> with a google review lower than 3 stars

At least here, the majority of 1-2 star reviews are actually complaining about third-party delivery services like Foodora[1].

Of course the fries will be soggy and the burger luke warm when you got a guy who had to pedal a bike for half an hour to deliver it for you. Like what did you expect?

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foodora

I expect this guy to keep it fresh for me.

I don't know if you're joking or not but in case you're not, you can't really keep fries "fresh". Regardless, the point remains that the quality of third party food delivery services shouldn't be considered when studying the quality of restaurants.

I always open fries. They will get cold. Fine. Cold fries can be reheated; they won’t be as good as fresh, but soggy fries are much harder to fix.

I agree. Nothing is worse than receiving fries which have been in a closed or semi-closed container and have been soaking in their own steam.

> 2. All those "bad kebabs" actually located within 500m from the nearest station. No kebab located in further than >500m is bad.

Right, but this is selection bias. There will always exist a distance D from which all bad kebabs are located.

Unless D is provenly chosen _before_ looking at the data, this has no meaning.

One also has to take the kebab density into account.

This "you have to choose D" ahead of time nonsense is why people distrust and dislike statisticians! Humans have priors on what is "close" that are independent of this particular article. If they had said "See, everything within 5000m" or "everything within 5m" you might have a point but "500m" being a rough definition of "close to a train station" is pretty reasonable.

> If they had said "See, everything within 5000m" or "everything within 5m" you might have a point

On the contrary, if everything was within five meters, that would make the finding much more impressive.

Bad kebab shops may survive if located near a train station.