New-Vintage Reviews

Adding a new review in addition to the old one seems like unnecessary duplication to me. I don't have any difficulty searching reviews under the present system.

For our own reviews the simple approach is make a list of them by date which makes them easy to find no matter how far back in the archive they reside.

 

I don't think enough people review once, let alone twice to justify being able to add a second or more review.

Just to clarify though, as I'm reading it both ways, are you suggesting the new review be placed at the top with the old review directly underneath it and/or attached, or generate a completely separate rating and review box?

 

I was thinking "ability to sort by fields besides chronological" as soon as I read your first post.

 

I don't mind my updated review not bubbling back to the top for the reading enjoyment of others. Others not seeing my updates is inconsequential to me since my selfish purpose is for me to refer back to when I spot the beer years later. I recently changed a review drastically. When I first had it two years ago on tap I thought it was outstanding. Since then I've had it bottled on two occasions and it ...what's the technical term....sucked. So I updated the review to reflect my most recent experience. I suppose I could have added to the review instead of editing it, but I wouldn't have entered a new one.

 

I mostly write reviews of Places instead of Beers, and I occasionally update an old review with a new info paragraph or two and a dotted line like you display above. I start the new info paragraph with the new date so the reader knows it is different info. I typically also make a note of what the old rating score was so a reader can see the effect of my new info and the related changes to the numbers. This works okay for a small brewery with a relatively small number of reviews, but if the brewery had a large number of reviews it would be nice to have the latest 'edit' float to the top.

It's cumbersome, but a workaround to float the new info to the top would be to delete the old review and create a new one. Assuming the deletion of the old review is instant (I've never tried it to know) you could cut-and-paste the old review text into the new one with the original review date added at the beginning, then use the dotted line separator above it, and then add the new info with the preface: "Update".

 

I hear what OP is saying, and I do think that would be a nice feature. I don't tend to notice this much as I review beers for myself - except when I've just rated/ticked a beer (like a pour at a festival, or in some situation where I don't think I was able to do a full review), and then later on - sometimes years later - end up with a bottle and do a full review. When I enter in the text of the review, it looks like I reviewed it from years ago, even if that wasn't the case.

I guess I could delete the "rating" and enter in review that would have the proper date on it, but I've never taken that extra step...

 

If the beer is a different vintage with different abv, different hops, different IBU or a different mix of ingredients brewers do alter their recipes from time to time, then it makes more sense to treat it as a new beer. If the reviewer's knowledge and appreciation has developed, then it might make sense to post the most recent revision based on when it was done. On the other hand, there are probably somewhere in excess of 250,000 reviews on this site. How many people go through and read them all?