RateBeer Forums

Places ratings format poll

#1

So - just to see how the population here thought - you’ve all seen the changes to Ratebeer Places scoring - their outwards visibility at least. Right now - the scores are shown on a 5.0 scale instead of the old 100 scale and you need to click a checkbox to see how people actually scored the place instead of them being shown outright.

What do you think about this and what would be best in your opinion?

  • I prefer the classic Ratebeer Places score (up to 100) and want/need to see the score breakdown by default
  • I prefer the classic Ratebeer Places score (up to 100) but don’t want/need to see the score breakdown by default
  • I prefer the new Places score (up to 5.0) but want/need to see the score breakdown by default
  • I prefer the new Places score (up to 5.0) and don’t want/need to see the score breakdown by default
  • I would prefer that both the new and the old Places score (up to 100 and up to 5.0) are shown and want/need t osee the score breakdown by default
  • I would prefer that both the new and the old Places score (up to 100 and up to 5.0) are shown but don’t want/need to see the score breakdown by default

0 voters

#2

They also need to make those grid borders invisible on the attribute scores, they just look awful… Same thing for the upcoming new Beer page.

We need an official list of what’s missing and what need to be reinstated ASAP.

#3

Can we have a mention somewhere on how scores are calculated for places.
By the way, the 5-star score isn’t new, it was there on the old page next to the Associated Brewer link. But there’s no place on the website that explain how the 2 place scores are calculated.

#4

We do use the 5.0 rating scale for beers as well, so I welcome the change to also use it for places. It will take some time to get used to for sure, but besides that I see no argument to keep the 100 scale.

1 Like
#5

It’s different scales with different values so having different score systems is quite okay.

1 Like
#6

I would rater like the idea of having the percentile score compared to other places (in a country or regions for example) plus the 5 star score a for average score like beers though… Having 2 times the same score but based on 100 or 5 seems stupid… More so that the 100 score doesn’t mean the same thing for beers.
@aww

#7

Obvious thing for me that needs fixing … it lists the number of beers the user has rated next to their name … this should display place ratings !!!

1 Like
#8

I agree that we should use the 100 scale only for percentiles to remove the confusion what the 100 scale means site-wide. It always confused me that places had a 5.0-scale rating which was actually a converted percentile, and not an actual average.
@aww

3 Likes
#9

We could have a percentile for score comparison between the kind of general places (for example brewpubs, breweries, stores) and a second percentile for score comparison between specific kind of places (grocery stores vs bottle shops) , like the percentile based vs all beers and vs styles) and the average 5 star score would be worldwide.

@joet
@aww

#10

We still need a ‘N/A’ option for ‘Food’, too. I feel bad giving a ‘0’ for a place, just because they don’t have a food menu.

Also, how is the 5-star rating calculated? For my recent ratings, when I put in a 3.6 (for example), it shows up on the place page as a 3.1. Why are those numbers not the same? Is it because of the 0 for food?

#11

Food and Value shouldn’t count. If they do, the score’s bugged. 0 should be the same as n/a (and not count).

#12

Oh for FUCK’S SAKE. Now I see my last two scores which I’ve scored as 80 and 78 respectively, and where my score shows, correctly, as “4.0” and “3.9” in the new system on the new place page in my profile down as 68.6 and 55.7.

@joet @aww @services - please fix this, it’s embarassing!

#13

We realize there’s been a mistake and are now working toward corrections.

1 Like
#14

Glad to hear! I :smiley:

I was shocked for a second - I’d look like a major douchewad to score those places this low with a positive review…

1 Like
#15

Thanks for creating a poll to capture all the preferences @Marko! :beers:

Just wanted to dump a few of our thoughts here as well.

So, there are a few scores floating around :joy:

For a beer/place profile
1a: RateBeer score for a place
1b: Style score (Currently beer only)
1c: 5-star rating average

User reviews for a place
2c: 5-star rating average
2d: Score breakdown (if available)

Depending on the audience, we believe both 1a and 1c have value. Some users may use one or the other, some may use both.

2a: RateBeer score for a user review against a beer/place is not currently being used in the new design. We also need to consider that during the review process, the user is also submitting a 5-star rating/total score (irrespective of whether it’s with/without a score breakdown).

We hoped we would have given users who value 2d: Score breakdown an easier way of toggling this to be shown at all times. We could work towards making the checkbox/toggle persist in the future; so that it will remember a users preference.

Intent was to make it more readable but we’ll note this down to explore some other options.

#16

Also, Can we have a mention somewhere on how scores are calculated for places?
@aww

1 Like
#18

Current state, apart from the obvious visible from the poll, the target population being boards-using Ratebeerians and the sample currently being 33 people:

55% of users prefer the original scoring, 27% like the new scoring, and 18% would be okay with both showing.

A whopping 88% of users want to see the scores breakdown by default, 12% don’t.

1 user out of 33 (carrying 3% of the vote) prefers the way the score is shown now.

Edit:
-obviously not a priority today, this was a bump to gather more voters mostly.

#19

So, after 40 polled active Ratebeerians.

60% (24) users prefer the classic score. 25% prefer the new score. 15% are okay with both being shown.
91% (36 out of 40) of polled active users want to see the score breakdown by default.

The current way that reviews are shown is preferred by one user out of 40. Which I would dare call a pretty big failure design-wise, even if it’s a temporary one.

3 Likes
#20

And we’ve already acknowledged that there is some fine-tuning we could look at here. If we are able to make the checkbox/toggle persist then you’ll always see the breakdown by default as you browse the website until you uncheck it again. :wink:

It’s not all gloomy! :sun_with_face:

For those that are also looking for consistency, we’re starting to close the gap on that too!
Both Beer ratings and place ratings now share the same breakdown functionality (previously you had to tap on each and every beer rating to reveal the breakdown).

We believe that our less active and casual Ratebeerians will also now be able to digest the review content much easier now as there is less noise on the page by default. We need to strive for balance here and not make the experience positive for one set of users whilst making it negative for another.

#21

Persisting checkboxes would sure be fine since - even more previously - you could also see everything by default, which is still, I would reckon, the preferred way for most people here. But yes, this is definitely an improvement from before.

Hey, I was I believe the first one advocating for balance waaaaaay back when since the first mockups of RB’s new look were released, so I’m all for it. :smiley: However, I actually know a ton of casual and less active Ratebeerians in person and never heard a single complaint about this type of content being hard to digest / the numbers being a cause of that. :shrug:

I just hope you’re not making the mistake of perceiving noise where there actually is none. :confused:

Edit:
-The current state appears to be down to 1/43 now.

1 Like