RateBeer Forums

Rerates reorder ratings: not a good change

#1

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?

6 Likes

Editing a rating changes the date and puts it as most recent
#2

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.

6 Likes

#3

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

#4

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.

2 Likes

#5

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.

7 Likes

#6

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.

3 Likes

#7

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.

0 Likes

#8

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.

3 Likes

#9

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.

6 Likes

#10

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.

5 Likes

#11

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.

0 Likes

#12

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?

2 Likes