Who are these people?

Beer Talk
1

…who write glowing reviews of terrible macro beer? What do they gain from this? Is this a request from on high at Molson Coors or Budweiser’s executive board of directors to create an account on RateBeer and write unconvincing 5/5 summations of their average lagers, which don’t affect the overall score and generally aren’t read by many people? Just find it a bit baffling.

This rating is of Carling https://www.ratebeer.com/beer/carling-original-lager/94160/

1CED8692-9479-43A6-8FF1-2EB8723799BE_4_5005_c
1CED8692-9479-43A6-8FF1-2EB8723799BE_4_5005_c804×199 24.3 KB

2

And who found it helpful?! Nectar of the gods, who knew it was Carling (was) Black Label

3

Wow, and I thought I was giving that to high score when I in my kindness rated it to 2.0 when I tasted it.
Probably another one of these pop-up jokes, in rating a few beer good and then just never seen again.

4

Have the same question about people who seem to trash KBBS. Seems to be only ticks though.

5

Problem with that is ticks count in the average score (also effects score of beers that people give 1 to showing they have it in stock), that’s why it makes no difference to change poor ratings to ticks.

6

Lots of people like macro lager and have their favourites. They feel these beers are sneered at by us ridiculous snobs who don’t understand having a good time necking a few frothy quieties with mates, so supply compensatory appreciative scores. Also, @scholesy is a (presumably English) rugby player in Luxembourg who is at university but can’t spell for shit. So alcohol, loneliness, clinging to a bullshit camaraderie as a substitute for emotional maturity and head injuries are all likely factors.

3 Likes
7

If you check tick vs rate ratio for KBBS you’ll notice it’s unusually high. And avg rate of those ticks is unusually low.

8

I like this reasoning.

I also want to sit on your couch for an hour a week.

1 Like