The blog was linked to show the size of the appetizer.
Did you read that I pointed out the PHOTO and not the rest of the meal in the link that I referenced?
The blog sort of proves the OPs point. My point is continued.....
Here is a much more recent review with pictures: http://www.disneyfoodblog.com/2011/11/20/review-california-grill/
Both blogs are from couples which ordered at least 3 appetizers, 2 entrees and 2 desserts. Makes sense to me that a couple who only ordered one appetizer and one entree each might leave hungry. Why do posters continue to quote blogs which supports the OPs point?
I don't think you can go by a plate of food that was served to someone else, as a means to judge the OP's circumstance. It wasn't his plate.
+1
I agree 100%. I also think that it is unrealistic to expect CG to provided unlimited amounts a food or a refund to people that are 'big eaters' and who left hungry. Had the OP received a smaller portions than those around them, than sure you have a portion complaint (that should have been made then) but otherwise, I think there is no basis for an email complaint after the fact.
I also think that if more and more people pull this little stunt or ones similar that the price of food at WDW is going to continue to rise as will the price of the dining plans because Disney will have to recoup that money from somewhere.
ETA: We have eaten at CG every trip we have made to WDW and we have always found their portions sizes to be more than adequate. We also find them to be very much in line with the portion sizes of similar dining experiences elsewhere in the US.
Who suggested the CG provide unlimited quantities of food? Disney wouldn't have give a complete refund, really a credit, if the complaint had no merit.