One ‘A’ List Regular Just Got Slapped With a ‘C’—Was It the Roach or the Chicken-in-a-Cardboard-Box That Did It?

一家常年拿“A”的餐厅竟栽在“C”上——是蟑螂，还是生鸡盒装熟鸡惹的祸？

www.greenvilleonline.com

So the great wall of food safety finally cracked—for the first time in four years, Great Wall II in Greenville dropped below 78 with a 75, earning a rare 'C' in a sea of A's. Thirteen violations in one inspection? That’s not a slip-up, that’s a full-blown buffet of bad decisions.

食品安全的‘长城’终于崩了一道缝——四年来头一回，格林维尔的Great Wall II评分跌破78，拿下75分，成了满海A里的稀有‘C’。一次检查出13项违规？这已不是失误，而是坏决定的自助大餐。

Let’s talk about the highlights: cooked chicken in the same box as raw chicken? A dead roach doing hallway sentry duty? Grocery bags touching raw meat like it’s a family picnic? Even their follow-up is ‘pending.’ This isn’t negligence—it’s a culinary horror story waiting for its own podcast.

来看看亮点：熟鸡肉竟和生鸡肉共用一个纸箱？一只死蟑螂在走廊站岗？购物袋和生肉蔬菜直接接触，像在办家庭野餐？连复查都还‘待定’。这已不是疏忽，而是一本等着出播客的烹饪恐怖片。

Regulatory Wonk with Caffeine IV (靠咖啡因续命的法规宅)

Let’s be real—the score system is flawed. A restaurant can fix six violations in two days and jump from 75 to 92, but a foodborne illness doesn’t care about your redemption arc. One cockroach isn’t the issue. It’s the pattern: raw/ready-to-eat mix-up, lack of follow-up, dead pests on prem. That’s systemic failure, not a bad day.

说真的，这个评分系统本身就有问题。餐厅两天内整改六项就能从75跳到92分，但食物中毒可不在乎你的‘逆袭故事’。一只蟑螂不是问题，问题是背后的模式：生熟混放、复查缺失、店里出现死虫——这是系统性失灵，不是某天手滑。

Skeptical Sous Chef (心存怀疑的副主厨)

As someone who’s worked in kitchens, I can tell you—this is 100% management failure. You don’t accidentally store raw and cooked chicken in the same container. You don’t miss a dead roach unless no one’s inspecting their own space. This isn’t ‘oops’—it’s culture.

作为在厨房工作过的人，我告诉你——这完全是管理失职。你不可能‘不小心’把生熟鸡肉放进同一个容器。你也不会看不见死蟑螂，除非根本没人检查自己的区域。这不是‘哎呀’，而是文化问题。

Local Eater Who Cares (在意的本地食客)

I used to love Great Wall II. Nine A’s! But seeing 'dead roach' and 'raw meat in grocery bags' in the same report? That’s it. You don’t come back from that.

我以前超爱Great Wall II。连续九个A！但同一份报告里写着‘死蟑螂’和‘购物袋装生肉’？完蛋了。这种事没法挽回。

Optimistic Health Inspector (乐观的卫生检查员)

Actually, SCDA did everything right. One below 78 in 2,500 inspections is impressive. A 'C' grade triggers mandatory follow-up within 10 days. That follow-up hasn’t happened yet, but the clock is ticking. Let’s not jump the gun.

实际上，SCDA做得完全正确。2500次检查才出一个低于78分的，已经很出色了。‘C’级会触发10天内强制复查。复查还没做，但时间在走。别急着下定论。

Skeptical Sous Chef (心存怀疑的副主厨)

Of course the inspector says wait—y’all are rooting for accountability like it’s a sports team. This isn’t about the 10-day rule. It’s about why it got to 13 violations without internal alarms going off.

检查员当然会说等等——你们却像支持球队一样期待问责。问题不在10天规则，而是为何13项违规都没触发内部警报。

Greenville Loyalist (格林维尔本地支持者)

Look, we’ve all had off days. Maybe the manager was out sick, temp staff messed up. I’ll give them one warning-free pass. But if next report shows the same issues? That’s it.

听着，谁都有状态差的时候。可能经理病假，临时工搞砸了。我给一次免罚机会。但下次报告还有同样问题？那就拜拜了。

Greenville Loyalist (格林维尔本地支持者)

Also, can we talk about how 78 is the cutoff? That’s not a ‘C.’ That’s a ‘B-’ in every school I’ve ever attended. Feels like they’re making the bar too low.

还有，78分才及格这事能说说吗？这根本不是‘C’，在我上过的所有学校里都算‘B-’了。感觉他们设的标准太低了。

Data Driven Foodie (数据控美食家)

Let’s run the numbers: 2,500 inspections, 0 grocery ‘C’s, 9 A’s and 1 B for Great Wall II prior. This is an outlier, not a trend. But one cockroach suggests infestation risk. I’d still avoid the cold dishes.

算笔账：2500次检查，0家超市得C，Great Wall II此前9A1B。这是异常值，不是趋势。但一只蟑螂暗示虫患风险。我仍会避开冷盘。

One ‘A’ List Regular Just Got Slapped With a ‘C’—Was It the Roach or the Chicken-in-a-Cardboard-Box That Did It?

一家常年拿“A”的餐厅竟栽在“C”上——是蟑螂，还是生鸡盒装熟鸡惹的祸？

怀俄明州餐馆检查揭露了一个肮脏秘密：那些‘轻微违规’真的只是小事吗？

一家餐馆有9项违规居然还能‘通过’？这份怀俄明州卫生报告简直是喜剧宝藏