On a board I frequent, there is a poster who has some axes to grind. Sound familiar? So okay, there are people who dislike a particular restaurant, and always chime in when someone else says something nice about it. That's not what I'm talking about.
I'm talking about someone who dismisses categories, or even particular places that someone asks about or even recommends (detailed recommendations) by saying that "such places" are always terrible. Or asserts that a place has to be terrible despite a poster's detailed and heartfelt description of a meal, because this person looked at the restaurant's website and feels the place falls into a category that is unacceptable (like, oh, "red sauce Italian" or "a diner").
This kind of writing accomplishes two things. One is that people simply stop putting in the effort to write something, because of this nastiness. The other is that entire thread after entire thread is hijacked by back and forths about whether this assessment of a category is correct. Meanwhile, the specific restaurant is no longer discussed, or the specific thing the OP wants ("restaurants near Rte. XXX) is ignored in favor of negativity and argument.
Shouldn't there at least be a rule that, if someone is going to express an opinion about a place, the person either has to have eaten there or maybe has some hearsay about the place?