I use it as an excuse to get together and eat with friends. Sure, I've gone to Oceanaire and to the Prime Rib during RW (I highly recommend both, and anyone who thinks RW prices aren't a bargain at those two has been using the Oceanaire roach clips), but I've also gone to places that weren't particularly worth it.

I would have chosen its great, and I always plan on participating, but add on, because it's great for the city's small restaurants that need a little more exposure. It might get more people interested in trying local places other than applebees. It may get more crowded at your favorite place, but that just means they are making more money, and your favorite place might last a little longer, because let's face it, even some good places need the help.

3 Reasons I skip it.

1. Majority of the food at a lot of the places is pre-cooked in bulk in the afternoon and sits in the kitchen until it's heated up and served.
2. Price is comparable to just having an appetizer and entree and skipping dessert on a regular night.
3. Places are much busier and the service suffers.

This being said I have had some good restaurant week experiences. I look for places that are expensive or do 3 savory courses, skipping the dessert for a salad/soup course.

I voted for #2, because that's how my friend and I have always done it in the past. But I want to add that this year the additional $5 charge aligns with tighter than usual budgets for both of us, so we're going to a lunch outing instead of dinner - at a place that still strikes us as a good value. (Plus, at a weekday lunch we don't have to feel like cheapskates if we save money by not ordering a drink with dinner, which I always feel compelled to do at a nice restaurant in the evening.)

Restaurant Week doesn't blow my dress up because I don't eat dessert. I eat for less off the regular menu - well, unless I'm taking part in a Meat-a-Thon at Fogo de Chao I suppose.

I'm with Kirsten (and 34% of readers so far,) voting for #2. Restaurants like Fogo de Chao and the Prime Rib that feature their regular fare at a substantial saving have the right idea. But too many others miss the point, offering a limited, pedestrian selection, made more glaring by this year's oddly-timed $5 increase.

Baltimore might take a look at the cities where Restaurant Week prices are on a sliding scale, enabling smaller establishments to get in on the act without charging a set fee that's not much less (and is occasionally
more) than what you'd spend with a full menu to choose from

I don't do RW because I don't eat dessert and normally the only the meals we eat out are lunch on Saturday and Sunday.

I voted "Other" 'cause I don't live anywhere close to Baltimore anymore. But I do still read this blog.

Logical Jar

There's almost no point in going if you're vegetarian/vegan. The price is the same or more than if you got vegetarian meals outside of restaurant week.

The thing is that the main reason I was originally drawn to Restaurant Week was for a deal at a restaurant. I wanted a chance to taste what The Prime Rib or Cinghale had to offer without dropping a few hundred bucks on a dinner.

However, at many places there is no deal to be had. It feels as if many of the places should not be on the restaurant list if it costs less money to choose the menu items a la carte than during RW. The list should be limited to higher end restaurants where 3 courses would normally cost more than $30 (or $35).

If the concept is to try a special, limited time only pre-fixe meal with items not offered other times during the year, than it is okay for not all of the restaurants to be high-end. However, the marketing would need to be drastically revised. I'm fine with less expensive restaurants participating, but they need to make sure the pre-fixe menu is of value, even if it means including another course, or beverages.

Just my opinion, anyone else agree?

I voted other, because some of the restauranteurs have admitted that they couldn't afford to have a restaurant week menu that was a variation of anything they regularly served, because of the expense. And I noticed that this year, more and more restaurants are not serving any items that are on their regular menu. I understand why they are doing it, but I do not necessairily want to spend $35 when it may not reflect their regular offerings.