Pet Peeves of Reviews

Pretension in general is bothersome for me. I know it's a vague criticism, but it gets under my skin. I've never seen a pilsner that was "ecru", and it just makes you look like a tool when you describe it as such.

Lack of length and detail is probably my biggest pet peeve. Granted, there are many beers about which there just isn't much to be said. But short reviews with a lack of detail only signal a tick to me. I think the implementation of "Hads" is greatly helping that problem, though.

 

honestly, I give props to everyone for taking the time to carefully think about a beer and record their thoughts. I don't care about format or anything else.

 

This.

When I drink a beer, my favorite position is on the couch, laptop off, nothing to write with. Just enjoying the beer. That's why I never review beers.

Really, anyone who does take the time to write reviews of any kind is doing me a service. I really do appreciate them.

 

"I don't like this style" or "the beer was obviously bad (only an issue if the beer is often
bad)".

 

Great timing! I recently read someone's review stating "insert cult favorite DIPA here" was too balanced to be considered World Class.

Or when someone bashes a brew or gives a poor rating, then goes onto state that they're not a fan of the style or familiar with it.

 

take a random sampling of 10 of my reviews. try to pick out 2~3 attributes of each one, especially those that appear in every review. chances are, those are my major review pet peeves.

i hate my reviews.

 

Clowns that say: from notes, poured into a 2oz sampler.

 

I lose more brain cells by reading reviews from BA Raulmondesi than I actually do from drinking beer.

 

...not sure why people have to tell me the brand name on the glass they are pouring their beer into.

 

with you on that one. i used to review a lot, but these days i seldom do. i was finding i'd get so wrapped up in the analytical aspect of it - dissecting the beer and all its components - that i'd scarcely remember to just enjoy the damn thing.

 

I find any review helpful in some way...
even if its just to point out that a certain brewery makes a cool snifter

 

I try to buy at least two of every beer I try to review. One to enjoy and one to try and dissect to the best of my ability. That being said my biggest pet peeve is vagueness. I don't have problems with short descriptions as long as they have detail.

 

This is a tough question for me, I'm definitely not confident that my own reviews are all that great. I think I'm trying to improve on certain things like never comparing the beer I'm tasting to another beer. Doesn't make sense since the reader might not have had that beer either. And you mentioned the breaks between the categories, I actually like them and think when I'm on my phone or tablet it helps me quickly see which category I want to read next.

I also want to be more descriptive with my flavors. I don't want to use more descriptions in a row to get my point across (unless the profile changes through the taste), just sum up the flavor more accurately. Less is more

But yes, I am very grateful for anyone who reviews as well. Especially on the lesser known beers that might only have 14 reviews.

 

I've certainly skipped to the next one but I haven't ever been annoyed by a review.
I wish more people specified vintage on certain beers.

 

I don't review but I wish everyone wrote down what vintage or bottled date etc of the beer that they were reviewing

 

I don't think anyone with 300+ reviews is concerned with this. Was just a simple curiosity.

 

Cosign! Should be a requirement!!