New Rating System +/-

Agreed completely. I don't have much to add to what has already been said, but wanted to add my voice to those already here that are very disappointed about the changes made. I feel a bit betrayed at the intentional loss of data by the deletion of the category scores as well.

I hope the brothers will reconsider their decision, even if that means adding a layer of complexity. I see no reason, even if things are left as they are currently, that an "In-Depth Review" or some other category couldn't be added to allow the former types of reviews to continue to exist.

I had the same thought. Always wondered why people would choose to include the information in the text that was so elegantly preserved in the drop-down boxes above. Now I know. And I'm very disappointed.

 

I've always looked up to @BEERchitect. I wonder if he has any input on the new review system?

On top of what I've already said, I'd like to say that the new review interface is problematic...we have a tiny box to play with now, which naturally discourages review length. The old review-specific page at least gave us the feeling that we were doing something that had weight, and we had a box to type in that allowed for those of us who enjoy writing at length - *ahem* - to do so.

As subjective as this sounds, now when I review I feel like I'm adding unwelcome notes which intrude upon the webpage of the beer. I'm stuck writing in this out-of-place box above the actual beer. If I want to see what others have said about the beer, I have to scroll down. Heaven forbid I forget I'm reviewing and click something and then lose all of my review text.

Others have already stated this, but it's an important thing to note - many of us chose BeerAdvocate over alternative websites because of the review length and the detail of the notes here. That's what brought me here, and it's what has kept me here. If this website chases the features and interface of its competitors instead of embracing what makes it unique, it will lose many users.

 

And part of Todd's state motivation is to not have people do things like that.

 

Then it seems they are throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

 

obviously if the 5 categories are made optional, this would 100% remove people tailoring each category to get a desired average (since they can simply set the average).

 

Regardless of how it is done moving forward, the fact that I have lost over 1000 reviews that had scores for the five breakdowns is inexcusable. I had thought about backing up everything in case everything crashed so I wouldn't lose my data. But I never thought I would lose it because of an arbitrary decision done without any input from long time members.

Moving forward, I can deal with this and add scores in the text for smell, taste, feel, etc, but please give me my scores for my 1000+ reviews back.

 

The only thing left to add is WTF... was BA thing about... This is just so not right.

 

I might just be knee-jerking after the initial shock of data loss and drinking a hefty Double IPA, but I'd even be willing to pay a nominal yearly charge if 5 category reviews became some sort of "premium upgrade" at this point.

 

Can someone quickly write a small iPhone app where I can punch in the scores for each individual category and it spits out a final score? It would make it a lot easier for me to stay consistent with my reviews. If you look at my 2 latest reviews of 2 JK beers, I'm just writing the weights at the end and the final score. I'd like to keep my scoring system consistent at the very least. But most of all I want my category scores back.

 

I can't help you with that, but I made myself a little cheat sheet to help me manually calculate the aggregate score per the old system:

Appearance: (X x 0.05) +
Aroma: (X x 0.20) +
Taste: (X x 0.45) +
Mouthfeel: (X x 0.10) +
Overall: (X x 0.20)

It looks a little daunting and cumbersome, but for example if your scores for appearance, taste, and overall are 3.5 and your scores for aroma and mouthfeel are 4.0, you just add (3.5 x 0.70) + (4.0 x 0.30) to derive your final aggregate score.

It's really sad that this is what it has come to.

 

Yep. That's exactly what I meant when I stated previously - why make it harder to do the right thing? And to stay consistent?

I really feel there are only going to be X amount of times where I'm willing to calculate the final score from each of the category scores with individual ratings. At some point I'm just going to throw my hands up and stop posting reviews on here because I can't keep my scores consistent over time. And while I am not under the illusion that my choice will make a major difference, I am 100% sure after seeing all of these prolific reviewers post their frustrations in this thread- that many of us will simply quit posting these helpful reviews- which will make BA a much poorer website for the change. What set BA apart from all the other sites is that it encouraged, nay, almost required, a high standard for reviews compared to other sites. Now with the new system, it doesn't even have that. Anyone can now post an arbitrary number and it's weighted just as much as any review where I have to go punch in a formula to get the final score, a process that was automated before.

It was bad enough that a ton of long-time members and contributors got banned in the purge a while back, now we are getting more obstacles put in the way of writing a well-thought out assessment that everyone can benefit from? Again, why make it harder to do the right thing?

 

Here is the value that everyone is obviously missing. The new rating system allows reviews to be as in-depth and useful as this:




Evil Twin Ashtray Heart

Evil Twin Brewing
Russian Imperial Stout / 8.90% ABV

4/5

Great smoky taste.

 

I agree entirely. I have been reviewing every new-to-me beer for more than 3 years, and I have no intention of stopping. I review for my own purposes and nobody else's. And fortunately for me, I've also been saving my reviews in an Excel spreadsheet right along. So even if I stop posting my reviews on BA, I will continue to maintain my database and use the same algorithm I started with. It obviously takes more time now, but given that I review a new beer only every day or two on average, I guess to me it's worth the effort to keep my scores and methodology consistent despite what BA has decided to do.

 

You're a smart one. I never saved my reviews in a spreadsheet or database all along. Silly of me to trust that my contributions would stay impermanent on the interwebs. Maybe I'll have to take a day off and use an internet archive website to pull out my category ratings for all 736 unique beers that I've reviewed and to put it into a database. But then again, I clearly spend enough time on beer as it is already, especially if I'm getting annoyed about having to calculate overall scores on my own lonesome to keep my scoring system consistent.

 

@Todd : So what happens now with the Edit/Re-review feature? Do all revised reviews/ratings just stay dated with the original review/rating date? I just went to review Abita Amber after already having previously rated it and couldn't figure out why it wasn't showing up as my most recent review. Then I realized that in the past when you selected re-review it would set it to the most recent, but if you just select edit it keeps it set at the date when you first reviewed/rated it. This is an important feature IMO due to things like batch variance.

 

It will be up to people to downvote every awful review like that and in the event where reviews contain absolutely nothing that have to do with the beer to flag them as 'inappropriate'.

 

Except for reviews by Todd, Jason, or Beeradvocate. You will notice that their reviews are set to only allow up votes, and not be flagged or downvoted.

 

Didn't notice that before. The plot thickens.

 

I've only written 20 or so reviews, and feel bad for everyone who has lost details from hundreds or thousands of reviews. I think there are positives and negatives to the new system. On the plus side, appearance and mouthfeel are seldom meaningful. Taste and smell are what matter in most cases. Also, the reduced required characters should increase the number of people who say something. It may reduce the number of pure numerical ratings. Those who lack the time or ability to write a long review can still contribute. It is also much more mobile friendly, and mobile is the future of every site like this.

Negatives: rating before review. I agree with several that there should be a "review" button first and it should then add a place for a number rating. Let people submit a blank review if desired. The process of reviewing lets us refine our snap judgments. I also thought that the format drop down was useful.

I understand the complaints about the formula, but really, why limit yourself to a formula someone else created? You can still make notes and include point ratings by taste or smell or whatever in the text.