Unfortunately the answers to these questions return us to the subjectivity and capriciousness of the individual person’s character. When the situation is not a no-brainer because it doesn’t lie at one extreme or the other, we must then decide what we are comfortable accepting and what we are not.

A final consideration, other than the actual quality level of the food, and the person’s own internal standards, is the context of the situation. For example, one is less likely to return the inadequate filet mignon on a first date than when dining alone. Then, to make the matrix even more complicated, sometimes the context and the particular personality commingle. For example, if you are a regular patron of a certain eatery and know some of the staff, would you be less or more likely to inform them that the fries arrived undercooked and greasy? Some folks wouldn’t want to say anything because of familiarity. They don’t wish to disrupt what has been a smooth and stable relationship. Other people may think just the opposite. They feel that because they’ve been a loyal customer and have brought them consistent business that they have even more right to complain.

To invoke my trademark phrase, where does all this leave us? Ultimately you must consider 1) your personal feelings about when to complain or not to complain, 2) the parameters of the particular situation, and 3) just how inadequate the actual food is. As for me, I can tolerate personal criticism much easier than I can tolerate cold lobster.