Those of you who followed the saga of the Frozen One may already be aware of a couple things. First, that this faux reviewer claimed from the beginning that he was only a hobbyist, who thought he'd post a few personal thoughts on the net. When I quickly called him out on this, accusing him of going over to "the Dark (commercial) Side", a charge he vehemently denied right here on The Project. This was the time when we were joined in a lengthy exchange of private emails in which I tried desperately to bring him over to the side of purity, freedom from additives, and honest labeling of both age and contents.
As a prime example of funny business, I dared him to admit that his then favorite rum - Diplomatico Reserva Exslusiva - was heavily sugared. "As reviewers," I said, "we have the obligation to share our opinions". He vigorously refused on the basis that he didn't believe distillers altered rums,. Without absolute proof, he was completely unwilling to accuse even one distiller of doing so.
It was a Mexican standoff. I held that Diplomatico was the poster rum for alteration, a charge he just as vigorously denied. Until now...
Wolfboy finds God - and the Cap'n!
As you know the Frozen Wonder has been subjecting us all to a seemingly unending countdown which he calls his "Top 30 of 2012", perhaps to replace the lack of reviews and, we might assume, a lack of freebies - not to mention allowing him to bring his total number of butt kissing awards to over 80 this year! The #2 rum - just recently announced - was noneother than his beloved and heavilty altered Diplomatical Exclusiva - a perfect rum for the 20% of tasters who suffer from a bitter-sensitive palate. Now here's the interesting part...
Wolfboy "revises" his review!
Most of his Top 30 are simple reposts of the old review, but not this one. Why you ask? According to Wolfie...
Mind you his original review made no mention of alteration. But was this the real reason for his "revisitation"? Perhaps not, as he led this rare rewrite with this:"Since I was allowed to take the ‘heels’ of each of the bottles home with me after the sponsored eventt, it seemed natural to me that I should revisit my original review for this outstanding rum, which is a Venezuelan Rum produced by Distilerias Unidas, S.A.."
First of all, I'm not buying this poorly translated "admission" of anything of the kind. To do so is a stretch."The (Diplomatico) website also makes it clear that flavouring and aromatic agents are used in the production of their rum, as this statement on the website attests:
“Only high purity distilled alcohols and rich aromas and flavours are used to manufacture rums…”
My feeling when completing a review is that the spirit should be judged on its own merits, rather than prejudged by my own misconceptions about how rum should be produced."
Like a Public Defender of Rum who finally realizes his client is dead guilty, he finally admits to we the jury what heretofore he argued so vehemently against. He now reluctantly states that Diplomatico is altered - but by their admission - and that even so, it should not be "prejudged by my own misconceptions" about "how it should be produced".
Can't he just say "It's altered, as should be obious to anyone with a whole tongue!".
Bottom Line
And so we've come full circle. Long ago the Wolfling denied that this rum - or any rum - was altered, and refused my challenge to trust his tastebuds and at least post his suspicions, if any. It goes without saying that Diplomatico is among the most altered rums in the universe, and should be outed, not least by a "reviewer".
And now? We have a side door admission, and a back door apology to moi and to us all. He admits that for all practical purposes Diplomatico Reserva Exclusiva is indeed altered - but - not because he thinks so, but because he found a badly translated line at their website (which admits nothing of the kind). To hell with how this monstrosity tastes.
Still he insists, we must avoid his "misconceptions about how rum should be made"! His? Or does he mean our misconceptionss? It's certainly not one of mine. Nor of the many afficianados who despise such practices. Not Richard Seale's. To be fair, I don't know anyone who opposes fair and honest labeling of rum, or who doesn't immediately recognize rums like Diplomatico or 1919 for their blatant and unnatural profiles.
As for the years of denial, finding a single, misinterpreted line at their website provides scant cover... but thanks for the apology anyway.
