I agree - I've had a few out of town friends ask about Lumiere (not related to this ranking). It seems to have opened some eyes to St. Louis who may not have looked otherwise.Moorlander wrote:Good news for St. Louis
Tuesday, July 13, 2010, 5:59am CDT
St. Louis Four Seasons named world's best
For the first time, the Four Seasons Hotel St. Louis has made Travel & Leisure's "World's Best" list, ranking No. 19 among the top 50 large hotels in the United States and Canada.
http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/ ... rround=lfn
- 11K
only when they're related to crime, obesity, teen pregnancy, job loss and net migration.The Central Scrutinizer wrote:I thought lists like this were meaningless?
- 11K
Welcome cynics...I'll try to lay it out clearly for you:
In general, lists citing statistics that place titles on regions or cities such as "most dangerous," etc. are misleading and should be examined more closely to understand what is really being shown, what numbers are being used and finally what assumptions are contained therein. The numbers are used as a stand-in for actual values and the living experience. Someone can look at list of "most dangerous cities" and conclude that living in one of those cities is hell. At their worst, such lists are lies that cash in on sensationalism and fear to make money.
Qualitative lists such as "Top 10 places to raise a family" or "Top 50 hotels in the US" are simply opinions and it's generally nice to be thought of as have quality destinations or as being a nice place to live.
I'm sure there's more to add, but I hope that helps. Of course you can simply continue to play dumb and ridicule all lists as a way to mock those who see different lists differently.
In general, lists citing statistics that place titles on regions or cities such as "most dangerous," etc. are misleading and should be examined more closely to understand what is really being shown, what numbers are being used and finally what assumptions are contained therein. The numbers are used as a stand-in for actual values and the living experience. Someone can look at list of "most dangerous cities" and conclude that living in one of those cities is hell. At their worst, such lists are lies that cash in on sensationalism and fear to make money.
Qualitative lists such as "Top 10 places to raise a family" or "Top 50 hotels in the US" are simply opinions and it's generally nice to be thought of as have quality destinations or as being a nice place to live.
I'm sure there's more to add, but I hope that helps. Of course you can simply continue to play dumb and ridicule all lists as a way to mock those who see different lists differently.
- 6,775
So one should examine negative claims and accept positive ones? Really?Alex Ihnen wrote:Welcome cynics...I'll try to lay it out clearly for you:
In general, lists citing statistics that place titles on regions or cities such as "most dangerous," etc. are misleading and should be examined more closely to understand what is really being shown, what numbers are being used and finally what assumptions are contained therein. The numbers are used as a stand-in for actual values and the living experience. Someone can look at list of "most dangerous cities" and conclude that living in one of those cities is hell. At their worst, such lists are lies that cash in on sensationalism and fear to make money.
Qualitative lists such as "Top 10 places to raise a family" or "Top 50 hotels in the US" are simply opinions and it's generally nice to be thought of as have quality destinations or as being a nice place to live.
I'm sure there's more to add, but I hope that helps. Of course you can simply continue to play dumb and ridicule all lists as a way to mock those who see different lists differently.
- 6,775
As are your critical thinking skills.Alex Ihnen wrote:Your reading comprehension is lacking.
- 11K
It's painful that I have to spell it out for you...
A list purporting to show the "safest places to live in America" has the exact same problems as a list claiming to show the "most dangerous" places to live. I'm not discriminating based on "good" or "bad" ratings. The point is that it's lazy and cynical to not differentiate between lists or examine what's being said and what assumptions are being made. Rankings are short-hand, the question is short-hand for what? If you don't care that's fine. If you don't want to better understand what's being said, OK, but don't belittle those who do want to know more.
A list purporting to show the "safest places to live in America" has the exact same problems as a list claiming to show the "most dangerous" places to live. I'm not discriminating based on "good" or "bad" ratings. The point is that it's lazy and cynical to not differentiate between lists or examine what's being said and what assumptions are being made. Rankings are short-hand, the question is short-hand for what? If you don't care that's fine. If you don't want to better understand what's being said, OK, but don't belittle those who do want to know more.
- 6,775
Wow. Whatever.Alex Ihnen wrote:It's painful that I have to spell it out for you...
A list purporting to show the "safest places to live in America" has the exact same problems as a list claiming to show the "most dangerous" places to live. I'm not discriminating based on "good" or "bad" ratings. The point is that it's lazy and cynical to not differentiate between lists or examine what's being said and what assumptions are being made. Rankings are short-hand, the question is short-hand for what? If you don't care that's fine. If you don't want to better understand what's being said, OK, but don't belittle those who do want to know more.
- 11K
^ Sorry, didn't mean to actually try to inform/explain. Just ignore me. 
C'mon, all lists are subjective to some extent but some are more objective than others. This being one that could be considered more objective as the measures for determining the best hotel may be a bit more clear than the "happiest city" or whatevs. Play nice, fellas...
- 320
A detailed scale model of the Lumiere Place development, including the uncompleted blocks east toward the Mississippi, is on display and for sale at the new Warehouse Of Stuff in the old Famous warehouse. Maybe this is an important 'artifact'. It's some pretty impressive model work; quite interesting to look at on display.
http://www.warehouseofstuff.com/detail.asp?id=1015
![]()
(I just bought a bookcase.
)
http://www.warehouseofstuff.com/detail.asp?id=1015
(I just bought a bookcase.
)Wow, look how crystal clear the waters of the Mississippi River are!
- 729
Look for a more casual, possibly sports themed place to take its place.
- 6,775
Wasn't Sleek a little high end for your average hillbilly gambler? I mean, we're not Las Vegas. We don't have high rollers flying in from all over the world, we have Billy Bob and Brenda Sue from Lemay or Arnold.
And I doubt many folks from Ladue or west come down to Lumeiere Place on a regular basis.
And I doubt many folks from Ladue or west come down to Lumeiere Place on a regular basis.
- 8,910
^Nope. The problem was the food. I ate there 2x, on LP's dime, and both times the my steak was "not good."
It's too bad about Sleek, although the place was doomed from the start in that location. On the bright side, after unloading Sleek chef keller might now be able to afford a haircut.
![]()
A sports bar would work a lot better in that spot. Especially given its location next to the tunnel to/from the Ed Jones Dome.irocktheparty2000 wrote:Look for a more casual, possibly sports themed place to take its place.
Either that or move the asian restaurant across the hall from it's current location. It always seems to be doing a lot of business.
A sports bar would be very fitting indeed. Fox Sports Midwest broadcasts their post-game reports from just outside the casino floor for every Thursday, Friday and Saturday home Blues and Cardinals game.
Asia is some good eats in my experience. Overall, the Lumiere is a great place to walk to eat and play, IMO.dweebe wrote:A sports bar would work a lot better in that spot. Especially given its location next to the tunnel to/from the Ed Jones Dome.irocktheparty2000 wrote:Look for a more casual, possibly sports themed place to take its place.
Either that or move the asian restaurant across the hall from it's current location. It always seems to be doing a lot of business.
Why wasn't something sports related added from the beginning, I wonder.
