Upton's tea review policy

However you guy want to do it is fine with me. My last shipping cost for special teas was 3.95 for 2oz of tea and a 4 cup Chastford pot.

Mike

It seems to me that what is needed is a set format, a schedule, and (most importantly of all), someone to keep track and organize the effort.

I suggest a monthly cycle with a regular schedule. Each month there would be a new "event". Perhaps each event could have a theme, such as greens, oolongs, assams, darjeelings, price range, etc.

On the first day of each month, announce the theme and open the event for submissions. Each person can submit one entry. Provide the name, source, price, description of the characteristics, and ??? Each entry is recorded in a database somewere (hence the need for a secretary).

After some period of time (10 days?), close the event for submissions and start the ratings. Each person can submit only one rating for each entry. Each rating should include a numerical rating (0-10), number of tastings, details on how it was brewed, and a short description of its characteristics (sweet, bitter, smokey, etc.). Maybe require some minimum number of tastings (3?, 5?) before submitting a rating.

After another period of time, start posting the results is summary form. If a web site is available, details could be posted there.

The next month, start a new event.

Ratings could be allowed to continue for 2-3 months or longer for each event and results could include all of the recent events.

If a one-year schedule were established (Jan: greens, Feb: oolongs, etc.), then the results could include the past 12 months.

Again, if a web site is available, all previous results could be available.

Just some ideas.

-- Email: Usenet-20031220 at spamex.com (11/09/04)

Those are good ideas. I'm not one for organizing, but I can do the website. I already have hosting, so it's not a problem.

Ian

On reflection, perhaps a slight modification might be in order. Instead of open submissions which could potentially result in hundreds of teas, perhaps we elect a committee to narrow the submissions down to a more manageable number (5? 10?) and then vote on those.

-- Email: Usenet-20031220 at spamex.com (11/09/04)

Ah, I really truly mean no offense here Top Spin but that's rather more organization and control then I was looking for. I just thought this was going to be a sort of informal thing. Seeing as there's only maybe four people that have expressed an interest so far, we might not need such a lot of organization. I suppose if we only have a few people, they could each put forward the tea they would like to see reviewed and then we could all vote on it. As to exactness of the tastings...lol, wasn't this the issue with Upton in the first place? Irony. Anyhow...several trys I suppose could be made before a reviewer pronounced his or her findings..::shrug::

Melinda

No offense at all. Whatever everyone wants. But I suspect there might be more interest than you think.

-- Email: Usenet-20031220 at spamex.com (11/09/04)

This is getting rather complicated. All we need is to agree on which tea to each purchase, and the rest can work itself out over time. YMMV, of course, and no offense intended. :-)

Ian

Upton's is $3.80 and SpecialTeas' is $3.95 w/ $75 & up being free.

Okay, that let's me out because I don't want that much of a tea that I'm only sampling. I was thinking of the 1/2 oz size for $2.

(I've still got what's left of 1 oz of a tea that I bought to sample over a year ago...which makes me wonder, why in the world don't I just throw it out??? Hmm...)

Mike snipped-for-privacy@individual.net/3/05

Mike,

I think you are quite right in your assessment. After all, you buy a sample to evaluate the tea for your own future use and purchasing. It makes good sense that you be afforded an opportunity to share your thoughts with others using their forum.

How about this explanation? Based on your sampling of ten teas you decide to buy a four ounce package of your favorites, say three of them. That makes sense, right? Well, if Upton allows you to review those three, your reviews will be skewed to the good. If they allow you to review the samples, which you purchased for your own evaulation, your reviews will be objective and include those you liked and those you don't. Upton lies. Pass them by. Don't buy from companies that wiggle and wriggle. Their explanation died on the vine. That's my every so humble opinion. Thanks Mike for bringing this to our attention.

Michael

Sonam Dasara19a4yircw0gmn.19atebmjem06r$. snipped-for-privacy@40tude.net/3/05

While your point is well taken, I believe that if Upton's samples are in their opinion too small to allow a fair evaluation, then their samples are undersized.

Michael

Top snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com/4/05

I can't say quite yet what my time and tide will allow my participation to be, but I think the basic idea of group tastings and commentings is a great one whose time has definitely come.

Michael

FWIW, I think an informal setup would be most beneficial, at least for now. Get the project up and running, and get people comfortable with the process. A database is a good idea, and I certainly have the time to do an RFDT website, but that doesn't have to happen first.

I made a suggestion earlier for a particular tea, the Dragon Well China green from SpecialTeas. Not that it's a perfect choice, or better than any other choice, but I think a definite decision will get the ball rolling.

My understanding of this "experiment" is that we're setting up a common ground, through which we can understand what someone means by, for instance, "astringent", or "floral", or whatever. That's more than enough reason to do a group buy.

Anyway, these are just my ideas. I'm fairly loopy from a cold right now, so I hope this makes sense. :-)

Ian

If we have a website with a database, then several interesting things are possible. Leaving out the procedural details, I offer these suggestions and rationale:

1. Introduce new selections periodically. I suggest once a month or so. This keeps the work more manageable and gives people time to obtain the tea and test it.
2. We need some mechanism to select the candidates. Maybe have two databases: (1) List of candidate teas on which people can vote for inclusion. Teas get added if nominated and seconded. People can then vote to include them in future tastings. Next tea is selected from top candidates. (2) Actual tasting results. Voters should provide brewing information.
3. Keep voting open for a fairly long time (at least months, maybe as long as the tea is available). This will allow many more people to participate. I currently have more tea samples than I will ever use having just received an order. So I am unlikely to order anything right now. But when I am ready, I might order several from the tasting list on my next order and then submit my results.
4. Rotate vendors. Make sure that we don't favor one or two vendors.

1. Rotate teas. Make sure we get a good mix of varieties (green, black, oolong, etc.)

I am just getting into tea. I never know what to try. If this database had been going for awhile, I would probably order several from the list each tme I placed an order.

Thanks

-- Email: Usenet-20031220 at spamex.com (11/09/04)

Gosh, Michael, you think that's bad - wait till you hear this!

I actually have seen some online vendors who don't allow anyone to post any reviews at all! What they do is put up *their own* blurbs about the tea - and guess what? All those blurbs only talk about how good the tea is! Talk about totalitarian censorship - reminds me of PRAVDA in the old days of the Soviet Union.

OK, you've convinced me! Let's all only order tea from online vendors who allow totally uncensored public reviews of their teas to be posted onto their websites. Now, let's see, maybe you can remind me - who are those vendors again?

Randy

While I understand your point, I think there is a difference between a site that advertises customer reviews and one that does not. To make a fair comparison, your example would have to be a site which claiming to have customer reviews but having marketing instead. In its present form, it is a strawman.

That being said, I don't necessarily agree 100% with Michael's analysis. Perhaps Upton has legitimite reasons other than rating-inflation in mind. His is still an interesting point; perhaps a fair compromise on Upton's part would be to include what purchase a person is making their review on as part of the review process.

Still, raising the purchase required may be an effective way to reduce signal to noise ratio. What comes into question is if this reduction is not also accompanied with an unfair positive bias in reviews.

Steve

I'm afraid my real point got lost in my sarcasm, as I had a bit of steam coming out of my ears at the time. I apologize - I'll make myself clear (I hope) below. This is certainly not intended to be a personal attack on Michael Plant (who I think probably knows a lot more about tea than I do); rather it is intended to be a vigorous challenge to some of what he wrote. (Neither, BTW, do I have any issue with Mike Boucher, who was simply irked that he couldn't review a sample and was seeking other opinions.)

As a conclusion to his post, Michael Plant wrote this:

I believe these statements are *completely* unwarranted, and very unfairly damage the reputation of an excellent online vendor.

Upton offers a combination of features that few or no other online vendors do, these being 1) huge selection, 2) the ability to buy virtually any of their teas in sample sizes, and 3) the ability to post reviews of their teas to their own website. Yes, they don't allow you to post a review if you have only bought a sample. I don't necessarily agree with this position, although I do think it is defensible. It in no way justifies labeling them as liars.

Some strong evidence against this characterization is the fact that Upton DOES in fact post bad reviews on their site. I believe people have a strong tendency to write only good reviews, which at least in part accounts for the preponderance of good reviews on the site.

But take a look at the Darjeeling Margaret's Hope Estate FTGFOP1 MUSC 2nd Flush, which is TD35 in Upton's numbering system. This is an expensive tea, with only one review (by our own Mike Boucher, it turns out). He gave it the worst review possible - one star, and really panned it. But still, there it is for all the world to read. Now, this review is going to cost Upton sales and money. How many other vendors would post such a review on their own website?? Wouldn't a "liar" quickly sweep such a review under the rug, or better yet, replace it with a good review???

Let me contrast this with an experience I had sometime back with another online vendor - SpecialTeas. I ordered an oolong that looked like a good value to me. Their description sounded very good - but of course there was no customer input because they don't have that on their site. And, I couldn't get it in a sample size so I had to buy 1/4 lb. (they do carry many of their teas in sample sizes, but did not have this one). It turned out to be perhaps the worst oolong I have ever tasted, and I experimented a lot with it. At anything past 2.5 minutes, it was very astringent, and at less than that, it was pretty lifeless. But I was stuck with the whole packet, and no way to post my opinion on their site.

Now, I still think SpecialTeas is a good vendor and continue to recommend them. But if "Upton lies", then what are we to say about SpecialTeas? I would have very much preferred to buy this tea from Upton, as then I would have only had to buy a sample, even if I couldn't review it. And if I had been forced to buy a packet from Upton, at least I could have voiced my opinion.

I don't think Upton is the be-all-and-end-all of online tea vendors. I'm sure there are many other excellent vendors out there, especially if you are looking for high end teas, or specialty styles like Pu-erh. But Upton has a lot going for them, especially for newbies and generalists. I simply can't sit still and let Michael's conclusion and characterization go unchallenged. They do not lie, and rather than pass them by, you should seriously consider purchasing tea from them.

-- Randy (if replying by e-mail, remove SPAMFREE and DeLeTe from my address) Current book recommendation: BLUE LIKE JAZZ

On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 15:43:30 -0600, RJP quoth:

I can think of several teas that I hated at first, and grew to like or even love later after I had more experience with them. I wouldn't have bothered to give them more time if I hadn't bought a full 3-4 oz tin and felt the need to finish it.

Of course maybe you can convince Upton that you're a real Tea Poo-Bah and get them to accept your reviews under-the-counter.

bkr

We know the texts on the HP are written or at least chosen by the vendor, and that the vendor will show you the positive aspects, that's fair. But when Upton say they let you send reviews, it's in order to give you the false impression the reviews are not part of their marketing. It's taking customers for dumbies.

You have not understood anything. A vendor has no obligation to provide public reviews, like he/she doesn't have to put photos or tons of things. But if they decide to do something, they will be judged on the way it's done. On that point, we can see their sense of honesty.

Kuri

How has this been demonstrated to be a false impression? Have YOU ever written a negative review they haven't posted? The only thing at issue here is whether they allow reviews of samples - which they don't. Now, exactly how does that create a false impression? This is not a secret.

I have understood plenty. To me, you seem to be confused about exactly what the issue is here. You seem to have "piled on" without understanding the facts. Read my most recent post (besides this one) on this issue. Upton does in fact post negative reviews on their site. Again I ask - have YOU ever written a negative review they haven't posted? If not, then exactly what is your problem with them?

-- Randy (if replying by e-mail, remove SPAMFREE and DeLeTe from my address) Current book recommendation: BLUE LIKE JAZZ