 % of the original.  I also did blur the logo and in hindsight that might have been a mistake, but at the time I was editing the video it seemed like the right thing to do (just because I could).

Is this copyright infringement?

Time to Retire?

Yesterday's Formula 1 race in Spain was one of the best Formula 1 races I have seen in a long time.  In lap 13, there was a racing incident between Michael Schumacher and Bruno Senna.  Incidents such as that is part of what makes motor racing entertaining and fun to watch.  However, on the radio after the crash, Schumacher called Bruno Senna an idiot.  Even that could be excused at the time.  Schumacher was/is obviously frustrated.  He has crashed in 3 out of 5 races this season so far and he is consistently being out classed by his much younger team mate Rosberg.  However, during press interviews following the race (and following him clearly having watched the video footage since he is mentioning it), he kept on blaming Bruno Senna for this accident, and that is absolutely inexcusable.

According to this article, Schumacher said:

"I want the stewards to clarify what happened. He moved to the right, but he shouldn't move back in the braking phase to the left that sharply, I'm just behind him and I don't know how sharply he is going to move. So it was all very dangerous."

Well, let's have a look at it:

Now, let us take a closer look at what happened.  Here are some frames from the video.  The first frame is early.  Senna is approaching corner one, but he is clearly on the wrong side of the track to get an ideal racing line through the corner (right hand corner, so he should be at the left side of the track).

At this point, both Bruno Senna and Schumacher decide to pull left - something they both have to do to get through that corner.  It could look as if Schumacher at this point have decided to overtake Bruno Senna on the outside through that corner, something he could easily have done since he had much fresher tires.

Bruno Senna have a right to defend himself, so even if he was aware of Schumachers move, he had a right to close the gap.  However, it is worth noticing that he did leave room for Schumacher, even if he had a right to go all the way to the left.

Schumacher at this point, less than half a car length behind Senna, obviously decide not to go around on the outside - even if Senna left tons of space there.

Schumacher start pulling right, but do notice that Senna is not changing direction at all.

This is probably one of the last frames before the crash.  Schumacher is moving right, Senna have left space on the left side for Schumacher to go through but there is a corner coming up and he has started braking at this point.  He is however still not moving to the right.

Senna is still not turning.

And contact.  Notice the tire marks on the track.  They clearly show the ideal line through that corner.  The two cars in front of Schumacher and Senna is following that line and the car behind them is also properly lined up for the corner.

To me this is a racing incident.  It is part of what makes Formula 1 entertaining and it is how it should be.  What pisses me of is Schumacher calling Bruno Senna an idiot.  OK - I can somewhat understand a stupid reaction during distress - Schumacher was/is obviously frustrated and that is OK.  But even after the race - even after watching the video - he is still maintaining that this incident was caused by Bruno Senna being a poor driver.  Obviously the guy is a bit delusional these days.  I guess he is used to lesser drivers moving out of the way when the great Schumacher approaches.  To me he is just a has been that should have stayed retired.  Look - I am a year or two older than Schumacher and my reactions are definitely not as sharp as they were when I was 20 or 30.

Schumacher, no doubt, was once a great driver and I don't think anybody is going to forget that - just as nobody will forget the dirty tricks he pulled along the way.  Who will forget this incident:

Bruno Senna's uncle was one of the few that might possibly have been an even greater driver, but Bruno Senna is clearly not in the same league.  But in this case the mistake was Schumacher's 100 %.  There is no doubt about that.

Update 2012-05-15

When I wrote this post yesterday I was actually rather pleased with the FIA, since they had slapped Schumacher with a 5 place grid penalty in the next race (which will be Monaco so it will be bloody hard to overtake).  I was under the impression than FIA in general would feel rather pleased to have fans show an active interest in the "sport" (or show) they are trying to promote.  However, today I had some new input on this, read more here.

Cheap Cock

First of all - let me apologize for the title of this posting.  Honestly - it was not my idea, but really - it is what this post is all about:

Personally I would probably have gone a bit American on that one and called it a "Fuel Valve" - but never mind - a cock it is.

First a tiny little bit of background.  I was having a problem with a bike leaking fuel when parked on the side stand.  I took the fuel cock apart and cleaned it up but there is a tiny o-ring in there that had gone a bit brittle, so I went out hunting for a new one.

I had a hard time finding that o-ring in Malaysia, however I did find it on an American web-site specializing in Kawasaki parts (the motorcycle is a Modenas Jaguh 175 - which essentially is a license built Kawasake BN125 Eliminator honed up a bit) and they did indeed have the o-ring and the complete fuel cock - albeit they called it a tap.  In this example I have added both to illustrate the pricing:

$65 for the tap was a bit expensive and the thing is damn heavy, however $3 for the o-ring wasn't too bad, so I tried to order it.  The problem was they wanted $120 - I am not joking - $120 to ship the darn thing to Malaysia.  An o-ring!

Never mind - back to searching and eventually I actually did find a shop with an OEM version in stock.  Here comes the killer - RM 20!  I am NOT joking - 20 Malaysian Ringgit, which right at this moment is US$ 6.51 - complete with o-rings and all.

Trust me - I can live with it being a cock rather than a tap or a valve.  Here's some close-ups:

If that was all I probably wouldn't have bothered writing this post, but seriously - look at the thing!  Here is an exploded view from the Kawasaki BN125 service manual:

Think about this for a while.  The darn thing consist of 3 rubber seals, 1 rubber diaphragm, a handful of screws, 4 pieces of metal that is both molded and machined, 2 fairly complex injection molded plastic pieces and a few washers.

So - someone in Malaysia or China (more likely) actually went through the trouble of taking an original apart, carefully draw up each piece, create injection molds, produce the thing, put it together, ship it to Malaysia, store it in a shop for a while and then sell it to me.  And I am pretty sure they did that for a profit - not to save me a 100 bucks in shipping.

$6.50!!!!! - how on earth is that possible?  It is mind boggling if you think about it and it is a thing of beauty!

Once a Third World Country Always a Third World Country

I just experienced a prime example of why Malaysia still is a third world country and will be for the foreseeable future.


Malaysia got a few companies manufacturing motorcycles.  One of these are called "Syarikat Motosikal dan Enjin Nasional Sdn. Bhd.", a.k.a. Modenas.  Modenas in turn is owned by DRB-HICOM, which is the largest conglomerate in Malaysia with an annual revenue of over RM 6 billion.


Now, one of the bikes Modenas produce is a license build Kawasaki Eliminator, called the Modenas Jaguh.  I have considered getting one of these but most of the ones for sale on the second hand market are quite worn down, so I considered buying a new one.  According to Modenas' web-site:

RM 6000 is really not too bad.  Especially considering most of the second hand ones goes for around RM 2500 and are 12-14 years old.


Unfortunately calling the local resellers didn't prove very productive, so I went back to the web-site:

So I decided to give their sales and marketing office a call.  This was on a normal Tuesday at around 2.30pm.  I think I called 2 or 3 times and nobody bothered to pick up the phone - nothing - nada.


Then I decided to give the factory a call and got through to some receptionist that actually proved quite helpful.  She gave me a mobile number for "someone in sales".    So I called that mobile number a few times and again - nobody picked up.


By this time I had already started browsing Kawasaki, Suzuki and Honda's web-sites, but after half an hour - much to my surprise - I actually received a return-call from the mobile number I had called earlier.  Unfortunately all he could tell me was that Modenas stopped making the Jaguh years ago.


So - a conglomerate with an annual revenue of more than 6 billion Ringgit, owning a motorcycle manufacturer that have apparently produced in excess of one million bikes (2008 figure) - 

1. Can't afford - or couldn't be bothered - to update their web-site
2. Can't afford - or just can't be bothered - to pick up the phone - IN THEIR SALES OFFICE!

As a result I probably wasted almost an hour chasing something that doesn't exist. Ok - I just called local, but say I was located in Europe and wanted to import motorcycles - my next call would be to China - not Malaysia and most certainly not Modenas.

It is incredible that someone can be that uninterested in making themselves convenient for their customers.  



Not only is this third world mentality incredible rude towards potential customers, it is also plainly illegal in Malaysia.  The Malaysian Consumer Protection Act 1999 clearly states:

Considering Modenas no longer produce the Jaguh, I think it's clear that they "do not intend to offer for supply".  I think I'll consider filing a complaint.

The Anti-Social Platter to Share with Yourself

Nice eating places (and nice to means one thing and one thing alone: good value for money) is hard to come by in Kuala Lumpur. There are lots and lots of overpriced show off places, and there are lots of places serving cheap rubbish. Places that do descent food at the right price - these are very few and far between. Because of that, I do tend to be a bit unadventurous these days. Today however I decided to give "The Social" in Changkat Bukit Bintang a shot for lunch.



I've been walking passed this place a hundred times, but for some reason I never ventured inside before. Instincts? Perhaps, and if it is, I should learn to follow my instincts.

The menu was the usual mix of burgers and pasta, but one thing from the menu did look reasonably interesting:



A platter to share sounded OK for lunch, considering we were two.  I mean, after all the Social is boosting itself like this one the same menu:



So it would at least appear if they are trying.

The platter, however,  was quite disappointing.  Let me sum up what was on it:

* 2 skewers, one with one piece of lamb and one piece of sausage, the other with two pieces of lamb.
* 2 tiny meat balls - lamb I would assume.
* 1 (I kid you not) Pita bread divided into four pieces.
* 2 small bowls with the humus and moutabbel - containing about a tablespoon-full each
* A bit of salad that wasn't particularly fresh and didn't have any dressing whatsoever

And that's it.  The "chorizo sausage" was one piece on one of the skewers.  Even if this had been excellent it would have been quite stingy for RM 36 and most certainly not enough to share.  Since the only chicken was the one piece on one skewer and my partner doesn't like lamb, I ended up eating most myself and I was still quite hungry after.

What is far worse though was that it really wasn't very good.  The meat was not tender and had a really odd taste to it (and no - I love lamb and know how it's supposed to taste!), and when I say not tender I really had to work hard to chew through it (one of the pieces appeared quite raw although it was still gray in color).  The salad was probably fresh a few days before served but most certainly not when it was served.  The cost of four pieces of lamb and two table spoonfulls of what is essentially eggplant and chickpeas and one pita bread is what - RM 3-4 and they charge RM 36.  I think I have a right to expect the meat to be of good quality at least and well prepared.

When the waiter cleared the table I did inform her that it wasn't very good (not that she bothered to ask) and she told me she would tell the chef.  A bit later I asked her how the chef reacted and she told me: "he was laughing".  Now this really piss me off.  Did she really imagine that I told them because I wanted to entertain the staff?  If anything I told her to give her (and the chef) a change to make up for it somehow.  I told her that I really wasn't joking at all and that I found it quite offensive that the chef was only laughing.  She THEN informed me that the chef wasn't really there - it was just some assistant.  I suggested her that she called her boss and let him know that the chef ASSISTANT found it amusing that one of the customers had rubbish food, and well I can only assume that she did in fact tell her boss, because when the bill came it looked like this:

WTF!  10 % discount?  Who the hell do they think they are (and more to the point, who the hell do they think I am).  They have the nerve so charge RM 36++ for four tiny pieces of meat that was off and a bit of salad that was off, prepared by the chefs assistant (and I can guarantee you that wasn't the one who won the awards they were bragging about) and they give me 10 % discount as if that would make it any better.  This is really truly offensive!

In short this place is unfortunately quite typical of Kuala Lumpur.  They spend all the money on making it look fancy, but they have absolutely no pride in their kitchen and absolutely no respect for their customers.  What is even worse, how can they let unqualified staff in charge of their kitchen?  If I go down with a food poisoning (I'll add that in a few hours) I will sue them.

Needless to say, the Social is one place I will not visit again and if you dear reader got any taste what so ever, neither will you (or at least ask to meet the chef before you order!).

Update Mar. 3, 2011

I posted a link to this blog entry on The Social's Facebook page, and not only did they delete that, they also removed me from the page.  That doesn't really come as a surprise though.  It's fairly symptomatic for this kind  kind of places.  Restaurants that sell overpriced food at questionable quality are always extremely sensitive about poor reviews.  I guess that is the only way they can maintain an "air" of exclusivity about them.  Anyway - they can't control Google, so this review will remain here and it will remain in Google search results.

Update Apr. 21, 2012

Another one bites the dust.  While it often amazes me how long places with poor service or poor products can survive, eventually they do go down, and "Social" is no different.  Back in February it closed down and they absolutely deserve it.