Robusto "D" Reviews/Discussion

[dwoodward]

My 2 cents here....

I think the reviewers should just be allowed to review a cigar however they feel and whatever points system they want. Then just give an overall score:

So say someone gives a cigar 33/40 for points, and the next guy gives 42/50 for points then their scores would be 82.5 and 84...

I don't see the issue with people making new categories tbh. Hell, Some cigars I have a hard time finding a difference between thirds so I think of it as halves.

[RevSmoke]

Originally Posted by dwoodward

My 2 cents here....

I think the reviewers should just be allowed to review a cigar however they feel and whatever points system they want. Then just give an overall score:

So say someone gives a cigar 33/40 for points, and the next guy gives 42/50 for points then their scores would be 82.5 and 84...

I don't see the issue with people making new categories tbh. Hell, Some cigars I have a hard time finding a difference between thirds so I think of it as halves.

Your noted. Here'e my reasoning.

If I sign up with Cigar Trader Magazine (fictional name) to do reviews for them, they send me cigars and tell me to review them in a specific format, can I tell them, "You know, I like to review this way. This is how I want to do it."???

Of course not.

I am not trying to be rigid here, nor am I trying to stifle creativity. If every panelist reveiws according to their own way, then how do we compare their reviews to one another? Everybody doing the same thing, with the same cigars, allows us common ground to compare things

When Fred becomes a member of CA and writes reviews to post on the boards, he can review however he wants. Jim becomes a member of CA and writes reviews to post on the boards, he can review however he wants. Jonathan becomes a member of CA and writes reviews to post on the boards, he can review however he wants. But when we compare their reviews to one another we have no common ground because one focused on aroma/room note - one focused on burn and finish - and the last focused flavor. If those are the sole categories they used in their individual reviews, some would find one review useful and perhaps the other two completely pointless because those facets do not interest them at all.

Here's one. I know people who really enjoy the presentation of a cigar - the box, the packaging, the band, etc... In fact, they may even purchase a less that stellar smoke simply because they like the presentation. In a blind review, that is unfortunately not taken into consideration. I have a friend who will only smoke box-pressed cigars.

We each have aspects of the cigar experience that we each feel are important. I chose this style of review to ask the panelists to follow, for I believe it gives the most amount of information over a much broader spectrum of the cigar experience, and therefore will provide information for most, if not all, cigar smokers who read them.

So, I ask the panelists to carry on as they agreed to by consenting to be a panelist in this particular series of reviews.

If someone else organizes a group of panelists to do reviews, I could care less what method(s) of review they suggest their panelists to follow - hey it will be someone else's game and they can set the rules in whatever way they want. I will then read those reviews, thank the reviewers for their work & words, thank the organizer for setting it up, and gather what I can glean from those reviews.

Peace of the Lord be with you.

[pnoon]

Originally Posted by dwoodward

My 2 cents here....

I think the reviewers should just be allowed to review a cigar however they feel and whatever points system they want. Then just give an overall score:

So say someone gives a cigar 33/40 for points, and the next guy gives 42/50 for points then their scores would be 82.5 and 84...

I don't see the issue with people making new categories tbh. Hell, Some cigars I have a hard time finding a difference between thirds so I think of it as halves.

People who bought the cigars can do what they want.

But, yes, I DO see issues.
Todd wanted to do an experiment and laid out the guidelines beforehand. There is an implicit agreement to abide by the guidelines. As I said, you paid for the cigars so do whatever the hell you want but don't try and justify it within the context of the "experiment". If you had issues with the format, why not express them upfront or not participate.

[dwoodward]

Originally Posted by pnoon

People who bought the cigars can do what they want.

But, yes, I DO see issues.
Todd wanted to do an experiment and laid out the guidelines beforehand. There is an implicit agreement to abide by the guidelines. As I said, you paid for the cigars so do whatever the hell you want but don't try and justify it within the context of the "experiment". If you had issues with the format, why not express them upfront or not participate.

I did not mean to offend. I was just trying to offer a compromise. Sorry.

[pnoon]

Originally Posted by dwoodward

I did not mean to offend. I was just trying to offer a compromise. Sorry.

I'm not offended.
But after "offering a compromise" you argued the point that it makes no difference.

Did you not implicitly agree to the format?

[dwoodward]

Originally Posted by pnoon

I'm not offended.
But after "offering a compromise" you argued the point that it makes no difference.

Did you not implicitly agree to the format?

Well no... I am not a participant in the reviews, I am just a bystander looking for some tasty cigar ratings lol.