New Rating System Feedback

At this point we're just quibbling. Not sure how the timeline is relevant. I get that the original system was closer to this than the previous iteration but I'm arguing for a more inclusive system, you're arguing for a more rigid system. That's it, timelines be damned.

 

Interesting. If the amount of "thought behind the numbers" doesn't significantly affect the numbers, then I'm not seeing the benefit of the change. Seems like all downside to me. Just my $0.02.

 

It's not that it's too much work to rate all five attributes or to have to write a review every once in a while. It's the fact that now all attributes need to mean the same thing to all raters, no unique interpretations of style allowed...It's important for any beer to taste and smell great. But if it goes down like a raw egg then who cares what the BJCP guidelines say? Apparently I'm wrong. An arbitrary system based on another arbitrary system is still arbitrary.

The bottom line for me is that everyone, regardless of style or preference is forced to treat all attributes with the same weight and that doesn't make sense.

 

For me, it is. That's all this is about for me (and for others who've already chimed in), but yeah, this change is going to be unpopular with lots of users for lots of different reasons. I'm willing to give it a shot, and maybe I'll even get used to it but even that won't change the fact that it'll still take 5x longer to rate beers (and I rate a lot of beers).

 

Wait. So appeasing industry friends is more important to you than alienating a chunk of users who have invested in your site? Man, at this point you might as well just come out and say "Too bad guys, have fun on Untapped". There has to be a simpler/better way to eliminate outlier scores and troll reviews than this. Good thing BA is free to use or I'd be fuming right now.

 

You left out feedback from users who don't/didn't like the quick and easy rating stuff that's been tried for a couple of years and now dropped in favor of a compromise that may work better for more people.

 

Null and void considering there are just as many users who did like it.

 

Show me the data. Both the numbers of users who like, dislike, and don't care, along with the relative contributions to what makes the site a valuable resource for the community.

 

I am happy and surprised to see this implemented. I suggested something very similar to this about 6 months ago and it was (politely) declined.

 

Could ask you the same thing.

But anyway, Todd said "Yes, 40% is historical. So if we look at say 2012 to now, we had recently applied millions of Hads (now Ratings) to the scores which brought it down to roughly 16%. And if we look at just 2014, it's roughly 20%."

So the last couple of years, it's only 20% of the people filling in reviews. So I take it as the other 80% simply filled in a score for the beer. I highly doubt the majority of beers being reviewed by numbers would support the requirement of having to add more information to a review.

The numbers show a sign that people would rather not take the time to write a review therefore would not take the time to fill in attributes. It's the 20% of people that do take the time to fill out a review that would't mind this change.

I don't see why people are in support of this anyway. I understand the viewpoint of BA wanting the change. But from users?? Todd already explained that the averages and scores were not significantly impacted by the previous system, so why do you all care so much on how the rest of us like to rate a beer? It doesn't impact you at all.

 

You could ask but I wasn't the one making claims about numbers so I'll let you do your own homework.

Honestly I don't care at all how you personally rate a beer. I just like to see people get their facts straight. And if my pointing out to someone that they omitted some from their claim or argument bothers you, there is an ignore button you are free to use any time.

It most certainly did impact me as a user of the information on this site when the shift to allowing a single rating only took place, but I'm not going to repeat for the third or fourth time how and why I favor the changes most recently made. Continue your argument with the owners of the site.

Enjoy your day!

 

But they probably like it for the wrong reasons - it's quick and easy to do if you are a ticker, and possibly inaccurate and meaningless to anyone else without justification of the score. BA is a share site, so the 'share' part should be maximized.

 

Well I hope it works out for everyone. Thanks for letting everyone discuss this. Even if we don't get our way, at least we get a voice in it.

Can we at least get a change as far as submitting the ratings? It was nice in the old version that we didn't need to click the submit button. It took me a while to figure out why my ratings we're not saving on the attributes. Didn't realize we need to click submit for it to save.

It would be nice if it auto-submitted once every attribute field is filled in. Could also help on the learning curve for new users.

 

What Todd said is the reason people care. Not all ratings were equal in value to the site and level of usefulness to other users.