By Maura Judkis from Washington Post

When Michelin announced Tuesday morning that it would launch its famed and feared dining guide in Washington, the news was met with cheers — and grumbles.

D.C. diners and chefs were proud, of course. But some — both in D.C. and elsewhere — wondered if it was an acknowledgement the city didn’t yet deserve. “No knock on D.C., but it gets into current Michelin Guide while L.A. doesn’t? As 4th U.S. city in guide? Nuts,” tweeted New York Times columnist and former food critic Frank Bruni.

To that, Washingtonians replied:  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Sorry. Gloating is unbecoming. Besides, it’s a totally valid criticism, because by many standards and rankings — including, we must point out, the Post’s own — L.A. is a better food town than the District. It also has a longer history with Michelin, which is worth examining, because it says something about what Michelin looks for, and what Washington can expect once the guide launches here on Oct. 13.