Posting reviews without text to back it up

Discussion in 'BeerAdvocate Talk' started by hottenot, Mar 29, 2019.

  1. SoCalBeerIdiot

    SoCalBeerIdiot Champion (894) Mar 10, 2013 California
    Society

    Not sure if this is pointed at me, but I never said I was against reviews, lol. That's silly. Why would I be against them just because I don't take the time to write them? I just think people who write full reviews *and* shit on quick scores take themselves way too seriously. That's all.
     
    Junior and Steve_Studnuts like this.
  2. cavedave

    cavedave Poo-Bah (2,572) Mar 12, 2009 New York
    Trader

    I am asking about these number ratings, sorry if that wasn't clear. I am asking how am I supposed to use these number ratings without a review? Or are we not supposed to use them for anything?
     
  3. beer_beer

    beer_beer Aspirant (228) Feb 13, 2018 Finland
    Society

    The numbers tell a bit more than the average, it's the look, aroma, taste, mouthfeel and overall. I'm trying to differentiate between them, makes you think and reflect. It can be a step towards a full-blown review, and what could be better? I'm planning to fill in reviews as time and beer goes by. So what you see today is not totally what I am. I'm in the "not yet" category.
     
    #83 beer_beer, Apr 7, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2019
    rudzud likes this.
  4. SoCalBeerIdiot

    SoCalBeerIdiot Champion (894) Mar 10, 2013 California
    Society

    Just ignore them, ffs!!!
     
  5. beertunes

    beertunes Poo-Bah (6,029) Sep 24, 2007 Montserrat
    Trader

    Because, without input on a human level (words), what gives us non-mathies a thing we can relate to? How is one supposed to use social media, if not to socialize?
     
    rudzud, Junior, Squire and 1 other person like this.
  6. beertunes

    beertunes Poo-Bah (6,029) Sep 24, 2007 Montserrat
    Trader

    Huh. Someone posts online, likely looking for a response (in certain circumstances), gets a response that's not to their liking, and everyone should ignore it?

    Fuck that.

    We open our mouths, we're gonna get replies. All of us.
     
    rudzud and cavedave like this.
  7. SoCalBeerIdiot

    SoCalBeerIdiot Champion (894) Mar 10, 2013 California
    Society

    People use this site in different ways. Just accept it.
     
  8. SoCalBeerIdiot

    SoCalBeerIdiot Champion (894) Mar 10, 2013 California
    Society

    I was talking about the quick scores. If you can't glean anything from them, if they bother you, if you find them less than helpful--just ignore them!!! :rolling_eyes:
     
    johnInLA likes this.
  9. beertunes

    beertunes Poo-Bah (6,029) Sep 24, 2007 Montserrat
    Trader

    Funny thing is, I, personally, do not give even the tiniest shit about scores, rankings, wutevz. But, a lot of folks do use the scores here as a guide to their purchasing decisions.

    It's so awesome how dismissive you are of our compadres on this site. Cool, you do you, but do not think you're above those who put weight into the scores you give.

    I suspect that there are at least 2 shallower sites that may fit your needs better.
     
    rudzud and cavedave like this.
  10. SoCalBeerIdiot

    SoCalBeerIdiot Champion (894) Mar 10, 2013 California
    Society

    :rolling_eyes:
     
  11. cavedave

    cavedave Poo-Bah (2,572) Mar 12, 2009 New York
    Trader

    I have quoted your response. I have written out my response, which completely refutes everything you said, but instead I am leaving it as a number rating, which is just as valid.

    My response, 4/7/19-

    Effectiveness 5.0
    Logic 5.0
    Facts 5.0
    Topicality 5.0
    Overall 5.0
     
    rudzud, Scrapss, Junior and 5 others like this.
  12. GratefulBeerGuy

    GratefulBeerGuy Poo-Bah (2,840) May 20, 2006 New Hampshire
    Society Trader

    I Don't think it should be mandatory to review, but some short tasting notes can sort of weed out the possibility of fake, drunken or otherwise crazy low or high scores from trolls.
     
    nc41 likes this.
  13. superspak

    superspak Poo-Bah (31,121) May 5, 2010 Michigan
    Moderator Society Trader

    There is no reason why people should skip reviewing. I spend 150 characters just describing appearance. And when out bar hopping and not officially reviewing, I still can spend 2 minutes writing out a half-assed review on untappd so I remember what it tasted like. You guys are just lazy.
     
    Scrapss, Junior, VoodooBear and 3 others like this.
  14. Bitterbill

    Bitterbill Poo-Bah (6,622) Sep 14, 2002 Wyoming
    Society Trader

    It's something we have to live with, whether you're for it or against it. Shrugs
     
    PapaGoose03 likes this.
  15. cavedave

    cavedave Poo-Bah (2,572) Mar 12, 2009 New York
    Trader

    You seem unwilling to take a stand on whether these number ratings you suggest I ignore have a purpose. Since they either do or don't have a purpose for others, and that purpose, if there is one, is not affected by whether or not I look at them, I ask again. Do these number ratings without a review have a use for other people, and if so what use to other people do they have?
     
    GOBLIN and DavetotheB like this.
  16. SoCalBeerIdiot

    SoCalBeerIdiot Champion (894) Mar 10, 2013 California
    Society

    Ask them. I already told you what I use them for.
     
  17. ZAP

    ZAP Poo-Bah (3,796) Dec 1, 2001 Minnesota

    I definitely prefer and put much more weight into a well thought our review but you have to realize there are writers and people who don't like to write...neither is better. I love the written reviews and usually do my best to write review. Even in worst case scenario I will not add a review/rating without a few comments at least...(Not that hard to toss in a sentence or two). I think that is not too much to ask. I do understand how some who lack writing skill (me included) or excitement to write would only be willing to add a sentence or two.
     
    Junior and Squire like this.
  18. beer_beer

    beer_beer Aspirant (228) Feb 13, 2018 Finland
    Society

    It's shades of grey man, shades of grey.
     
  19. Chuckdiesel24

    Chuckdiesel24 Meyvn (1,072) Jul 6, 2016 Illinois
    Trader

    Individual non-review ratings are part of build of the average rating, I think people have said on this thread they use the average rating at times when making purchase decisions.

    They are also the input to generate the top 100/250 list on the site. People use those lists.

    People use them, those would be the main 2 reasons I can think of.
     
    Junior and PapaGoose03 like this.
  20. MNAle

    MNAle Meyvn (1,472) Sep 6, 2011 Minnesota
    Society

    IOW, because they have no choice :stuck_out_tongue:

    (well, almost no choice; that is the reason I largely ignore the aggregate ratings and the Hyped 250 list.

    I would like it very much of the site computed a second aggregate rating that was reviews only. If for no other reason than academic... is there an actual difference?

    Either way, though, as I stated previously, I rely more on individual reviews from members who's judgment I respect than the overall rating.
     
    VoxRationis, beertunes and cavedave like this.
  21. Stevedore

    Stevedore Poo-Bah (5,144) Nov 16, 2012 Wisconsin
    Trader

    I've been pretty diligent about posting reviews over the years. However, as of late, I have started to feel less and less compelled to do so. It helped a ton early on to help develop an understanding of my palate and what it prefers, and how to judge beers based on a standard set of metrics.

    Now, I am feeling that people aren't getting as much out of my reviews as they used to, and overall engagement in that part of the site has been steadily declining (just my perception). And when I want to pick up/trade for a beer, it's much more often than not that I look it up on here and I'm able to count the number of ratings (not reviews, but ratings) on one hand- with zero reviews. It feels like an uphill battle in contributing reviews, at least mentally. Having ratings is better than nothing, though, don't get me wrong. But even locally, people don't even update beers for local breweries/blenderies.

    It's getting harder to contribute knowing that I'm getting less and less out of it (from other members) as the years go along. Even Untappd, with its massively flawed rating system and methodologies, has far more data points that I can use to get an idea of what a beer is like, and I can see which of my friends/trading partners have had it so I can text them and start that discussion about whether it's worth it or not.

    Shrug. It seems to be the reality nowadays in our app-based digital life. Maybe I'll keep going until I hit 4000 reviews and call it a day after that. Hobbies evolve, this is no different.
     
    rudzud and SoCalBeerIdiot like this.
  22. drtth

    drtth Poo-Bah (3,871) Nov 25, 2007 Pennsylvania

    May I suggest, based on my own reading of some of your reviews, that your perception is wrong?

    As for the problem of beers with few ratings or zero ratings the larger the number of reviews you have completed the harder it will/should be to find beers that haven't already been reviewed and the easier it will be to find lack of updating. This is the type of place where your level of expertise is actually most needed. I'd rather find one quality review on a new beer by someone who has experience with reviewing that a dozen ratings without any comments.
     
  23. cavedave

    cavedave Poo-Bah (2,572) Mar 12, 2009 New York
    Trader

    Well, I can't figure out how to tell what a beer is like from numbers alone. Hopefully you'll be able to figure out what my response is from this
    https://www.beeradvocate.com/commun...-number-was-chosen.610046/page-3#post-6450652
     
  24. officerbill

    officerbill Aspirant (266) Feb 9, 2019 New York
    Society Trader

    Numbers and reviews serve different, but related, purposes for me and I hope both reviewers and raters will continue what they do.

    I use a beer's score (primarily derived from ratings) to determine whether or not a new beer is even worth trying. When the score is high enough I read the reviews to see what to expect.

    A bunch of 4's tells me the beer is probably worth the price, while scattered reviews tell me if I'm likely to enjoy it.
     
    Junior, VoxRationis and cjgiant like this.
  25. Chuckdiesel24

    Chuckdiesel24 Meyvn (1,072) Jul 6, 2016 Illinois
    Trader

    I understand you don't feel there's a helpful use for you. But you asked if people on this site find a use for them. My answer is yes. It's not a fair response to say "but I don't". You're switching from 3rd person to 1st, and it completely changes the context. Just because something isn't useful or used by you personally, or me, or person XYZ - doesn't mean it isn't useful to others.
     
    Junior likes this.
  26. cavedave

    cavedave Poo-Bah (2,572) Mar 12, 2009 New York
    Trader

    I guess that a rating without a review is a tiny bit better than just walking in to a store and picking out a pretty label.

    I think my problem with ratings without reviews is I am looking for a way to find out specific characteristics of a beer, and ratings without reviews only tells me how much somebody I never met thinks a beer stacked up against his/her experience that I have no idea what that experience is, or what characteristics the person enjoys or dislikes. I guess this is because I am not wealthy, otherwise if I had a ton of money I wouldn't care. Heck, I'd probably stop doing any research, and just start buying at one end of the store and go to the other if I had bucks ahoy. Any losers get drain poured, and on to the next. I need to remind myself more often I am at the low end of the wealth spectrum of folks on this site, and most others here couldn't care less about finding out a beer's characteristics before buying, and no harm done to pick a loser. Oh well. Cheers!
     
  27. SoCalBeerIdiot

    SoCalBeerIdiot Champion (894) Mar 10, 2013 California
    Society

    Wow there's a lot to unpack here.

    I can read a label to get the brewery's description of their own beer so that covers the "characteristics" of the beer for me, just fine. Some of the shorter reviews used to be helpful, but when I start seeing some dude's page-long review referring to an entire laundry list of flavors that in no way sound like they'd go well together, my eyes start to glaze over. Clearly, your mileage varies. I get it.

    Your whole premise that numbers don't mean anything without context is silly, though. I love BA for the forums (mostly) but when I want to find out a beer's score, I go to Untappd. It's so fast and easy and the beer is almost always there. If I want to find out what my friends thought of it, that's a click away. I can see any tasting notes they chose to share. Easy. But honestly, I'm usually just looking at the beer's description and the average score. 4.0 or higher and I'm buying. Less than 4.0, I rarely buy. I know this sounds crazy to you, but it rarely let's me down. I end up drinking a lot of great beer and I miss out on most of the duds. It works for me, but then again, I'm just an idiot.

    The part about "ratings without reviews tells me how much somebody I never met thinks a beer stacked up against his/her experience that I have no idea what that experience is, or what characteristics the person enjoys or dislikes" gave me a chuckle. To me, reading a review from somebody I never met that lists off every flavor known to man isn't any more helpful to me. I'm no super taster and I'm not going to taste those flavors anyway and sometimes I wonder if that dude really did to begin with.
     
  28. MNAle

    MNAle Meyvn (1,472) Sep 6, 2011 Minnesota
    Society

    That's a false dilemma fallacy.
     
    rudzud, Junior and stevepat like this.
  29. gatornation

    gatornation Poo-Bah (5,074) Apr 18, 2007 Minnesota
    Trader

    Only if it was intentional.
     
    rudzud likes this.
  30. cavedave

    cavedave Poo-Bah (2,572) Mar 12, 2009 New York
    Trader

    I assume every rating without a review is written by some idiot who lists every flavor known to man. Or someone who started drinking beer yesterday. Or someone who thinks IPA sucks because it's bitter and he/she hates bitter beers. There is no way to tell how much of a jack off the guy was who left that number. The difference is that with reviews you read it and you know the guy is an idiot, and disregard that idiot, or is someone who has experience, is similar to me, and the description he gives on other beers I have tried syncs up with my experience. So the choice is not knowing if the asshole who left that number started drinking beer yesterday, or finding a reviewer who gives good descriptions that I can use to buy beer I am likely to enjoy, because going in I have an actual idea what the beer is like. Sorry if this is too hard a concept for you to understand, but there it is. Cheers!
     
    rudzud, Junior, superspak and 2 others like this.
  31. SoCalBeerIdiot

    SoCalBeerIdiot Champion (894) Mar 10, 2013 California
    Society

    To each his own. Cheers!
     
    cavedave likes this.
  32. Roguer

    Roguer Poo-Bah (4,175) Mar 25, 2013 Georgia
    Moderator Society Trader

    But correspondingly, isn't posting a full review equally unfair (and therefore equally fair)?

    In other words: as they impact the score equally, a rating can impact a beer unfairly without written justification. But written justification is just that: written. Does tossing on 150 characters (which you could reach while just talking about the head production and lacing, if you so chose) now imply that the numerical impact on the beer is somehow fair?

    Perhaps there is a trend in that direction, but certainly not causation. I have read many terrible, poor, unfounded "reviews" that "unfairly" impact the scoring of the beer. It turns out that adding 150 words to a rating doesn't automatically make it more fair or accurate.
     
    rudzud and JayORear like this.
  33. MNAle

    MNAle Meyvn (1,472) Sep 6, 2011 Minnesota
    Society

    In fact, that was my point. If you think conditions are such that a review is unfair, then so is a rating.
     
  34. Roguer

    Roguer Poo-Bah (4,175) Mar 25, 2013 Georgia
    Moderator Society Trader

    I don't disagree that was your point - merely suggesting that, if the point of the OP was that it is unfair that someone might post a rating without a written review because of the inherent unfairness of a lack of words ... well, that simply doesn't past muster, does it? Somewhat circular? X is unfair because X is unfair?

    That's what I was looping back to (perhaps ineffectually): the OP. People might choose not to post a wordy review for any number of reasons, but recording 150 or more characters is not, in and of itself, an act of "fairness" for the review. You are right to point out that eliminating the written portion of a review doesn't impart fairness to the process, but neither does writing a review impart any more fairness to that process.

    On the other hand, quickly swiping in a rating without dedicating the time for a wordy review - because you are with friends, for example, and do not want to be antisocial (seeing as most of the responses in this thread have focused on the setting as being the reason for not entering a full review) - hardly seems as though one is automatically or inherently being unfair to the beer. There is no correlation (of which I am aware) between inaccurate reviews/ratings and choosing to type in words.

    If your point, specifically, only pertains to people who eschew a written review because they feel they are being unfair to the beer review process - well, that is simply a difference of opinion. I can 100% see why that might be the case for an individual, while seeing that someone else (like yourself) might disagree.

    I fall into the former category: some settings don't lend themselves toward full reviews, but I can still reflect on the properties of a beer that made me like or dislike it for future reference. Should the opportunity arise to fully review the beer, I will gladly take it - and nor do I rate every beer I've ever tried. There lies some gray area between "perfectly clean palate enjoying the first beer of the week" and "wasted at a beer festival," a place where you are not sitting in a cedar-lined study in a leather chair, dedicating your focus to a single brew, trying to sniff out every nuance, yet neither are you impaired or distracted beyond the ability to rate your impressions of a beer's appearance, aroma, flavor, and feel.
     
    JayORear likes this.
  35. MNAle

    MNAle Meyvn (1,472) Sep 6, 2011 Minnesota
    Society

    I wasn't suggesting a review was more fair. I was suggesting that if the conditions are such that a review is unfair, then so is a rating, so, in fact, nothing at all should be posted.
     
    VoodooBear and Roguer like this.
  36. Roguer

    Roguer Poo-Bah (4,175) Mar 25, 2013 Georgia
    Moderator Society Trader

    Fair enough - but again, the position of the OP is precisely otherwise, that a review is somehow more fair.

    And again, others (myself included) might disagree regarding conditions. No one should be taking a 3 ounce sample 4 hours into a heavy drinking event and entering a rating or a review. But isn't there some gray area? A spot where perhaps a drinker is not catching (nor even trying to catch) every nuance, but can still get an impression of the beer's positive and negative aspects? Where a worded review might not meet that reviewer's individual standard for detail, but the rating is still reflective of the beer's quality?

    You may not think so, and that's fine for your approach - you're not alone. Others simply disagree. Count me in that camp. I find there is a difference between a rating or review being a fair assessment of a beer, and meeting my standard for depth, clarity, and detail for a review. Being unable to dive in detail to a beer's every single detail does not inherently mean that the numerical assessment of its qualities is in doubt. It's on a spectrum; like virtually everything else in life, it's not digital or black-and-white.

    But you may still disagree, and I respect that. I don't think you're axiomatically wrong, but I am willing to see life as a spectrum, vice digital. Somewhere along that spectrum is a place where a review or rating is unfair to the beer. Somewhere farther to the right along that same spectrum is a place where I can't give the attention to a beer that I would prefer for composing a review, but where I can still record my assessment - i.e., rate the beer.
     
    JayORear, stevepat and beer_beer like this.
  37. stevepat

    stevepat Defender (647) Mar 12, 2013 California
    Trader

    The averaged score on a beer rated by many people has a fairly obvious use. I would think that we could all agree that a beer that has a score above 4 after hundreds of ratings will be of reliably higher quality than a beer closer to 3. If a beer hasn't been rated many times or is of an extremely diverse style that I may be more picky about (for me this would be things like wild/sour and saison) then a rating only won't be nearly as useful as a review(s).
    But pretending that the amalgamated number score has no use seems just contrarian
     
    Chuckdiesel24 and Ronmarley1 like this.
  38. dbrauneis

    dbrauneis Poo-Bah (8,175) Dec 8, 2007 North Carolina
    Moderator Society Trader

    I'm not sure I completely agree - I have been in situations where I can easily spend a lot of time thinking about the qualities of the beer and enjoying it but do not have the opportunity to type up those thoughts (I was at my spouse's work dinner with lots of kind of boring speeches recently, I had plenty of time to enjoy the beer and really think about it but it would have been a social no-no to pull out my notebook and starting writing down all those thoughts).
     
  39. officerbill

    officerbill Aspirant (266) Feb 9, 2019 New York
    Society Trader

    If be willing to bet that the majority of ratings and reviews are done on a phone or other mobile device; the text blocks on BA's website aren't exactly mobile friendly to start with (maybe that'll change with the app). It's difficult to write a review, in a dimly lit bar, on your phone screen, stone cold sober; let alone trying to do so after you've finished one or two beers. If people are required to submit written reviews you will end up with most written by folks sitting home alone :cry:.

    Do you really want to force a written review from someone who just finished their third 120 Minute IPA?
     
  40. MNAle

    MNAle Meyvn (1,472) Sep 6, 2011 Minnesota
    Society

    I agree, but that is a different issue, call it "social acceptability" to "fuss over" a beer and write a review. That's different from circumstances preventing giving the beer a fair tasting due to food, atmosphere, attention elsewhere, etc.