beschizza at February 26th, 2014 12:10 — #1
aloisius at February 26th, 2014 12:23 — #2
and we certainly don't make any good wine.
Now Boing Boing posts trolls? Really?
jerwin at February 26th, 2014 12:27 — #3
Ahem. Quoting gawker.
What is California wine made out of... grape soda? LOL.
Don't these foreign slobs know that good wine comes from France or somewhere like that??
If you think this constitutes trolling, perhaps you should take it up with Gawker.
fuzzyfungus at February 26th, 2014 12:27 — #4
What's the word?
How's it sold?
Well, internationally, to my surprise... Hopefully still good and cold.
I'm not going to ask what the price is, though, forex is a bit of a headache.
salgak at February 26th, 2014 12:29 — #5
IT could be worse. . . .consider Australian Wines. . .
A lot of people in this country pooh-pooh Australian table wines. This is a pity as many fine Australian wines appeal not only to the Australian palate but also to the cognoscenti of Great Britain.
Black Stump Bordeaux is rightly praised as a peppermint flavoured Burgundy, whilst a good Sydney Syrup can rank with any of the world's best sugary wines.
Château Blue, too, has won many prizes; not least for its taste, and its lingering afterburn.
Old Smokey 1968 has been compared favourably to a Welsh claret, whilst the Australian Wino Society thoroughly recommends a 1970 Coq du Rod Laver, which, believe me, has a kick on it like a mule: eight bottles of this and you're really finished. At the opening of the Sydney Bridge Club, they were fishing them out of the main sewers every half an hour.
Of the sparkling wines, the most famous is Perth Pink. This is a bottle with a message in, and the message is 'beware'. This is not a wine for drinking, this is a wine for laying down and avoiding.
Another good fighting wine is Melbourne Old-and-Yellow, which is particularly heavy and should be used only for hand-to-hand combat.
Quite the reverse is true of Château Chunder, which is an appellation contrôlée, specially grown for those keen on regurgitation; a fine wine which really opens up the sluices at both ends.
Real emetic fans will also go for a Hobart Muddy, and a prize winning Cuivre Reserve Château Bottled Nuit San Wogga Wogga, which has a bouquet like an aborigine's armpit.*
Yes, it's Monty Python. . .
jonathanpeterso at February 26th, 2014 12:32 — #6
shit it's not even an ORIGINAL troll, just a troll repost. Is there some meta joke that's sailed over my head? I can't imagine any other reason that I'd waste my time with the gawker article's "riffing", much less a "riffing" on a "riffing".
jeffk at February 26th, 2014 12:34 — #7
Thanks for reminding me why I stopped reading Gawker ten years ago.
aloisius at February 26th, 2014 12:39 — #8
Why? Boing Boing is who decided to post this comment bait. You'll have more trolls come out and say how of course California has only bad wines and then the people who don't know they're getting trolled who will say no, Caifornia has good wines.
The fact that Gawker likes to troll their users doesn't mean I think Boing Boing should.
jpbottomsworth at February 26th, 2014 12:42 — #9
The idiot has to realize there are only 3 reason it's sold , it's cheap,easy to drink and gets you plastered before you go to the club. I wouldn't even call it wine. Your average teenager isn't going to spend the equivalent of $20 on some decent European wine when the only reason your drinking it is to get a head start on a Friday night.
jerwin at February 26th, 2014 12:49 — #10
md2020 is made by a new york company, Mogen David. I suspect that they use new york grapes, not californian grapes,
jerwin at February 26th, 2014 12:53 — #11
There are many European Wines that can be had, in American Grocery stores, for far less than 20 bucks a bottle, Conversely, that appears to be a floor for quite a number of Californian wines--at least for the ones that don't come in jugs.
beschizza at February 26th, 2014 13:05 — #12
So, about this thing where one attributes an individual writer's opinion to the publisher itself, to elicit collective responsibility or a collective response or whatever.
I think people understand that it is a bit trollish in its own right, you know? Since we're all fairly approachable and our names are right there on the posts and all.
beschizza at February 26th, 2014 13:06 — #13
This post is clearly just a delivery system for my exquisite MD2020 pixel art.
spunkytws at February 26th, 2014 13:08 — #14
Off-topic, but you reminded me of a store I used to pass on my way to work that only sold beer. It was shut down when it was discovered teenagers were buying beer there by asking for the "$40 special".
The "special" was a case of the cheapest, most awful beer in stock, which, legally, sold for $16.99. It still surprises me that teens who could probably have found an easier way to buy a cheap sweet wine like Boone's Farm, Cold Duck, or Wild Irish Rose were instead willing to pay a 135% markup on a beer that was like sex in a canoe.
samsam at February 26th, 2014 13:09 — #15
Eh. You said in your post "riffing on the LA Times' coverage..."
I didn't see you say "riffing on Marc Lifsher's coverage."
If you write for a blog, it's hardly surprising when people talk of the blog posting an article. And I hardly thinking doing so constitutes being "a bit trollish."
(And the Gawker article was trolling, of course, but you knew that and made your own decision to re-post it here, which is fine by me.)
wygit at February 26th, 2014 13:10 — #16
On the contrary... Two Buck Chuck?
There are hundreds, if not thousands of California wines under $10.
It's getting harder to find bottles under $5, but hey, inflation.
This piece brought back memories of our first trip to Paris (in the cheap quarter)(circa 2000) where there was a little grocery store down the street, and in the wine section they had an endcap featuring Sutter Home White Zin for ~$12 a bottle.
Or you could pick up a lovely local red from around $2/bottle. I love lovely local reds.
jerwin at February 26th, 2014 13:20 — #17
Maybe my local Virginian Safeway is just a bit strange. Lots of 25-30 dollar California wines. Lots of French wines in the 8-12 buck range. Australian wines are slightly cheaper-- and by Australian, I do not mean Penfolds Grange.
beschizza at February 26th, 2014 13:31 — #18
Usually I always cite by authors instead of publication, for precisely that reason.
That said, I do think it's more reasonable to hold publishers (be it the LA Times or Boing Boing) collectively and corporately responsible for what we present as reported, fact-checked, edited newswriting than for things like self-posted links, comments, op-ed analysis and other obvious subjective opinion work.
The key thing: by attributing a writer's opinion to others, is someone making a good-faith effort to resolve what ails them, or just trying to somehow punish the others? I'm right here and ready to provide CUSTOMER SERVICE.
aloisius at February 26th, 2014 13:37 — #19
Could it be California wine sold outside of California?
At Whole Foods (known affectionately here as Whole Paycheck) in San Francisco of all places, you'll find several California wines under $10. I tend to shop at K&L for wines though which has according to their website, 3,185 California wines under $10 (including out of stock) and 50 in stock.
A lot of California wine producers often set their price to try to make their wines look better using the psychology that higher price == better product. A lot of wineries will sell a second off-label product for a lot cheaper to a third party for either mixing or bottling straight. That's why you get off-label things like Two Buck Chuck and the various Kirkland California wines at Costco.
samsam at February 26th, 2014 13:38 — #20
Though it's tricky. The original post that led to this discussion was "Now Boing Boing posts trolls? Really?" I think it's reasonable to suggest that @Aloisius was surprised (fairly or not) that this was on Boing Boing, not that you, Rob, posted it. Boing Boing, after all, may have a different standard of editorial conent than whatever Rob Beschizza or Cory Doctorow posts on their Google+ stream.
Everyone might expect some good trolling from you. People may or may not expect re-posting of Gawker articles on BB.
Anyway, that's probably too long a response to the very tangential discussion on whether people should refer to authors or publications. Personally I find the original Gawker article funny, and funnier still are the author's comments in the threads below it.
next page →