Posting length - a pet peeve or am I just showing my age and moaning about nothing?

A very good day to you all,

I just wanted to get a bit of a feel from other raters about what they think is a suitable length for a beer post. So often I see raters accumulating ratings for the sake of racking up numbers and it made me think about a few things:
Why do we post? Is it for our own edification, so that we may have some record of our experiences; is it to share with the world our opinions on products; is it to offer brewers constructive opinion based feedback; or is it the competitive desire to rate more beers than other people? These are all laudable aims in their own way and they are all reasons that I take part in this wonderful forum.
My gripe is that we see ratings that extend to one or two shortish sentences that no-one can gain any benefit from other than the statisticians.
I recognise that the statistics are an important part of the site, but surely it isn’t difficult for raters to take a little bit longer and dig a little deeper into their beer. Isn’t that what the site seeks to promote - the greater appreciation of beer?
What do you think*?

Jimthechap

*I realise also that by writing a novel in the forum that only people who write and read longer reviews are likely to read it and bother to respond. The system isn’t perfect, but ah well, that’s what it’s there for.

simple for Sponge when I rate a beer just the facts its like WHAM BLAM TRIPE SLAM THANK YOU SAID SPONGE IAM!

moaning.

everyone has there own style..

People can do what they like...I personally rate for myself, not for anyone else, so my ratings are for me to remember the beer

hi jim. your lengthy and detailed ratings are very welcome on the site and much appreciated, you should be proud of them. where you’re wrong is thinking that shorter ratings offer no value to the site. a short rating is much more informative to prospective buyers and travelers than no rating. do your thing and don’t be worried about what anyone else is doing.

Not everyone - and especially men, who comprise the majority of RB members - is descriptive. Besides, a lot of the limited-production/specialty beers with a sample size below 50 are sought out by people who generally know their beer and have a lot of reviews; and I have found these people to be a little more descriptive in their ratings. I don’t need a verbose description of a beer with 500+ ratings; the quantitative data speak for themselves, and I’ll trust my own judgment when I write a thorough review.

I think twitter has it right to limit you to 160 characters in order to encourage brevity in communication.

I use the ratings to assess a beer I might consider buying to see what others think of it. After I rate it myself I only look at my own rating of the beer as a record of what I think of it. So, before I drink a beer, the ratings are used for research. After I drink a beer, my rating is used as an archive.

Bottom line: I write ratings for myself.

rating beers is for fun unless you make it seem like a job (as some do here). cheers.

I admire those raters who create really well thought out ratings, but I rate for my own record keeping. I doubt anyone would find my ratings useful (except me) but I do appreciate the role of ratings in stats, thus I do it here instead of just a notebook/excel/etc.