New Rating System +/-

Because IP issues as I travel, I now write reviews in Word then copy and paste them into BA. That means I review the beer before assigning a number. All my reviews are in the cloud. I now have to calculate the scores but that's not a big deal. The bottom line is I don't like the change but it's nothing with which I can't live . And in the final analysis it doesn't really matter whether I like it or not; it's not MY website and if I don't like the changes I'm free to leave.

 

I was struck at how similar your reaction was to mine. I'm pretty much done.

 

Also, only REVIEWS are flaggable. But someone who is giving 1's without a written review is not flaggable, as ratings are not flaggable but reviews are. (assuming I read the patch notes correctly).

 

Somehow... someway... I do feel this will all work itself out for everyone involved.

 

As a frequent beer reviewer, I found this new system to be disappointing and my first thought is that it is catering more to the tickers out there. In a way, it is a slap to the faces of people who take the time to write a thoughtful review. I really enjoy thinking about a beer and its different components, grading each one component with my assessments, with the ability to see how other people thought of a particular component.

The new system is no better than untappd, and is probably worse for the ticking crowd because you can't even post a picture of your beer unlike untappd. So, why bother?

All in all, we all lose here. I already disliked the "hads" function but tolerated it because well, why not? Can't always have the time to write a full thoughtful review, right? But this is certainly worse as it unnecessarily places obstacles in the way of assessments and thoughtful reviews. Why make it harder to do the right thing?

 

This new review system is awful. I'm probably done here.

 

It's more or less a business decision (with a component of change for the sake of change), I do understand why they did this. Get more traffic, keep people more engaged at a more superficial level of interaction that doesn't require people to think as in depth about the beers they drink. There are far more tickers out there than dedicated beer reviewers (obviously this is a spectrum, not A vs B but more like A vs Z). I am certainly biased, but I really don't think anyone would argue with this assessment.

Overall, I am pessimistic about the administrators rolling back any particular aspect of the new system.

 

You are spot on. $$$$ drives the decisions made for this site.

 

I think the "usefulness" feature is a step in the right direction and is responding to what many users have asked for in the forums over the previous months...

And that's where my praise of the changes stops.

I could write at length here in the forums regarding why the changes are troublesome, why they have a detrimental effect on the validity of the ratings/reviews, and on and on. I could make logical arguments against the changes and respond thoughtfully to the comments of those who disagree with me, but I won't. Why not?

Some of you remember how that worked out the last time I did it... in December 2011.

And to those of you talking about still including categories in your reviews because that's how it used to be done: welcome to my world! Maybe now I'll stop getting criticized for keeping my reviews accurate and consistent with past systems.

And I do have to ask...

@Hanzo - what are your thoughts now?

 

As someone who's been reviewing here for about 6 years now, I will say that I am saddened that it's moved closer to Untapped style stuff. That already exists. I used to enjoy thinking about appearnace, taste, etc., and then scoring them accordingly. It's also what sets this site appart from other places, with Untapped and RB basically having useless descriptions.

This newer system makes it easier, yes, but if I wanted easier, I would've moved to Untapped long ago.

Will continue to participate when I can.

Cheers,
Jeff

 

I also disagree that this change will encourage more text-based reviews. If we're not asked to score appearance, smell, taste and mouthfeel, it is less likely that people will put any actual thought into those aspects as such.

If there is any text at all, it is more likely to be comments on the context, atmosphere, etc., in which the beer was consumed. This is fun too, of course.

Jeff

 

With a new minimum review length of 5 characters, what even constitutes an inappropriate review now?

 

Other than Congress, can anyone think of something that has a 90% disapproval rating and survives?

 

And in those... books you call them... Michael Jackson assigned individual scores to each category and then used an equation to convert those scores into a final number which he assigned to the beer? Because my impression is that he used words to describe beers and that those words had far greater importance than the precise mechanism by which he assigned a number.

That the arbitrary number comes out differently from the arbitrary number I would have picked myself, and the extent to which the entire process just felt like a farce.
You can't look at a beer for 2 seconds, smell it for 2 seconds, etc. and then give it a fair shake [with a single number]? How is that any different than giving 5 random arbitrary numbers?

 

this.

i hate this new change. i have never felt adamantly about any of the adjustments to scoring since i started reviewing in 09.

i'm unlikely to continue reviewing without the separate categories. i guess i can write it in and just use overall, but i think this change is horrible. you're limiting the information i can give (and receive!). just awful.

 

Todd, can you create a poll for us that is free from the bias you think the poll in this thread suffers from? Maybe if you see an accurate reflection of how the user base feels via our votes, that could help inform the future direction of the site?

Thanks for your time and consideration...

 

To be honest, even though I am a fan of having at least a quick rate option, I do not like the stripped down review system at all.

 

I just noticed that the scores I'd put in for appearance, smell, etc., have since been erased! Extremely disappointing. I put a lot of thought into those scores and have been using them as a reference as well. If I had known they were eventually going to be erasaed, I would have been including them in the text this whole time. I used to think it was weird when people did that, but I guess they're laughing now *shrugs*

Jeff

 

I found not one, but two of these mystical "books" you describe and indeed, it is pretty interesting that they're so full of words and so scarce on numbers. Why it's almost as if the late Michael Jackson thought that describing a beer was more important than scoring it, whether through one number or five numbers.

 

i read your update (and didn't read the OP of this, just took the poll).

i dislike losing all the category-scoring i did (if you look at my reviews, you'll see i basically used a template that broke down the beer into those categories; losing the numbers makes all of them pretty unintelligible).

again, i don't see any reason to bother reviewing here after the change. it's harder to contribute in a meaningful way, and if you just want number tallies like all the other apps, craft beer is big enough now to support that without people like me. i thought reviews of the old type added value. it's now harder to do that, which is a bad change.

really, just a bad idea all around. you already have ratings. the only constructive thing i can say is "please change it back, since none of the reasons for the change are good (last iteration of the system was exactly as inclusive) and reasons to keep it categorized are good (don't lose years of data, give more info in reviews more easily).