|
|
|
|
Interesting, thanks. I suppose the disconnect centers around trying to think of Ratebeer as a collective when it’s just a collection of individuals. We in-fight enough about ratings to prove there isn’t an exact consensus on how things should be done. The ’chaff and grain’ comments were spot on. Luke sounds like a brewer who’s honestly willing to have a discussion on the topic of ratings -- cheers to that. |
yeah everyone rates differently, appearance especially |
|
|
What a lot of these armchair quarterbacks can’t seem to grasp is the notion of a mean score. They assume that if their beer doesn’t receive a perfect score that this means the reviewer finds it flawed. A 3/5 is pretty much my default score for any beer I think is good but not great for me in the appearance category.
About a year ago, I was contacted by a brewer who shall remain nameless asking me why I thought his flagship beer was so bad going on and on for about 4 paragraphs about how anyone who rates beer is about as useful to the beer world as an ant at a picnic, blah blah blah. The score: 4.0. He interpreted that as 80% and to him 80% meant bad score. What the moron couldn’t seem to grasp was the fact that a mean of 4 usually puts a beer in the 99th percentile. Maybe if the rating was 4 stars instead he would have felt differently. 
To make a long story short, I tried to explain this to the irate and irrational guy but grew tired of the insults and stopped responding to him. If I were 100% sure he was a brewer and not some insane random fanatic trolling the site, I would have outed them, but decided to give the brewery the benefit of the doubt. |
The way a brewer looks at a product and the way a consumer looks at it are two entirely different matters. I think a lot of the consternation comes from the fact you get a bit of everything here. Homebrewers and pro brewers tend to evaluate based more on style parameters (such as they exist for a given beer) and brewing faults.
Most folks who don’t brew are best served not to dip into these things. The disconnect comes when a brewer sees a consumer review that does not approach the issue in the same way they do. But consumers don’t - they don’t have much QC mindset besides the most glaring faults. Moreover, they are very hedonistic, which is why a run-of-the-mill imperial stout will almost always outscore an exceptional pale lager. The brewer and the consumer see the product in entirely different ways.
Now here on Ratebeer, we have the savvy consumer, who knows a little more about the brewing and can get a little bit more nitpicky about technical stuff, but ultimately we are guided by the hedonistic approach because the majority are not brewers. There is a bit of a mixed message and the Ratebeer collective does come off as taking an approach that is neither pure brewer nor pure consumer. It can be a little strange for people used to an either/or type of viewpoint.
|
Originally posted by Oakes
The way a brewer looks at a product and the way a consumer looks at it are two entirely different matters. I think a lot of the consternation comes from the fact you get a bit of everything here. Homebrewers and pro brewers tend to evaluate based more on style parameters (such as they exist for a given beer) and brewing faults.
Most folks who don’t brew are best served not to dip into these things. The disconnect comes when a brewer sees a consumer review that does not approach the issue in the same way they do. But consumers don’t - they don’t have much QC mindset besides the most glaring faults. Moreover, they are very hedonistic, which is why a run-of-the-mill imperial stout will almost always outscore an exceptional pale lager. The brewer and the consumer see the product in entirely different ways.
Now here on Ratebeer, we have the savvy consumer, who knows a little more about the brewing and can get a little bit more nitpicky about technical stuff, but ultimately we are guided by the hedonistic approach because the majority are not brewers. There is a bit of a mixed message and the Ratebeer collective does come off as taking an approach that is neither pure brewer nor pure consumer. It can be a little strange for people used to an either/or type of viewpoint.
Hmmm, this is a very nice way of summarizing some things I’ve been thinking about recently as regards style parameters. Thanks Josh. |
Agreed. That summary would be a great About Us or FAQ addition. |
|
|
Originally posted by Oakes
This is exactly why I like evaluating beers style-to-style. It compares apples to apples, allowing a fabulously crafted pale lager to receive high scores, since it’s not being compared to a Belgian Quad. Just my .02. |
Originally posted by TheBeerCellar
Originally posted by Oakes
This is exactly why I like evaluating beers style-to-style. It compares apples to apples, allowing a fabulously crafted pale lager to receive high scores, since it’s not being compared to a Belgian Quad. Just my .02.
it’s not really apples-to-apples though, because some styles are harder to perfect than others. |
They have a point about words not matching the numbers. I notice this myself and I would never consciously say a beer looks good and not give it a good appearance rating.
But to say ratebeer is not valid is kind of like saying speech or opinion is not valid. I don’t think he went that far. If he was trying to make a point, he might have pointed out more beers rather than an obscure lager. |
