Beer Trading & Beer Karma

I was going to like this.... but now i'm not.

 

I'm chiming in in the spirit of providing feedback, not with the intent of being argumentative. That said, the proposals to have a minimum beer karma of 1,000 or more to see the trading sections are ridiculous, as are those who want a year-long waiting period. I would argue that 250 and 3 months are also way too high.

Full disclosure: I've been here for less than 6 months, and have around 50 beer karma. I came here to learn about beer, and to ask occasional questions, and then to trade for beer that I can't get locally. I don't want to post reviews yet (or hads) until I've tried a bunch of different beers in a style -- how could I rate BCBS if it were the only BA stout I'd had? I need context, and I get that by reading, trying beers, and occasionally posting. I don't post outside of IT Forward a lot for the same reason I don't review -- I don't have a whole lot to add to the conversation yet. But I will, and when I do, I'll review, post, help, etc. In the meantime, if I had to post more it would be mostly empty, like repeating the same information about good beer stores in Chicago, favorite beer discussions in Beer Talk, etc. If I first came here when I was in my early 20s and had to rate stuff, I'd have been tossing around high scores for Killian's Irish Red and beers like that because I didn't have context yet.

I'd like to think that I've been a good BA in my time here. I've run a LIF with another in the works, had a great time doing a BIF, and have traded with a dozen people around the country, all of whom have been quite happy (I'm pretty sure). The trading section (especially IT Forward) is what kept me engaged with the site while I was (and am still) learning. If all I had to flip through in the forum was Beer Talk and a regional forum, I would probably have drifted away long before now. This site gets people excited to try ALL OF THE BEER from everywhere -- making people wait a long time (in terms of time or posts or reviews) to gain access to all of that beer is going to result in far fewer engaged new members.

I'm not opposed to paying a small yearly fee for posting privileges in ISO:FT -- I have seen this work well on another forum (bass guitar related, not beer). I don't have a problem with a short probationary period (I think the current month works well, or 5-10 posts). I think anything more than that would effectively kill off the trading forums, maybe only slowly but surely, by vastly reducing the number of new participants. That would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater, IMO.

 

That's why I was careful to include the word "necessarily". .

 

Nothing can truly solve bad traders, though trading feedback would at least help. But if someone wants to scam someone else there's very little stopping them.

As for trolls, increased moderation is about the only thing that can curb them. What else would? Also, it's important to remember that there are very few things that can be universally called trolling. I've seen MikeTen called a troll more times than anyone else, but he's pretty clearly not a troll, just someone who's argumentative and convinced he's right. He's not saying things solely to get a reaction. So you have to walk this fine line that takes a lot of care to really walk right.

 

Always wondered why there wasn't a more formal Trader Feedback setup. While sending off e-mails asking people to vouch for another trader works, unfortunately the inefficiency of that process often is not ideal as "For Trade" items at times move rather quickly.

 

I hate to say it but people looking to scam people out of beer/$$ will pay a small user fee if needed because the gain outweighs the cost. The fact that several people on the bad trader list had some/many positive trades before going postal exhibits the length some will go to screw others over and it would not be a surprise that they are doing this for profit by selling beer on other sites. Not to mention that if Karma points are instituted many simply won't post an ISO:FT bc they can't, but they can contact/BM others to facilitate trades and now we're back to square one. I don't have a good solution but it seems to me that regardless of your decision they'll find a way around it. You can always hope that by implementing a minimum of Karma points to trade and requiring a fee it will reduce the potential and/or maybe they'll simply find other sites where it's just easier to screw people over. I guess it can't hurt to try...

 

Sell karma like airline miles if they don't want to put the effort in.

Internet commodities (read bitcoin) are all the rage these days. FT: DL ISO: 500 beer karma

 

If possible, I think a standardized feedback system embedded in profiles would do the most good. An overall score coupled with ratings for communication, promptness of shipping, packing, etc. The ability to add notes would be cool, too. In addition to building a reputation, the feedback might also help to give people a heads up in areas where they might be lacking even when the overall trade experience is fine.

I don't think there's any way around lousy offers, annoying posters, threadshitting, etc. As the site (and beer in general) continues to grow in popularity you just get more new people and more rabble. Besides regular moderation, I'm not sure how else to handle it.

 

I'll bite. I didn't post above but I do tend to agree that those that are against privileges. Having said that, I wouldn't be opposed to some sort of privilege based on Karma points but a lot of numbers that are thrown around are excessive imo.

A fair example would be a brewery that required you to purchase a certain amount of year round beer in order to get a special release bottle. However, the restraints to someone getting a limited release these days are controlled by other consumers, not the brewery itself. Sure someone could argue capacity but this is real life and additional capacity isn't something a brewery can add at the flip of a switch. In an environment without external constraints leveled by the company providing the service, the person complaining thinks that they are more important than someone else for no other reason than their being.

On the flip side, BA forcibly creating their own restraints on users by way of commission is a different animal. People don't like being made to do something they don't necessarily want to do, ie review beers, places, etc... While it would be BA's prerogative to instate some sort of mandate, we as users have plenty of other options for beer news, forums, and trades. Right now for me, the positives of BA outweigh the negatives so I am an active member. Such enforcement would only perpetuate the "beer snob"/"elitist" moniker that is so often attributed to us. Essentially what they would be saying is that you have not earned it, and people would read that as they aren't good enough (whether it's true or not).

In fact, I would argue that these examples you are citing are on opposite extremes. On one hand the consumer says they are more important than other consumers and on the other the company chooses who is more important than someone else. Therefore, I'd argue that your stance is closer to that of the entitled person by not having a balanced, unbiased view of each individual consumer.

At the most basic level the difference is omission versus commission.

 

I don't agree with making access to the Trading forum a privilege. It's just too hard to determine what makes one user more deserving than another.

There are some bigtime contributors to the site that we all know and love. And there are some asshats that mess things up with their trolling, bad trading, and general asshatery. But I think the majority of the users fall into the same category as I do: we are on the site all the damn time and we have an established trading history, but we enjoy reading the thoughts/review of others more than we enjoy actively participating in the conversations. I, myself, have been here since 2008 and have a measly karma of 85 before this post.

I think that restricting access to the Trading forum would do more harm than good. Despite your intentions, you would be saying that one user is more important than another, and........(lowers sunglasses) that's not advocacy.

 

Majority? Where do you get that impression?

Not everybody trades. Matter of fact, I'd love to see some stats on how many users actually participate in trading versus how many are here to write reviews, learn about beer releases, and chat about the beers they're drinking now.

 

I feel that a new user to the site might be a little turned off if this was implemented. It would kind of feel like a punishment just for being new. Isn't that one of the most rewarding things about craft beer, in getting new people to convert? This site is one of the main reasons I've gotten so much into the hobby and if this had been implemented when I signed up, I'm sure I wouldn't be into beer as much as I am. Isn't one of the rules "trade at your own risk"? As long as people use common sense it shouldn't be much of an issue in the trading forums with new people.

I also believe there should be a little more leniency on the forums as well. It seems like as of late, we've been going with a "if it moves, shoot it" approach. But I'll just end that convo right there as I see Thor's hammer getting close and I'd like to keep all of my posting privileges. =D

 

Of course. I was thinking about the trading community that would be impacted by this entitlement system more than the general BA community. Didn't make that clear.

 

totally on board with iTrader system

the falsest post in this thread

 

The implementation would not stop you from using most of the site. Why does beer advocacy have to rely so heavily on trading? Can't you advocate local or locally distributed beer? What does trading have to do with "getting new people to convert" to craft beer?

 

there are plenty of decent people who would prefer to observe. there are plenty of people who avoid the big forums and stick to their regional forum or whatever it may be. these people would be punished and excluded under the new system. the alternative is the new person who joins and instantly posts "what's the most overrated beer?" "pliny vs heady topper" "lager vs BA beer" threads. that person crosses the threshold much faster than the former two people, but i would much rather have the former two around.

i travel for releases and get their early. i don't complain or feel any sort of entitlement. i don't review beer. while i enjoy trying to break a beer down and pick out specific flavors and scents, i don't want to bring a notepad and take notes at tastings. i just want to drink good beer with friends. i appreciate the value of reviewing but i, like many other "good traders", don't do it. many people feel they don't have palates strong enough to detect the subtleties and write good reviews, so they don't. while this may improve if they start reviewing, i think it's absurd to suggest that anyone should be forced to review beer, and it would obviously encourage shitty quick reviews which help no one.

the amount of join date elitism on this site is bizarre. obviously the majority of problem users are newer, but seeing a bunch of adults act like cliqued up children is weird.

i think a 2-3 month waiting period before registering and being allowed to post in ISO:FT would be good. 25-50 karma would be a reasonable requirement. anything beyond that is excessive.

there are other options for beer trading. i like BA, it's the most active and the layout is the best by far. i would hate to be run out but i definitely would not pay, nor would i spam reviews to reach some insane karma number that a bunch of overzealous vets decided was a good idea.

a waiting requirement may prevent people from trying to trade pinot noir barrel aged supplication for whales, but it's not going to make mornin' delight or BA abraxas trade for any less. the culture of maximum value, instawhales, and trade winning will not be fixed by running half the users out. these are not the problems todd is trying to address. his solutions to other problems don't fix the real problems with beer trading that everyone loves to complain about.

 

If you're advocating your local beer, and I'm advocating mine, don't you think I'd be excited to try yours, and for you to try mine? Then we can actually both talk about those beers, rather than you talking over there about CA beers, and me talking over here about Chicago beers. Everyone wins! Not everyone trades, but I think a lot of BAs want to try all the beer that gets discussed here, and trading is one of the quickest ways (and sometimes effectively the only way to try a beer).

Let me flip the question: what's the point of restricting access to the trading forums to only people who have been here X months/years or posted/reviewed X times? Some bar to entry is useful to slow down fake/alt accounts, but beyond that, what does it solve?

 

There are plenty of decent people who are decent folks who haven't been on the site for 2-3 mo.'s. You have no prob. with saying they don't deserve something, because you have your time in. Welcome to the elitism club

This is a site dedicated to helping each other find good beer, and learning how to enjoy good beer. You say you aren't good enough to recommend a beer or not recommend it, maybe you can improve? In any event there is no down side, just your insistence that you would rather not. IMHO any step, including the one you recommend, that will better ready folks and better invest folks, two factors that, despite your protests, can only help the trade forum, I am in favor of.

I won't even go into the implication you make about the group of people who you say don't now review, and would write crappy reviews if they needed to review to meet site requirements. I will just point that little factoid of yours out and let others decide what you imply with it.

 

no one can jump right in without observing trade value and make fair trade offers. that's not elitism. personally i don't care how long it is, if someone really wanted to they could figure out the value of the beer they want or have in 10 minutes. i just said 2-3 months because it's a more reasonable solution than the year some people are suggesting.

i didn't say i'm not good enough to recommend beer. i said i don't want to take notes at gatherings with friends.

i didn't think you were seriously advocating forced reviews, but apparently you actually are. that's really dumb.

if you don't see that people would rattle off quick and less thoughtful reviews if there were incentive to do so, i don't know what to tell you.