This isn’t something I have paid any attention to until today. Checked in somewhere. Saw I was the place’s mayor and wondered how. I started checking around and I’m apparently the mayor at CCB, J.Wakefield, Funky Buddha, Civil Society, etc.
I looked for, found, and read the description of what a mayor actually is. Cool. I’m glad my taking the time to punch in where I bought and/or drank a beer actually helps people.
Then I thought of a brewery in Vermont from which I’ve tried well over 100 different beers that I’ve either drank there or shared a growler or bottle that was actually purchased there. For each beer I sampled and rated from the brewery/place, I’ve done what I always do; I entered the information re: where the beer was purchased and its format (on tap, bottle or can). However, I’m not the place’s mayor. The person who is the place’s mayor has entered information regarding eighteen beers purchased from the brewery’s tasting room or accompanying brew house.
I’ve definitely topped that number, probably by 100 or more. It doesn’t bother me, but I like to understand things. I’m OCD that way.
The mayor is from NH, so I’m thinking this brewery is considered, by ratebeer, as a local one to him. Does this mean that the portion of the description of a mayor that reads: “… local watering holes, liquor stores, bottle shops and restaurants…” place’s a huge emphasis on ‘local?’
That’s all. A simple yes or no answer will suffice. Just curious.
It depends on how long ago you made the rating. Ratings of over a year old stop counting towards your Mayorship therefore someone who has rated and linked beers more recently will then become Mayor.
Mayorships currently are a joke. The intent of mayorships, which is a good one, is to provide beer availability information on local “watering holes” and beer shops. However, in many cases the mayor of a place has never rated the place or even checked in and may live many hundreds of miles away. Just look at the top 5 mayors. Numbers 3, 4 and 5 have more mayorships than place ratings. WTF! By assigning beers to places just to gain a mayorship means the information on beer availabilty in these places is totally unreliable. An easy fix: make a place rating or check in a precondition for a mayorship of the place.
Wrong I’d say. Leighton had the Mayorship on Total Wine in Long Beach (as I recall) and I questioned that a UK guy could have 25 or so ratings there. As I was told, he had been looking at their inventory and adding them. So Mayorships are fun, and maybe folks add beers from websites to chase them, but if a place has an up to date beer menu on the web that seems as valid as sitting down and rating a beer in the place. All that info is of limited time value anyway. I suspect as well that admins may do things that get “points” for Mayorships. Not a biggy.
I get your point about users inputting current beer data on places based on current website information, but I think what more typically happens is someone at a bottle share or beer fest rates a beer and is immediately confronted with a question about the source of the beer. Rather than just honestly skipping the answer I think some just hit one of the default options (like brewery, tasting room or brewpub) without knowing whether the beer is, or ever has been, available there. Anyway you seem to be validating my larger point that mayorships are a joke, because they provide no reliable information about beers available at a particular location.
Distinguish Mayorships and “beers here” tabs at places. Don’t necessarily agree that “beers here” aren’t reliable. The “beers here” at places show entry dates - recent ought to be reliable. Whether people who don’t know where a beer came from avoid the “skip” option? Hopefully they just click on through.
Mayorships really aren’t germane to this issue. Most people “aren’t in the running”. So they’re relatively harmless indicators of the people who do lots of attribution. I find it entertaining to suss out the “beer menus” of places. Sadly I can no longer add those links for general usage, but I seem to retain a memory over places important to my beer consumption.
So I think Mayorships not a prob. We could use a way to easily add place’s beer menus. Tho nothing is perfect. I just found a beer menu that was about 9 months out of date. Meh! But my “local place menus” are very useful to me in deciding where to knosh. Picked up a new to me Knee Deep today at a place in Davis, CA with an up-to-date beer menu.
Likely would have gone elsewhere, but for that menu. Or not. The turkey burgers there are pretty good.
I can vouch for one of them. He always lists it as available at the brewery, even if he’s never been there. I told him that’s cheating. Check-ins to a place should hold a lot more value
I thought Mayor was for the most check-ins…I check-in at every places I go… I guess that functionality is even more useless that I thought it was… I should get a life…
I meant place check ins, as counting towards the mayorship. Yes I know you can still check in to a place from anywhere, but I think that it holds value as it means you recently had first hand experience with the establishment, their inventory, their service, etc. There was a separate discussion about place ratings, and how they didn’t age well, a place that was great five - ten years ago, still holding down the top spot, even though it may have gone downhill or closed since then. And while we’re on the topic, I’d love to see place ratings added to your beer ratings for an overall score on the top raters tallies. I think they have just as much value to the community as the beer ratings. Soapbox…
I don’t think check-ins have anything to do with mayorships. It’s the beer attribution that does that. Hard to believe anyone would check-in when they weren’t there. But maybe there’s a point I can’t see. Rating a place adds to places rated, but check-ins just tell your friends where you’ve just been. Why try to fool them?
