0

I answered a question on Tablet K with a link to a blog. It was erased due to "stories heard through the grapevine".

However, the blog post I linked is a first-person account under a real name. The person is easily verifiable online. This is not a story heard through the grapeline, but an Eid Echad account who is just as believable, if not more so than a kosher symbol, and thus halchically valid. It should not have been erased, as it is not a rumor but a first-person account of someone who experienced tablet-k's unreliability first hand. I believe the answer should be restored.

Answer is below:

Regarding the ability to execute his policies:

Just Call Me Chaviva (AKA Kvetching Editor) describes when a Tablet-K certified institution served CATFISH and no response was taken!

It turns out the hecksher is Tablet K, the rabbi is Rabbi Rafael Saffra, and the kitchen is only open for kosher food during the summer. This means that the folks running the kitchen have only 7 prior weeks from summer 2008 under their belt, are not trained in kosher cooking, and that -- perhaps worst of all -- there was no mashgiach in the MEAT kitchen. The rabbi visits the campus at the beginning of each summer (which means he's visited all of twice), and gives all of his advice and guidance on kashrut from a great distance. Basically, Tablet K took the money and ran, which appears to be their M.O. We also found out that the guy who makes all the food realized, almost instantly, that the fish wasn't kosher. Making it fishy (har har) that he even made the product. I'm guessing this is why it was packaged separately for our consuming pleasure. The campus rabbi was less than excited to help or discuss the issue, and he was of no help in the situation. I expressed a desire for the kitchen to be rekashered -- that was the only way I'd eat anything out of the kitchen. I was told that it WAS rekashered (though without supervision by ANYONE). The rabbi didn't offer to rekasher, and neither did the school.

The full article is here. Read it and you'll never eat Tablet-K again.

1 Answer 1

1

I don't believe it was deleted incorrectly.

The laws of "eid echad" are not relevant here. There's an unverified story in a blog post about some sort of summer camp that allegedly was under the hashgacha in question but apparently the rabbi was not present at the kitchen. The attendee at the program is apparently very upset at the organizers. What does this tell us factually about this hashgacha? Pretty much nothing. Should you attend a summer program organized by this school? Probably not.

We don't even know what the hashgacha was hired to do and hence we can only guess about their ability to execute their policies.

This is exactly the kind of partial-information story which I believe falls squarely in the intended exclusion of "through the grapevine". There are no objective facts.

11
  • There is a first person report of a story in a university - not a summer camp. Did you read the story? It states that Tablet K.was the supervision agency. In addition the story is verified by the author of the post - the eid echad.
    – TheAsh
    Jul 15, 2022 at 1:56
  • It's shocking that you would delete the answer without reading the linked article.
    – TheAsh
    Jul 15, 2022 at 1:59
  • I don't see why the exact nature of the program ("university" vs "summer camp") is relevant. Again, "eid echad" is not a relevant construct that you need to be discussing it.
    – Double AA Mod
    Jul 15, 2022 at 2:00
  • Eid echad Newman beissurim is the reason we trust Kashrut. How is it not relevant?
    – TheAsh
    Jul 15, 2022 at 2:04
  • It's not the standard sought in the question.
    – Double AA Mod
    Jul 15, 2022 at 2:06
  • It is not through the grapevine. It a a first person personal account.
    – TheAsh
    Jul 15, 2022 at 2:06
  • @TheAsh it is exactly the kind of partial-information story which I believe falls squarely in the intended exclusion of "through the grapevine".
    – Double AA Mod
    Jul 15, 2022 at 2:08
  • I believe through the grapevine means hearsay. You are redefining the phrase, against what it actually means.
    – TheAsh
    Jul 15, 2022 at 2:11
  • It clearly falls under "Ability of the organization to execute on those policies". It's a first person account that confirms the inability.
    – TheAsh
    Jul 15, 2022 at 2:12
  • 1
    It's a first person account that tells a story where they allegedly didn't execute on the narrator's expectations. Be precise and you'll see why this isn't the sort of objective facts sought in the question. For all we know the kitchen wasn't under official hashgacha and the hillel rabbi (or whoever was organizing things there) just asked them for some initial advice and misrepresented things to your eid achat. As I said, "we don't even know what the hashgacha was hired to do and hence we can only guess about their ability to execute their policies."
    – Double AA Mod
    Jul 15, 2022 at 2:17

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .