Vegan/Vegetarian Restaurant/Dining Help Thread

lzimm13

Mouseketeer
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
I'm planned a welcome snack of macarons and champagne for a bachelorette weekend and I just remembered one of the girls is vegan! We're staying at Art of Animation. Any suggestions of what I might be able to grab for her instead of macarons? preferably from the food court there.
 

DisLiss

DIS Veteran
Joined
May 2, 2018

The article title says Disney is going vegan, but in the article they add this:

"Disney is being careful to call the items "plant-based" and not "vegan." That's because the exact definition of what qualifies as vegan has long been a moving target.
To help guests easily spot the plant-based plates, Disney is marking each menu item with a new green leaf logo.


However, the company did say that all of the items "are made without animal meat, dairy, eggs or honey," meeting the broadest definition of vegan cuisine."
 
Last edited:

OhanaMoana

Earning My Ears
Joined
Sep 6, 2019
So it seems that the Magic Kingdom menu I was so curious about was essentially a pilot program for a property-wide roll out rather then a short-term project (I was afraid it might fizzle out instead)! That's great - makes my life much easier.

I know they like to brandish the "400" dishes for marketing purposes since that total number sounds impressive, but I wonder how many of those are actually NEW additions. In the examples on the DisneyParks blog announcement I spot a number of dishes I've already seen on the respective restaurant menus prior to this announcement. The plant-based menu indications are a great feature that truly adds value on the *user-friendliness* front for those who currently need to read entire menus to find the often quite limited number of options available to veg and vegan eaters, but I wonder how much this new initiative is actually making the *menu selections themselves* more veg and vegan friendly by adding more dining options.

I also think it is smart business for Disney to label this initiative and its individual elements "plant-based" rather than labeling it as "vegetarian and/or vegan". They are doing a service to vegetarians and vegan diners by offering at least a few new menu items and making them easier to identify, (because as @DisLiss points out, their definition of the "plant-based" label overlaps with the broad vegan definition), but I imagine Disney also wants this initiative to successfully appeal to (or even be principally target) the market of omnivores looking to incorporate more plant-based cuisine into their diets. The omnivore open to increasing the mix of plant-based food in their diet frankly represents a significantly larger segment of the dining market at large than vegetarians and vegans alone do. At this point there is a fairly well-documented body of research showing how "vegan" as a brand/label is perceived very negatively by those are not already vegan (or vegan-curious/sympathetic/adjacent/peripheral) in their dietary choices. It would not surprise me if Disney views labeling this project as "plant-based" as an opportunity capitalize on the successful branding formula of Impossible Foods, Beyond, et al. in order to make good (cater to veg and vegan diner needs by improving information and options) while making good (not alienating/directly pursuing the omnivore customers who represent the bulk of the recent $ growth in the plant-based cuisine market). I think the "plant-based" label is the most inclusive umbrella term that doesn't alienate or other-ize any particular dietary group, enabling Disney to do right by those clamoring for more support/service (the veg and vegan community) and also be well positioned to respond to the faster growing, bigger $ trend(s) with significant business implications and potential upside.
 
  • Joined
    Apr 27, 2016
    So it seems that the Magic Kingdom menu I was so curious about was essentially a pilot program for a property-wide roll out rather then a short-term project (I was afraid it might fizzle out instead)! That's great - makes my life much easier.

    I know they like to brandish the "400" dishes for marketing purposes since that total number sounds impressive, but I wonder how many of those are actually NEW additions. In the examples on the DisneyParks blog announcement I spot a number of dishes I've already seen on the respective restaurant menus prior to this announcement. The plant-based menu indications are a great feature that truly adds value on the *user-friendliness* front for those who currently need to read entire menus to find the often quite limited number of options available to veg and vegan eaters, but I wonder how much this new initiative is actually making the *menu selections themselves* more veg and vegan friendly by adding more dining options.

    I also think it is smart business for Disney to label this initiative and its individual elements "plant-based" rather than labeling it as "vegetarian and/or vegan". They are doing a service to vegetarians and vegan diners by offering at least a few new menu items and making them easier to identify, (because as @DisLiss points out, their definition of the "plant-based" label overlaps with the broad vegan definition), but I imagine Disney also wants this initiative to successfully appeal to (or even be principally target) the market of omnivores looking to incorporate more plant-based cuisine into their diets. The omnivore open to increasing the mix of plant-based food in their diet frankly represents a significantly larger segment of the dining market at large than vegetarians and vegans alone do. At this point there is a fairly well-documented body of research showing how "vegan" as a brand/label is perceived very negatively by those are not already vegan (or vegan-curious/sympathetic/adjacent/peripheral) in their dietary choices. It would not surprise me if Disney views labeling this project as "plant-based" as an opportunity capitalize on the successful branding formula of Impossible Foods, Beyond, et al. in order to make good (cater to veg and vegan diner needs by improving information and options) while making good (not alienating/directly pursuing the omnivore customers who represent the bulk of the recent $ growth in the plant-based cuisine market). I think the "plant-based" label is the most inclusive umbrella term that doesn't alienate or other-ize any particular dietary group, enabling Disney to do right by those clamoring for more support/service (the veg and vegan community) and also be well positioned to respond to the faster growing, bigger $ trend(s) with significant business implications and potential upside.
    I think this is a huge step in the right direction as there is little to no options at many restaurants but I am very skeptical. Disney is once again clumping vegetarians & vegans together and trying to appease both groups with 1 vegan item per restaurant. As a vegetarian, I want food choices than contain cheese, dairy or eggs.
    I personally hate the term “plant based” because it usually means the item is meant to taste like meat. Hopefully Disney will prove me wrong and will add both vegan AND vegetarian options that are not meaty tasting.
     

    tguz

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Feb 6, 2018
    They talk about having 400 dishes "available". What does it matter whether they're new dishes or not? :confused3
    Exactly....I think what is more important is that EVERY restaurant will have at least 1 vegan option. This Summer we had to really plan where we were going to eat because my fiancee is vegan and I am not. One of us got something to go and took it to where the other wanted to eat or a couple times we ate at different places where one of us sat while the other ate and vice versa. It did waste some time but we were ok with it. Now, everyplace will have a vegan option. I do think the plan hurts vegetarians.....that is not the same as vegan and they are lumping them together, from what I understand. I could be wrong though.
     
  • igrsod

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    May 11, 2010
    Exactly....I think what is more important is that EVERY restaurant will have at least 1 vegan option. This Summer we had to really plan where we were going to eat because my fiancee is vegan and I am not. One of us got something to go and took it to where the other wanted to eat or a couple times we ate at different places where one of us sat while the other ate and vice versa. It did waste some time but we were ok with it. Now, everyplace will have a vegan option. I do think the plan hurts vegetarians.....that is not the same as vegan and they are lumping them together, from what I understand. I could be wrong though.
    I'm vegetarian and my son is vegan. We are both happy with the new vegan policy. As a vegetarian, I love having vegan options. I don't miss the odd bit of cheese, egg or honey.
     

    OhanaMoana

    Earning My Ears
    Joined
    Sep 6, 2019
    They talk about having 400 dishes "available". What does it matter whether they're new dishes or not? :confused3
    Well I guess I'm trying to gauge how excited I should be about this development, and my general framework for assessing this is comparing the current experience in a few categories to what we can expect to experience once these announced changes are rolled out:

    1. MENUS: It's easy to determine that the new menus marking the vegan choices are a big positive because that will save me a lot of time and effort over the previous situation where I had to parse regular menus for options.
    2. DISHES (Distribution of Availability): It is again a clear win that every restaurant property-wide will have a vegan dish. This means there will no longer be any locations where vegans definitely cannot eat anything (which was previously not a given), and thanks to the menu mentioned above, it will be easier to determine if the one (or more) vegan dishes at each place appeal to the person eating. This effectively eliminates vegan "food deserts" on property, which is only a plus for vegans (and vegetarians - presumably this initiative is not *getting rid of* any veg options, so vegan options being added at least *might* mean an extra option for a vegetarian, depending on tastes). So @tguz I totally agree with you (as a fellow omnivore whose significant other is a vegan) that this is the most important factor for making vegan-friendly dining options at WDW more accessible.
    3. DISHES (Overall Volume of Options): 400 vegan dish options sounds great and based on my experience (which is a subjective measure of limited scope since I've only eaten at a fraction of Disney dining locations) seems like a total number of dishes that is greater than the total number that has historically been offered. If 400 is actually more than we currently have, then this is a positive for vegans, but *how much of a positive* it is hinges on how it compares to the current situation. I'm just curious to know, quantitatively, how many more options this creates property-wide because it would give me a clearer/more precise sense of how much (and in what ways) we can expect the vegan dining scene to improve with this announcement. For example: Scenario #1: if theoretically WDW previously had 350 vegan menu offerings (totally made up number for the purposes of example), then now having 400 means we have 1.14x what was previously available. Nice, but not huge. If those numbers were the actual numbers, it might just mean the restaurants without vegan dishes were getting one vegan dish added to cover bases. Scenario #2: If we formerly had 150, then we suddenly we get 400 total, we have 2.67x what was previously available, which might mean in addition to some restaurants getting their one vegan dish minimum added, almost every other restaurant, on average, would be getting a second vegan option as well. In this second scenario, instead of just having an option at places where they previously had none like in Scenario #1, vegans might ALSO suddenly have an extra 1-2 options everywhere, which would be a huge increase in choice.
    4. DISHES (Which Courses?): I'd also be personally curious to know what the breakdown of these 400 dishes is according to course: how many are snacks, appetizers, entrees, sides, desserts. I personally hope a lot of them are entrees (because those most help me not go hungry and represent the bulk of the calories in meals I eat) and desserts (because I haven't loved most of the kinds of vegan options they've had to satisfy my sweet tooth). I'd personally be less interested in an increase in snacks, but these preferences would vary from person to person so there's not as obvious or universal a way to objectively measure "progress" in this category than in Categories 1-3.

    Overall I am super thankful for these changes because they are all positive for vegans. I just like to know details so I know exactly how big a deal I can expect this to be to my day-to-day experience dining on property :)
     
    Last edited:

    OhanaMoana

    Earning My Ears
    Joined
    Sep 6, 2019
    I do think the plan hurts vegetarians.....that is not the same as vegan and they are lumping them together, from what I understand. I could be wrong though.
    As for the VEGAN v. VEGETARIAN issue: Does anyone have information saying that the addition of some of the new vegan items in this initiative is being accompanied by a subtraction of other menu items? I haven't seen anything to that effect. If the vegan menu options are only *additions* to the options already on menus, then no non-vegan diner is having their dining choices negatively impacted in a literal, material sense:
    • A strict carnivore would see no increase in their choices because the vegan dishes will include no meat.
    • An omnivore would least have the *choice* of ordering any vegan dish because their diet doesn't restrict them from doing so, and thus how much the new vegan options expand their choice set is a matter of their personal tastes in food.
    • A vegetarian, like the omnivore, would also have the *choice* of ordering any vegan dish because none of the ingredients of the vegan diet are non-vegetarian, and thus how much the new vegan options expand their choice set is a matter of their personal tastes in food and how much each vegetarian's personal brand of vegetarianism is defined by the required inclusion of certain ingredients (dairy, eggs, etc.), which where vegans and vegetarians diverge, rather than the required exclusion of certain ingredients (meat, fish, etc., - exclusions vegetarians and vegans can have in common).
    • If we take the most extreme view, that vegans and only vegans will eat these new vegan dishes, then only the vegans benefit directly from the new menu options (but those with a vegan in their party benefit indirectly by not being limited by the vegan's dietary requirements when choosing where to eat). In reality, there will likely be at least some vegetarians and even omnivores that occasionally will opt for a dish that happens to be vegan, even if that group doesn't include all or even the majority of omnivores and/or vegetarians. That's why I would say that the new vegan dishes don't directly take away options from anyone else UNLESS someone knows that other items are being taken off the menu to accommodate the vegan additions.
    • The only way I can see that this "plant-based" initiative, focused on vegan foods, could be said to be detrimental to vegetarians is if vegetarians who prioritize having non-vegan vegetarian ingredients (eggs, dairy, etc.) in their food AND dislike vegan foods that emulate the experience of eating non-vegetarian foods (namely meat) argue that the fact that Disney is focusing on better serving vegans is consuming Disney's ability to devote time to creating more options particularly suited to the tastes of its other categories of diners. Then the metric for improvement of dining options isn't literally about whether there are more options a vegetarian can technically eat given their dietary restrictions (because the addition of new vegan dishes only increases options in this sense), but about the amount of *voice/advocacy/attention* vegetarian diners who specifically prize non-vegan ingredients and dislike plant-based-meats are receiving from Disney. Then the fear is that their interests will not be addressed because Disney will feel like it's "done its part" with this "plant-based initiative" just because technically those menu options fall within the parameters of a vegetarian diet, whether or not most/many of them actually satisfy the TASTES of certain vegetarians in addition to the vegetarian dietary requirements. I understand that concern, but the question I'd pose in response is this: which group has historically been more underserved by Disney dining: vegans, or vegetarians who do not like realistic meat substitutes but also really like eggs and dairy? I can't objectively answer that question, but I would think that those vegetarians have had more options over the years. In a pinch, they could eat a vegan dish if there wasn't a veg-friendly dish with egg or dairy in it, even if it wasn't their first choice. And the rise of realistic plant-based meats has been fairly recent - all the older, more tofurkey-like stuff didn't remotely taste or seem like real meat. And non-vegetarian ingredients like meat and fish are often much easier to remove from a dish than dairy or egg that is already cooked into/preprepared in some elements of a dish, so they probably have had and still more options/flexibility for modifying a dish to make it fall within their diet than vegans do. So maybe Disney is just trying to address the group that has been most hard up/restricted (probably vegans/) and taking a wait and see approach to understanding how much those new options serve the tastes of vegetarians. If they study the reactions to these new vegan dishes and segment them out by the diet type of each diner, they might learn more about which types of dishes helped satisfy which types/how many of their dining guests, and which subgroups are still clamoring for more of a specific type of option. Running a science experiment and understand the causality of the results is a bit simpler if you don't change as many of the variables (in this cases dishes for different types of diets) at one time. I think it's hard to do multiple things at once and do them well. Hopefully Disney has an eye on trying to help those specific vegetarians and it just making improvements in multiple phases for strategic reasons. I could be wrong and overly optimistic, but like @Traveling on cc points said, I think most of this is positive even if right now the changes are not giving every non-omnivore close to exactly what they'd like or hope for.
     
  • Mikey15

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Aug 29, 2018
    As for the VEGAN v. VEGETARIAN issue: Does anyone have information saying that the addition of some of the new vegan items in this initiative is being accompanied by a subtraction of other menu items? I haven't seen anything to that effect. If the vegan menu options are only *additions* to the options already on menus, then no non-vegan diner is having their dining choices negatively impacted in a literal, material sense:
    I'm about to stay at Art of Animation and I was looking forward to trying the "Vegetarian Breakfast Sandwich" which was actually an Indian-inspired dish with Naan (typically buttered in cooking) and Paneer cheese.


    They ditched it but added the (vegan?) Chipotle Seitan Scramble,
    Chipotle Seitan Scramble
    Plant-based Sauté of Edamame, Diced Tofu, Chipotle Seitan, Arugula, and Onions

    Admittedly I have no idea if they would have axed the Vegetarian option anyway as it's a pretty unusual offering, but it feels like it's one such consequence. I'm probably going to end up with an egg-and-cheese breakfast sandwich instead as that Soy/Soy/Gluten scramble does not appeal to me at all.
     

    tguz

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Feb 6, 2018
    As for the VEGAN v. VEGETARIAN issue: Does anyone have information saying that the addition of some of the new vegan items in this initiative is being accompanied by a subtraction of other menu items? I haven't seen anything to that effect. If the vegan menu options are only *additions* to the options already on menus, then no non-vegan diner is having their dining choices negatively impacted in a literal, material sense:
    • A strict carnivore would see no increase in their choices because the vegan dishes will include no meat.
    • An omnivore would least have the *choice* of ordering any vegan dish because their diet doesn't restrict them from doing so, and thus how much the new vegan options expand their choice set is a matter of their personal tastes in food.
    • A vegetarian, like the omnivore, would also have the *choice* of ordering any vegan dish because none of the ingredients of the vegan diet are non-vegetarian, and thus how much the new vegan options expand their choice set is a matter of their personal tastes in food and how much each vegetarian's personal brand of vegetarianism is defined by the required inclusion of certain ingredients (dairy, eggs, etc.), which where vegans and vegetarians diverge, rather than the required exclusion of certain ingredients (meat, fish, etc., - exclusions vegetarians and vegans can have in common).
    • If we take the most extreme view, that vegans and only vegans will eat these new vegan dishes, then only the vegans benefit directly from the new menu options (but those with a vegan in their party benefit indirectly by not being limited by the vegan's dietary requirements when choosing where to eat). In reality, there will likely be at least some vegetarians and even omnivores that occasionally will opt for a dish that happens to be vegan, even if that group doesn't include all or even the majority of omnivores and/or vegetarians. That's why I would say that the new vegan dishes don't directly take away options from anyone else UNLESS someone knows that other items are being taken off the menu to accommodate the vegan additions.
    • The only way I can see that this "plant-based" initiative, focused on vegan foods, could be said to be detrimental to vegetarians is if vegetarians who prioritize having non-vegan vegetarian ingredients (eggs, dairy, etc.) in their food AND dislike vegan foods that emulate the experience of eating non-vegetarian foods (namely meat) argue that the fact that Disney is focusing on better serving vegans is consuming Disney's ability to devote time to creating more options particularly suited to the tastes of its other categories of diners. Then the metric for improvement of dining options isn't literally about whether there are more options a vegetarian can technically eat given their dietary restrictions (because the addition of new vegan dishes only increases options in this sense), but about the amount of *voice/advocacy/attention* vegetarian diners who specifically prize non-vegan ingredients and dislike plant-based-meats are receiving from Disney. Then the fear is that their interests will not be addressed because Disney will feel like it's "done its part" with this "plant-based initiative" just because technically those menu options fall within the parameters of a vegetarian diet, whether or not most/many of them actually satisfy the TASTES of certain vegetarians in addition to the vegetarian dietary requirements. I understand that concern, but the question I'd pose in response is this: which group has historically been more underserved by Disney dining: vegans, or vegetarians who do not like realistic meat substitutes but also really like eggs and dairy? I can't objectively answer that question, but I would think that those vegetarians have had more options over the years. In a pinch, they could eat a vegan dish if there wasn't a veg-friendly dish with egg or dairy in it, even if it wasn't their first choice. And the rise of realistic plant-based meats has been fairly recent - all the older, more tofurkey-like stuff didn't remotely taste or seem like real meat. And non-vegetarian ingredients like meat and fish are often much easier to remove from a dish than dairy or egg that is already cooked into/preprepared in some elements of a dish, so they probably have had and still more options/flexibility for modifying a dish to make it fall within their diet than vegans do. So maybe Disney is just trying to address the group that has been most hard up/restricted (probably vegans/) and taking a wait and see approach to understanding how much those new options serve the tastes of vegetarians. If they study the reactions to these new vegan dishes and segment them out by the diet type of each diner, they might learn more about which types of dishes helped satisfy which types/how many of their dining guests, and which subgroups are still clamoring for more of a specific type of option. Running a science experiment and understand the causality of the results is a bit simpler if you don't change as many of the variables (in this cases dishes for different types of diets) at one time. I think it's hard to do multiple things at once and do them well. Hopefully Disney has an eye on trying to help those specific vegetarians and it just making improvements in multiple phases for strategic reasons. I could be wrong and overly optimistic, but like @Traveling on cc points said, I think most of this is positive even if right now the changes are not giving every non-omnivore close to exactly what they'd like or hope for.
    I have not found any good info on whether current vegetarian dishes are going away but it seems to me that maybe some are and vegetarian and vegan are being lumped together which means that vegetarians get the short end of the stick because they CAN and do like to eat eggs and cheese and other dairy products. My thinking is based off an article that I read that states...."to help diners find the food they seek, a new icon of a green leaf will be put beside menu items that are plant based." The problem with the label "plant based" is that BOTH vegetarianism and veganism are both "plant based" but vegans cannot eat a vegetarian diet because of the eggs, cheese, and other dairy products. It seems to me that they should label vegan dishes as "vegan" and vegetarian dishes as "vegetarian" to erase any confusion.
     

    OhanaMoana

    Earning My Ears
    Joined
    Sep 6, 2019
    I'm about to stay at Art of Animation and I was looking forward to trying the "Vegetarian Breakfast Sandwich" which was actually an Indian-inspired dish with Naan (typically buttered in cooking) and Paneer cheese.
    They ditched it but added the (vegan?) Chipotle Seitan Scramble,
    Chipotle Seitan Scramble
    Plant-based Sauté of Edamame, Diced Tofu, Chipotle Seitan, Arugula, and Onions
    Admittedly I have no idea if they would have axed the Vegetarian option anyway as it's a pretty unusual offering, but it feels like it's one such consequence. I'm probably going to end up with an egg-and-cheese breakfast sandwich instead as that Soy/Soy/Gluten scramble does not appeal to me at all.
    That is a major bummer and exactly the kind of thing I wanted to believe Disney WOULDN'T do with this new plant-based initiative. The timing definitely seems suspect. I'm sorry you're not getting your yummy sounding breakfast sandwich... :(

    I have not found any good info on whether current vegetarian dishes are going away but it seems to me that maybe some are and vegetarian and vegan are being lumped together which means that vegetarians get the short end of the stick because they CAN and do like to eat eggs and cheese and other dairy products. My thinking is based off an article that I read that states...."to help diners find the food they seek, a new icon of a green leaf will be put beside menu items that are plant based." The problem with the label "plant based" is that BOTH vegetarianism and veganism are both "plant based" but vegans cannot eat a vegetarian diet because of the eggs, cheese, and other dairy products. It seems to me that they should label vegan dishes as "vegan" and vegetarian dishes as "vegetarian" to erase any confusion.
    Your point about making menu options for vegetarians as well marked as those for vegans is well-taken. I was thinking mostly in terms of the "plant-based menu" that they put out in Spring and summer 2019 for Magic Kingdom, where everything on the menu was vegetarian and then the items that were also vegan in addition to being vegetarian were marked with the leaf icon. On a park-wide basis I think this makes it equally easy for vegetarians and vegans to assess their options. How to make things equally equitable at, say, resort restaurants, where there isn't a logical place to hand out the equivalent to a park-wide menu or there might not be enough restaurants in that group for it to make sense to put all the vegetarian/vegan menu items on one guide, strikes me as trickier. And I also will be curious to hear how the marking of this plant-based food initiative is being done on the menus of each individual restaurant. Are there plant icons on each menu but no markers for vegetarians? That would seem to be unfair a disservice to vegetarians who want to easily spot their non-vegan options. It's my hope vegetarian guests would always be accommodated if they asked a place that serves cheese or egg to add cheese/egg to a vegan dish, but I definitely understand that's not always the same thing as having a dish that was developed with the flavor of cheese or egg being naturally included in the dish. If the naturally cheese/egg containing vegetarian items are become cannibalized by the increase in vegan options, as @Mikey15 compellingly provides a potential example of on Day 1, that's a shame and I would be frustrated if I were a vegetarian. It seems like Disney should be able to keep both items on menu once they've already developed the dishes unless they took the original down for unrelated reasons.

    What would also strike me as useful are menu indicators at individual restaurants showing which dishes could be MADE vegan or vegetarian by the kitchen by requesting the removal of particular ingredients. I admit that as an omnivore I've never noticed if either of these has existed before, because I'm used to just reading every item on a menu to makes my choice. But I wonder if the "can be vegan/vegetarian" icons would just create too many icons on restaurant menus along with other allergen icons I assume they already have. If that were a potential issue, I imagine Disney would have hired some agency that works on user interface/user experience design to determine how to put as much of this info on a menu without making it too hard to follow/understand or without overly cluttering the menu . to the detriment of other diners/users. But maybe not. Maybe I have too much faith in the ways I imagine Disney researches and strategically maps out their decisions with the guest experience in mind.
     
    Last edited:

    Chaitali

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Jan 2, 2011
    Sure, I would be interested in a new thread since the older posts are pretty outdated. As far as content, maybe a link to resources on the first post, such as a link to this thread for people who want to look at the older posts, a link to veg disney blogs, maybe a link to the facebook group if that's allowed. And they I think the other content would just fill in as people provide reviews of the food they ate and ask questions.
     

    ljcrochet

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    May 4, 2006
    Question, since this post has been around forever, would anyone be interested in a clean start? Suggestions for content?
    That is a great idea. So much of this information has changed
    Sure, I would be interested in a new thread since the older posts are pretty outdated. As far as content, maybe a link to resources on the first post, such as a link to this thread for people who want to look at the older posts, a link to veg disney blogs, maybe a link to the facebook group if that's allowed. And they I think the other content would just fill in as people provide reviews of the food they ate and ask questions.
    I like the idea of the link to resources as well.
     

    OhanaMoana

    Earning My Ears
    Joined
    Sep 6, 2019
    Question, since this post has been around forever, would anyone be interested in a clean start? Suggestions for content?
    Sure, I would be interested in a new thread since the older posts are pretty outdated. As far as content, maybe a link to resources on the first post, such as a link to this thread for people who want to look at the older posts, a link to veg disney blogs, maybe a link to the facebook group if that's allowed. And they I think the other content would just fill in as people provide reviews of the food they ate and ask questions.
    I also totally agree with these ideas. Time for a refresh!

    What do people think about splitting vegan from vegetarian, since those two groups can have overlap but are also often looking for different types of dishes (and probably looking at different niche resources as well)?
     

    Chaitali

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Jan 2, 2011
    I like having vegetarian and vegan together. I’m vegetarian but often eat vegan too. A lot of the new plant based dishes are vegan and I wouldn’t want to miss that discussion. And this thread isn’t super active. I’m worried that if we split it up there would be less activity on both threads.
     

    Connect

    Disney News and Updates

    Get Daily Email Updates

    DIS INSTAGRAM
    Disney World Restaurant Menus Disney World Rehabs and Closings

    MINI DINING REVIEWS


    THEME PARK MAPS


    DIS PODCASTS

    Top