In my opinion, there is not much problem with the "time limit" of Diandude, but it should be based on the fact that all the dishes ordered by customers are served. Obviously, when the netizen learned that the waiter had "arrived at dinner time", his order had not been served. In this case, the behavior of waiters in restaurants and stores is obviously wrong. If a restaurant specifies the end time of dinner within two hours, but it can't be finished within two hours, who are you to ask consumers to end their dinner?

In fact, many restaurants in online celebrity have begun to implement "limited time dining", and these restaurants have one thing in common, that is, they often have to queue for more than an hour. Therefore, the implementation of "limited time dining" is also a helpless move of these restaurants. However, it must be pointed out that the "limited time diet" in most restaurants is only a warm reminder, not a mandatory requirement. Of course, this incident has also caused a heated discussion among netizens. The focus of everyone's attention is "Is it reasonable to set meals in restaurants?" The comments of netizens are also polarized.

netizens who are in favor of "limited time dining" say that "limited time dining" can alleviate the queuing phenomenon in restaurants and reduce the waiting time of consumers to some extent. Imagine that if a consumer sits down and chats for a long time after eating, it will definitely prolong the queue time of consumers outside the store. Netizens who oppose "limited time eating" say that eating should be fun. It's like "Diandude", a restaurant that deals in Cantonese cuisine. Because it is a Guangdong tea restaurant, it naturally has a close relationship with Guangdong morning tea. Speaking of Guangdong morning tea, besides delicious refreshments, there is also a leisurely environment. Therefore, if "limited meal", consumers will not be able to experience the real "leisurely" Cantonese snacks. In addition, although "time-limited eating" is only a warm reminder, it is not mandatory, but I believe many consumers know that "time-limited eating" in restaurants often can't rest assured to enjoy the food, because it often depends on whether the time is up or not.

The above two viewpoints are the standpoint of consumers and the standpoint of catering consumers. In fact, no one is right or wrong. Some netizens believe that "time-limited diet" is a bullying clause and infringes on the rights and interests of consumers. In fact, the law does not clearly stipulate whether "time-limited diet" violates the rights and interests of consumers. Some lawyers say that consumers' choice of "time-limited restaurants" is considered "defective" in the Consumer Protection Law, and these defects do not violate the mandatory provisions of the law. "In other words, if the consumer chooses a restaurant that previously claimed to have a" time limit ",it means that the consumer has clearly known that the restaurant has a" time limit "and agreed to do so, and then the catering industry is agreed by both parties in the contract law, and the negotiation is successful.