Site Feedback

Snooth User: GDal Piaz

1 - 5 glasses

Posted by GDal Piaz, May 24, 2007.

I find your use of glasses both counterintuitive and in conflict with every other us of graduated ratings used for wine. All other ranking mechanisms use the first grade, in this case one glass, to signify the least liked, but still liked, category of ranking increasing in preference as the number of units increases. In fact i did not realise that 3 glasses, the highest rating in the most watched Italian ratings guide, signifies a nuetral assesment. This just does not make any sense to me. The casual user will be easily confused while aficianado is forced to compress his or her rankings to include two meaningless categories. I fail to see the benefit in parsing information to allow the reader to know whether i disliked or hated a wine. Either categorization would signify i wine I would not buy again.

I suggest you reformat your rating scale to conform to what is generally recognized and utilizied by the wine community.


Reply by GDal Piaz, May 24, 2007.

I understand the need for negative feedback in this case so my follow up is tow fold.

On the first front perhaps all that is needed is to change the visual representation of the categories. For example having the negative selections represented by an inverted wine glass, the neutral by a horizontal. This would prevent the misunderstanding. My initial post was of concern on two fronts, the first was this initial impression that each glass represented a step up in quality begining from a base of liking the wine. The casual user, one who has yet to post reviews, may be confused by your representation since it is not consistent with established industry standards.

The second aspect is again the compression of the review scale required by your algorithm. To my mind it would be more valuable to know what i did not like, what i was neutral about, what i liked a bit, what i liked alot, and what i loved. As a note taking wine geek i have an unorthodox rating scale which translates roughly as

i wouldn't drink it if you pad for it -
i would drink it you paid for it
i would buy it if i saw it
i would seek it out and buy, price dependent
i would seek it out and buy it price no object

I think this is a personal and visceral way to rank and respond to wine and while most people don't use this ranking I believe they are ultimately making these sort of gradations and this is as precise as their rating scale can translate to a close to universal understanding within a diverse community.

So those are the two issues I have in, I hope, more precise language.

I recogonize quite a few of your users so it seems you will have a group of like minded wine geek users, perhaps one of them will chime in.

Reply by Philip James, May 25, 2007.

I like the way you break the 5 ratings down - we'll look into making the rating system a little clearer.

Reply by gr, May 30, 2007.

I think what you've done is model the ratings after NetFlix, but switch from stars to wine glasses.

I think this is a Very Good Idea.

If you model the rating system on what wine snobs do, your audience will be restricted to those who understand how wine snobs rate things.

If you model the rating system on what half the upper-middle class and above in the 18-35 demographic already uses, you have a free In with that group.

Guess which group is bigger.

Back to Categories

Top Contributors This Month

847804 Snooth User: EMark
31 posts
127503 Snooth User: rckr1951
30 posts
324443 Snooth User: outthere
12 posts


View All

Snooth Media Network