This might be a topic only for statisticians, engineers, and similarly-minded math geeks, but I've realized my ratings are decidedly non-linear. Let me explain. A linear rating approach would mean each .25 increment in the BA rating scale means pretty much the same thing in perceived "goodness" increase to you. I've realized this is NOT true for me. I've found that there is much, much less difference between increments from 3.00 to 4.00 than there is between 4.00 and 5.00. IOW, it takes much more to go from 4 to 4.25 than it does from 3.75 to 4, and more again to go from 4.25 to 4.5, and it is very difficult to get a rating above 4.5 from me. I've never issued a 5 rating (IIRC, anyway... I haven't gone back to examine all my reviews / ratings...) The same is true below 3.0 as well, although my personal sample size is small. IOW, a beer has to be really, really awful to fall below 2.5. I guess I'm a "tough grader" on the very good and a "easy grader" on the very bad. Any comments about my "system"? To my topic question, are your ratings linear?