Rerates reorder ratings: not a good change

Apologies if this has come up before and I haven’t seen it.

It used to be that if you were the 4th rater of a beer and you rerated it after it had (say) 100 more ratings, your rating would stay 4th. That meant if you ordered ratings by date you could see what people who’d first tried and rated the beer thought and whether they subsequently changed their minds and how they explain it (I was a bit enthusiastic/ I was too timid/ wow I knew nothing then/ this used to be good and now is rubbish/ that was old, now I’ve had it fresh etc etc). Now it seems a rerate changes the rating’s date (and apparently erases dates!) and all this information is lost. Reading through others’ ratings is already harder to do, please don’t take this information away. Or is there a reason to to it this way that I’ve missed?


You are obviously considering your response.

If there is a reason why someone might want to have a rerate change the date you could make it optional, the way it is for place ratings. It would still be nice if the date of the original rating was preserved though.


So today I didn’t rerate a beer that has been brewed again for the first time in 7 years because of this issue.

I thought I might do a “quick add” of where I got it though - I seemed to be the only one who liked it last time but the local scene has caught up a bit. But the availability didn’t show up on the beer’s page, the venue’s page or the My Local page. So I won’t bother again.

1 Like

Sitting here drinking a beer I’d normally rerate since it’s six years since I last had it. There have been a few others - like the Solera beer that I thought should have been split between the first (unblended) version and later ones, a Fuller’s VA around its peak and an underrated HotD collab that’s ageing well after its best before date. &c. About a dozen since I started this thread.

“Oh well, all my notes are here” was a factor keeping me here. It is no longer true for me.


I’ll occasionally find spelling mistakes in old reviews. I want to fix them, but I also don’t like the idea that my review has been “updated” over something so small and trivial.

I’d support either a checkbox to indicate a “new” review or a checkbox to indicate only “minor” edits.


Or if you rerated and changed everything, new text would show up. So you’d have two ratings on the website, but only one counted towards total? That might work.


And I used to think the old "UPDATED ON xx/xx/xxxx was annoying…
Stupid me, that was better, I agree with you.
I think I disliked that because my reviews were wordy enough already.

I’m drinking 8 Wired iStout, which has a site-wide score of 3.98. I’m not going to reconfirm or trim my rating of 3.5 because it would move my rating up to the top. Have I mentioned I don’t want that? I notice that my rating is sitting in the list as though I rated it in May 2017 and you can’t see by looking at my rating that I first rated it in 2011 (you have to look at rating by style to find that information). I don’t want that information to disappear from my or others’ ratings.

If there’s a reason for these changes that I don’t understand, do tell. If you know about this issue and are considering whether to or figuring out how to revert, again, sing out.


Places used to have it sorted out best - if you wanted it moved to the top, you could press a check mark and it would be. If you didn’t (fixing typos etc) - you didn’t do that.

@joet @aww - why was that option removed for Places and why are rerates pushed by force to the top site-wide for beers and places? We are now “scared” to do something simple as fixing typos because of that. Overwriting the initial date of scoring actually lower’s the will to rerate - which is essential if the site is to be up to date and as such relevant.


I wrote this in the long feedback on the new Beer Page; people are proud to be the first or one of the early raters, not the last.
TBH, I rerate a lot but I too decided not to correct some typo because I wanted my rating to be the first, not moved up.

The default sorting should be “date first entered”, with an option for one of the other sortings to be “date last updated” (hardly anybody cares for that though).
Alternatively, instead of the secondary sorting method, I too support the checkbox for pushing re-ratings up.


It also messes up milestsones. I did not know about this change. My number 1000 is now my number 999.

Edit: Disregard this, apparently one of my ratings have been removed. Probably an alias. Gonna figure it out which one.

Found it. The new rating got aliased and moved to the old, but the date of the rating got changed to the new.

Would’ve rerated La Sirène Forêt Sauvage to say how it’s developing after two years. And how Old Engine Oil is in cans - although probably only I care about that. But I don’t want the ratings to go up the top of the list. Has this registered - in this, the website feedback forum - after 73 days? Is it too soon to expect any sort of response? When I get a popup asking for my feedback, that’s a joke, right?


With you on this. Still no reply? Sadness…

@joet @services @aww

One last post from me in this thread, 102 days after starting it. There has been no acknowledgement or response to it.

I think I was the first to rate Bridge Rd / Mikkeller The Dark Harvest in April 2012 (can’t see this any more - the least recent are spuriously those in a different language) and since it has different hops each year I rerate it every year upon its release in April. Until this year.

And how was Hr Frederiksen a bit fresher? I didn’t note that here either.

Modus Operandi’s Former Tenant is apparently the top Red IPA here and the 5th best Australian beer. There’s been some negative talk about how their beers are in the new smaller cans. I had that one and Sonic Prayer IPA - one did seem slightly off, but I don’t want to rerate it for reasons I’ve mentioned.

Woah, doing that certainly makes a difference! – but guess I’ll leave tips on getting the best out of Garage Project’s Pernicious Weed cans elsewhere.

I suppose everyone knows that Fuller’s stronger beers kick on pretty well past their best before, but I had some thoughts about this case of Past Masters 1910 Double Stout and will probably make another note or two - but not here.

Feral’s Biggie Juice is getting badmouthed around town now it’s in cans - how did I think it compared to when I rated it on tap in August 17?

How about Hill Farmstead Arthur which I had from the bottle courtesy of RateBeer itself at the 100 for 100 event, having previously only had it on tap? Saisons in my experience tend to be better from the bottle, won’t get to say whether this one was. Nor Rodenbach Vintage 2015. Or Armand and Gaston (which was the 3F at the do, not Lente).

To reiterate, “Oh well, all my notes are here” was a factor keeping me here, even if features I value have been broken for years. It is no longer true.

102 days after starting it, there has been no acknowledgement or response to my thread from management. I have to conclude that this is not the right place to give feedback.

@joet @aww @services
Please bring back the distinction between the date where the new rating was added (permanent) and the date where a rating was last updated (just a mention, not changing the rating order)

It was there before, it’s something we lost during all those updates.


In addition to that - the previous system in place for Places was the best one - you could choose if you want to push the rating to the top among the new ones when you edited it. Sadly, that was lost too.


Clearly that should have been something that was kept for Place ratings, but that should have been implemented to Beer Ratings as well.

@joet @services @aww

1 Like

Thanks for your feedback. I’ll be conferring with the dev team. This ability to choose the sort/date effect of a re-rate is important to many who value being an early or initial rater, and it would be good to preserve.


Hi everyone, sorry that it has taken us a while to get around to this issue. We started fixing this issue today:

  • Reviews are now sorted by date added (not date modified)

As a next step, we will improve how we show the date added/modified (we are currently still showing the date modified)