Samurai changes are unacceptable in the current iteration

[Quor]

It's not even a dry burger, to continue this rather comical analogy. What we had before was a delicious burger. It had all the fixins, whatever makes you go "mmmmm," including this wonderful house-made aioli that just went so well with everything else on the menu. Then, for no logical reason at all, they took away the patty and replaced it with a piece of paper that read "please look forward to it" while the aioli got swapped out for a cheap off-brand mayonnaise that technically works but has a smell to it that makes all the other members of your party - you know, the ones with aioli-centered buffs - hold their noses because of how smelly this new off-brand mayo is. Now none of your aioli-centric friends want to come to dinner with you anymore.

So you ask the waiter to get the chef out here so you can see whats up with your burger, and the chef initially tells you that the burger was deemed to be too big. It was taking up too much plate space, so the meat was removed in order to free up plate space for more casual eaters. But then you point out that the bun, lettuce and tomato all occupy the same physical space, so nothing has changed as the same amount of plate real estate is still in use, and maybe instead of removing the burger patty they could have cut back on the asston of lettuce they've added to the burger, or used a slightly smaller-but-still-plenty-big-enough bun.

So the chef stammers out that he misspoke and there was a mistranslation in his brain and that the real issue is that the burger was taking too many bites to eat, so removing the patty was the correct choice in order to reduce the number of "chewing actions per minute" (CAPM) so that eating the burger wasn't as busy. But when you point out that the bun, lettuce, tomato and everything else is the same size - and requires almost the exact same amount of bites to eat, and in fact only takes one less bite to eat now then it did the last time you were at the restaurant - the chef stammers out an excuse about how management was very concerned with "burger eating variance" and the removal of the patty and addition of the stinky, cheap, off-brand mayo was a way to cut down on the difference in time it took people to eat the burger.

But then you mention how there were so many more elegant ways that could have changed the burger to achieve the alleged desired result without removing the patty or switching to a functional-but-stinky mayonnaise, and you even offered a number of suggestions that would accommodate the chef's goal. So finally the chef sighs in defeat and admits that the real reason the burger patty and house-made aioli was removed is because the patty was simply too much work to correctly deal with and all aioli's across the restaurant were ultimately going to be drastically changed at some point in the future, but they just decided to implement the changes to this particular burger first because removing all of the aioli at once is simply too drastic a change for the restaurant staff to handle. The chef then promises us that the removal of the patty and the change of the aioli to the smelly mayo is for the better, and to please try the burger (just eat around the "please look forward to it" note inside) despite the fact that - as burger connoisseurs - we know exactly how bad a burger with no patty tastes because we've been eating no-patty burgers every time we stopped by the Crystal Tower bar during happy hour.

Would you go to that restaurant again? If the chef, or some waiter, or the manager even, just kept coming up with excuse after excuse for why you're eating a shit product that was once very good? Food critics would be writing scathing reviews about this restaurant, lamenting the bad direction that the management is taking in regards to the menu, and wondering out loud what other major menu changes are in the pipeline, waiting to ruin your formerly-great dining experience. Such a thing wouldn't be tolerated in the slightest; the customers would revolt and refuse to eat at the restaurant, which would then go under in spectacular fashion.