Review Icon Feedback

Talk Discussion in 'BeerAdvocate Talk' started by duceswild, Mar 2, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. duceswild

    duceswild Pooh-Bah (2,108) Feb 8, 2010 Heard & McDonald Islands
    Pooh-Bah Trader

    http://www.beeradvocate.com/community/threads/rip-review-icon.157286/

    Since the thread where the updates were made were locked, I wanted to provide my feedback here.

    I can see the rational for removing the "Review" icon and realize it had an impact on the number of database queries, but I ask that you at least consider keeping it in certain locations rather then removing it fully across the website for the time being until a better solution can be identified. Specifically, those locations such as Top 250, Beers of Fame, etc. are where I feel that it is truly valuable and the lists in their current format (i.e. no review indication) while nice from a list perspective, do not provide much value to users who want to see how many they've had or what they are missing. While of course I can go and check each beer individually, that is a very manual task and given how much movement there is towards the bottom of the Top 250 not something I want to do on a daily basis.

    I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way, but I appreciated how I could always go to a brewery page and quickly scan their full list to see what I had versus what I had not had. I'd be willing to bet that many users considered these features a vital part of the site and not something that was just a small convenience.

    I am hoping that this is something the BA team collectively decides to revisit soon or explores ways to provide similar functionality as part of the upcoming site redesign.
     
    REVZEB, GABrew, acurtis and 12 others like this.
  2. Todd

    Todd Founder (13,518) Aug 23, 1996 Finland
    STAFF Mod Team Society Pooh-Bah

    As I said in my post ... "we understand that it was handy to some" and "we'll explore other ways of noting the beers that you've rated when viewing these lists."

    It wouldn't be efficient for us to partially leave this up either, so it had to be sacrificed to appease the bigger picture.

    Thanks,
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.