I just think it's possible for someone to like crap food and still be able to have authority on "fine" food

Definitely. Where I think the disconnect here is if you were to make the argument (and I don't know that anyone has) that, say, "green cardboard parmesan is good cheese," which to my mind is quite different than saying I like it or even that "green cardboard parmesan is good." (Or for that matter, "green cardboard parmesan is cheese.")

Or to use the other example - a super dirty martini may hit the spot sometimes, but that doesn't mean it's a good use of quality gin. It's just not.

Where I think the disconnect here is if you were to make the argument (and I don't know that anyone has)

I felt like Hec and Jess were, but they may have been just using "people who like crap" as shorthand for "people who believe crap is actually quality." Or I read it that way.

for some ungodly reason, he likes The Miller. I drink his good stuff.

Again, doesn't this prove my point? What is "the good stuff" if we're only defining quality by what people like without taking into account their level of informedness on the subject at hand?

However, if you like crap food and haven't experienced or learned about other foods, then you don't have an informed opinion.

What if one has experienced and learned about finer foods and beverages, and just doesn't like most of them? Is my opinion that, for example, there is no dish that can make Brussels sprouts edible, unsophisticated or useless? I mean, it would be useless to someone who liked Brussels sprouts, because I can't give them a nuanced opinion of any such dish, but is it an intrinsically worthless opinion? (I don't care; I'm just wondering how I fit into this discussion. I'm understanding the implication from Hec and Jessica to be that anyone who's experienced these finer foods/beverages would prefer them because they are intrinsically better.)

What is "the good stuff" if we're only defining quality by what people like without taking into account their level of informedness on the subject at hand?

How much food/beverage cred does someone need to establish before they can use a phrase like "the good stuff" without someone wondering if I mean microbrewed stout or Bud Light?

And also, where does the "just not liking stuff" come into the equation? I have a pretty decent palate, but I just don't like caviar. It doesn't mean that I don't know good food, it means that I don't like caviar.

What if I like dirty martinis, and that's the only way I like gin, of whatever quality? Should I never drink a dirty martini, because I'm defiling the gin with my olive juice? Or should I just make my martinis with bad gin? (I can taste the difference, BTW. The olive juice does not completely overwhelm the other tastes, to me.)

In fact, I'm not that fond of dirty martinis, but I've had a few, of varying quality, and I liked the high-quality ones better. I have a good friend who loves them more than she loves Hugh Jackman. She makes them with vodka, and she only uses good quality vodka, but I guess that makes her as unsophisticated as me. Even though she likes wine. And gin.

How much food/beverage cred does someone need to establish before they can use a phrase like "the good stuff" without someone wondering if I mean microbrewed stout or Bud Light?

If you asked someone "what's your favorite beer?" and they answered Bud Light, would you let them order a beer for you? Knowing nothing else about their food/drink preferences?