Improving BeerAdvocate

As has been borne out by many people over many threads, that is exactly what the "Hads" feature ends up being: a BA-supported ticklist. For whatever reason, people don't want to add to the community through reviews and additions and whatnot. One minute I hear they don't have the time for reviews, the next I see them basically reviewing their favorite IPA in the 80,001st "What's your favorite IPA?" thread in the forums. From one side of their mouth, they tell us they don't feel comfortable reviewing a beer due to inexperience, fear, etc, then from the other they proceed to toss in a rating through the "Hads" function.

It's all about making things easier and convenient for the lazy and the selfish. To borrow from another BA in another thread proposing "improvements" to the site, these people want BA to be not only BA but Word, Excel, and Access as well. "Why can't I have a one-stop shop for all of my personal beer-related information that pertains only to me and is meant only for my own reflection?" Clearly because the site designers just don't get it...

 

Or some of us that no longer review felt like we were doing homework instead of just casually enjoying a beer. I don't even really give a shit about what you or most of the people on here think about the score that I give a beer anyhow. When I use the had function, it's to either help me remember what I've had (shocking) and to show my buddies what I thought of it at a quick glance.

 

Nope, no other account needed. You can download imgupr Photo Uploader from the App Store (free). I use and iPhone but i am sure Android has it also if that is the phone you use. Nothing to sign up for at all. If you need help, message me, I would be glad to help.

 

This is stupid.

 

And the majority of your reviews are below the average. Thanks for proving my point.

 

I wasn't a big fan of Hads when they were first added, but I've softened my stance somewhat. There are plenty of people that don't have the time/will/wherewithal to write beer reviews, and that's their prerogative. They should still be able to turn to BA as a resource for keeping track of which beers they've tried and how they felt about each of them. I myself use the Hads feature if I am trying a new beer in a social setting, because I have no interest in dragging a notebook or laptop around with me.

But I still think including the Hads amongst the actual beer reviews screws up the aesthetics of the page. Too much blank space, and I can't imagine there are many people who click on a beer and find seeing a long sequence of numbers with a username and no other context very useful. By default, the 'Show Hads' check box should just be left blank, or at the very least add a 'preferences' feature so that we can toggle it on or off for all pages simultaneously.

 

I defy you to take any amount of "Hads" on any beer and by using only that information tell me one thing about that beer that isn't in the description on the top of the page other than if a majority of the had raters liked it or not.
I have no problem with had users keeping track of their own beers, but I do not think they provide the rest of us any benefit and therefore their rating should not be used to influence the beer's score. That's just my opinion.

 

The hads feature works nicely as it is. I do both full reviews and hads and find that both have their place. If you prefer to only do full reviews that's fine, but it doesn't mean you need to demean people who use the hads feature and it certainly does not mean you opinion is more valid or your palate more sophisticated. As for skewing the overall scores, I believe the bros have refuted that idea repeatedly and shown that the hads average out similarly to the full reviews.

 

I would love for BA's when doing a review to include what they paid for a bottle of said reviewed beer. In my reviews, I add a line called price point, I'd like to see it in other reviews as a reference point for new beers that I might like to try as well as those worth avoiding based on what it costs.

 

I'd like that, especially if the "hads" were required to do it too.

 

I don't think it's waste of time to really review a beer. Look at it this way, for any given IPA you can use the the same couple of words hop forward, pine, caramel malt, etc . . . so lets say that you have 20 reviews that all use these exact same words. Yet the scores are different. Why? because it's not the same beer. If you actually review a beer , it's not to be snobbish or "too - detailed;" It's to give all those same words that we all use some depth and definition. Otherwise it might as well just be all "hads" or ticks.

 

A had is more accurate than a review? How? Would you please explain this to me?

Also, would you please explain how you came up with the generalization that hads are usually done by beer lovers and reviews by snobs?