RateBeer Forums

Create a GUIDELINES section easily accessible somewhere

We need an official page, like the OUR SCORES page, accessible from everywhere on the website (for example, in the ABOUT section next to OUR SCORES)

We already have a document about this lost somewhere in the old Admin Forums but something should be available for everyone to see.

ADDING NEW PRODUCT GUIDELINES


The Products must exist commercially and be in production or was until recently. (for example, don’t enter a product you “remember” having tasted 5 years ago)

Recipes must be unique. No Variants: Nitro, Randall, Post-production Blends, Cask (see real ales below)

ALLOWED: Beers (Alcoholic or not), Alcoholic Ciders, Perries and Meads (≥1.5% abv), Sake.

NOT ALLOWED: Kombuchas, Hard Seltzers, Malt Beverages / Alcopops, Rice Wines, Fruit Wines, Home-brewed products.

BARREL-TREATMENT:
In most cases barrel treatments will result in a new entry. Occasionally, barrel treatments that are very similar may be confusing. The key here is a combination of 1) Brand Distinction and 2) Brewer Intention. If the treatment is a different bourbon barrel (thus, two bourbon entries), and one that results in a distinct product, it can be a new entry. However, it also requires the brewer’s intent to label and market it as a new product. This can be new labels or other distinctions such as wax differences or other markings. Without the clear intent to make a new product it will not be a new entry. Often brewers will utilize different barrels on a beer from year to year without marketing it as being different; we do not want these to be different entries. In the few cases such as Bourbon County Stout/ Rare, when there is a marketing and brand distinction plus uniqueness of product, it should be a new entry even if the barrel treatments are of the same type (two bourbon). Deciding what is a distinctly new product is difficult, so our default position here will be to follow the brewer’s intention, but with the ability to make our own decisions based on the information we have.

DRY-HOPPING VARIANTS
A dry hopped beer will be a new entry if:
it is bottled and given a new brand,
If the beer is not bottled but is given wide release, indicating brewer intent to market this beer distinctly from the base beer,
If production is a full-batch.

VINTAGE
Vintage entries of the same named product are allowed only if each Vintage differs commercially. A vintage is when there is a year listed on the bottle as part of the logo from the brewery, not a bottled date or an expiration date.

REAL ALE / CASK SEPARATE ENTRY
Generally, Cask version on a regular product should only be specified in the Disponibility infos.

These rules are largely confined to use in the United Kingdom where real ales are common but not solely. As with any entry, the two versions much be distinctly marketed and clearly differentiated.
In this situation, there are a few basic criteria to which we adhere:

  1. full batch production (i.e. not a few casks run off of a normal batch)
  2. the non-cask version needs to be pasteurized. This is a key distinction that causes confusion but it is one of the most important elements of ‘real ale’ or ‘live beer’.
  3. The two versions must receive distinct marketing…cask ale at pubs, pasteurized bottled beer at supermarkets.

COLLABORATIONS
A collaboration is when two or more breweries COME TOGETHER to brew a beer at one or many locations. The primary BREWER, where the beer stats will be displayed, is where the beer was brewed. If the beer was brewed at multiple breweries, still only one entry is entered, at the first known brewed location or prioritize a bottled version (wider release) before a tap-only version. (multiple separated entries for different primary brewers is allowed depending regional admins)
Include EACH producers names in front of the beer name.
A non-brewery cannot be listed as a collaborator (ex: Coffee shop, Hop Retailer, Friend, Home-brewer). In this case, a mention can be included in the beer description. It can however be part of the beer name if it was marketed and labeled as such.
Shared Recipe Projects / Worldwide Collaborations (example: the ALL TOGETHER project by Other Half) are not considered collaboration.

Note: When the BOTTLED term is used, it means Bottles and Cans.

@services

1 Like

This looks like a good start but there are a few issues.

  1. Rice Wines that are sakes are allowed tight?
  2. The Brits allow cask to constitute a different beer. We need to explain why.
  3. Generally, we should say canned, bottled or kegged, not just bottled.
  4. Should include homebrewers to impermissible collaborators.
  5. Should state conventions… i.e., collab brewers are separated by " / ".

Vintages - I thought these were only valid if a different recipe is used?

1 Like

This is not the policy any more. Collaborations brewed at both (or more) breweries get an entry for both.

Really? When was it discussed?
Are these exceptions?
Seems very Region-specific

If they are called Sake…I guess yes…really not an expert here :stuck_out_tongue:

I got this on an admin doc:

Cask- separate entry rules:
In this situation, there are a few basic criteria to which we adhere:

  1. full batch production (i.e. not a few casks run off of a normal batch)
  2. the non-cask version needs to be pasteurized. This is a key distinction that causes confusion but it is one of the most important elements of ‘real ale’ or ‘live beer’.
  3. The two versions must receive distinct marketing…cask ale at pubs, pasteurized bottled beer at supermarkets.
    As with any entry, the two versions much be distinctly marketed and clearly differentiated. These rules are largely confined to use in the United Kingdom where real ales are common but not solely.

Sure

Yes! forgot it

Yes.

https://www.ratebeer.com/beer/prairie-evil-twin-bible-belt/253908/
https://www.ratebeer.com/beer/evil-twin-prairie-bible-belt/586045/

@joet You should also have a look at this…

For example, should this be permitted?

Omnipollo / Siren / David Strachan Lorelei - Barrel Aged Extra Maple

Normally, we shouldn’t have David Strachan in the Beer name and only put it in the description.

I do not see the point in not putting “David Strachan” in the beername as a colab separated with /. He is not a comercial brewer and should not be registrated as a brewer. But should be in the name among other colab and stated in the description that he is a homebrewer only.

Well already listing Collab brewers in the beer name is already making the beer names painfully longs, adding homebrewer collaborators makes it even worse (and making it less obvious where the real beer name starts if the user doesn’t know about the other brewers or homebrewers).

And since we never had Guidelines about this, most of them don’t have homebrewer names in it.

ex: https://www.ratebeer.com/beer/goto/296996/, which would become 13 Virtues / Paul Johnson Paultoberfest

That is a rubish answer.
if you ad a homebrew member as an colab or an comersial brewer as a colab in the name do no differnce for length.
I de no point in skipping that in the beername and keep colab breweries in.
Then both shoud just be listed in the comment field instead.

I would say no. I usually don’t put homebrewers or even businesses which are not breweries into a collab beer name. I just don’t see a point to it for our site.

1 Like




Add To RateBeer

Add A Beer
Add A Brewer
Add A Place
Add An Event


Manage Your Account

Add Premium
Edit Profile
Messages
Sign out

RateBeer Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter, RateBeer Weekly, a must for understanding new people, places and beers in worldwide craft culture.


Stay Connected


2000- 2017 © RateBeer, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service