Places ratings format poll

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

1 Like

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

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

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

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

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?

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

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!

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

1 Like

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

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.

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

1 Like

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.

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

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.

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

I don’t want to get too deep in it, but I do invite everyone to try the following.
Let’s use this page as an example.

I want you to read through 4-5 reviews as you normally do (2 times).

  1. Turn off the score breakdown with your first go.

  2. And then turn them back on with your second go.

Each time you do it, I want you to take notice of:

  • What information you are reading and in what order.

  • Where your eyes are moving as you move down the page.

  • What you were able to get out of it at the end (how much do you remember, has it informed or helped you make a decision).

I’m going to say that everyone is likely to have a different experience.
Here is mine.

  1. I was reading the descriptions only (ignoring all other content, even the 5* ratings). I was able to do this quite quickly and at the end of it I felt pretty positive about the reviews (it’s a place that I would put on my shortlist).

  2. I’m still trying to do the same as my first run but it’s now much more difficult as there is more information within each review. My eyes are beginning to wander a little more which means it breaks up my reading rhythm/pace. It’s. Like. Trying to read. A. Sentence like. This. Instead of reading a sentence like this. In the end I could really only remember the last 2 reviews I read.

Interesting effect, not noting it myself in that manner - but I believe it’s like that for you and might be for some others! And that’s why we need a way to select what we want as default. And it might actually be the design of the breakdown that’s to blame… coming too close to the size of the average blob of text with its excess take of space (removing the borders around the scores might clear it up) - not really looking great if multiple textless ratings are there. Honestly, it’s the textless ratings that create a similar feeling for me. Immediate skips as they contain no info of value to anyone, and if there are several in a row…

You’ve picked a highly scored place with loads of reviews. I believe a large majority of places on the site have but a few ratings, if any, and all info on them is very valuable. Still, regardless of my personal preferences, the site will definitely be much better/more functional than it was when/if the possibility to make the checkbox persist is introduced. :slight_smile:

But that got me thinking… perhaps an option to hide ratings under a certain number of characters would be useful?

1 Like

Something we’re considering for a future iteration @Viper666.Qc

3 Likes

That’s exactly it. We need customizable experience for users. This is achieved by giving the maximum choices to users:

Lots of filter choices. You want want to hide textless ratings by default, you show attribute by default… You want to see all ticks and ratings or just ratings, etc…

Lots of sorting options. A-z, newest to oldest, most recent, highest scores, rated or not, see only one kind of places or all, see only certain styles, etc…

1 Like