No @Viper666.Qc it can’t be, I sent bottles of the Gibraltar beer to Birmingham and London for tastings and I rated it with @minutemat before @RichTheVillan etc, had received it. @Scopey and @Leighton had it at the same London tasting and are also miles apart.
The system is not ‘the highest placed rater’ in the overall tables either, it appears to be a random choice or something really complicated that some computer geek has installed for some reason.
It should be ordered by something … ie first to get there as mentioned above or the standard with top raters of a brewery … rating seniority ie the person with the most overall ratings goes top.
I think the system should be ‘based on total ratings’, but with the lowest total person being given preference, therefore giving new guys (and lasses), or less frequent raters a chance to see their names on lists. Otherwise some people will never get a mention.
Discussions are always good but there are way more urgent things to attack here on Ratebeer. This is some geeky stat thing a handful cares about. I do love lists aswell but this is cherrypicking-like. No one has any value of this and this mostly concerns small countries with a handful of rates. Especially the Gibraltar case is ridicously as there is only 1 beer which has been rated by more than 2 persons. One could add something like “…and 123 more people with X rates” though.
I agree there are things that need attention, but with AB-Inbev now in complete ownership of RB we should at least now have an AB-INBEV contact to relay these concerns to.
Or will they remain completely faceless and uncontactable?
Yes it’s random all right, not too sure about seeing your own name on the list if qualified though, I wasn’t on Gibraltar when I looked the other day, yet appeared two days later!
Sorry @fiulijn and @Oakes, only had three bottles and they ended up in London with @chriso , Birmingham with @RichTheVillan and the monthly share in Shewsbury with @minutemat . I think about 15 people rated those 3 bottles!