How can we help eliminate misinformation on this site?

It's mentioned later in this thread that we already have a thumbs up/thumbs down feature on this site. Would it be possible to expand this feature so that we could see which posts have been given a thumbs up/thumbs down and how many of each have been given? I think this would be a better way to accomplish what I'm attempting to achieve here.

====================================
Original post below:

I'll start off by saying that I have learned 90% of what I know about brewing from this site and it has been essential to me throughout my journey as a homebrewer.

One thing that I've continued to notice as I become more experienced is the continuous spewing of misinformation by people who are just parroting the misinformation they've read in a similar thread while having no real world experience on the subject. I know I was guilty of it when I was a beginner but now I get frustrated when reading these kinds of posts here.

Why would someone take my advice when there are 10 posts above mine with differing/incorrect information?

Obviously Yooper can't reply to every thread, so how are beginners going to know who to trust? When I was new here, I assumed the premium supporters were all knowledgeable people but then I realized you can become a premium member without knowing the first thing about brewing. Eventually I learned who the knowledgeable people were but that took a while.

I propose we come up with some kind of designation for trusted members. Their IDs would stand out in some way similar to how premium members do. The admins could deem anyone a trusted member if they notice them giving out lots of good advice. This would let the beginners know who to trust when it they get 10 different replies to a question with 10 different answers.

I think this would contribute greatly to the community and help stop the misinformation and myths from being so regularly repeated here.

Welcome to the internet.

TTB-J said:

Welcome to the internet.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the helpful feedback.

maybe a rating system that mods could assign to people who know their stuff? like gold stars or something?

I think this is a terrible idea. If admins/mods determine who is rated as a trusted poster, then why not just say only admins can answer questions?

TTB-J said:

Welcome to the internet.

Click to expand...

Exactly; I belong to several different forums, some technical & others like this one for my hobbies. They are all the same.

McGarnigle said:

I think this is a terrible idea. If admins/mods determine who is rated as a trusted poster, then why not just say only admins can answer questions?

Click to expand...

Obviously they can't answer every question. And I'm in no way saying others shouldn't be able to answer questions, I'm just saying it'd be nice to somehow designate someone that generally gives good advice.

I know there is more than one way to skin a cat and I'm sure even the most experienced brewers could argue the best way to do something, but I see so many posts on this site that are just plain wrong. That is what we're trying to eliminate.

This forum isn't an authoritative reference or a peer-reviewed academic environment. It's a forum. You'll get good accurate information, inaccurate information, something in between and information that might be thought "bad" today only to be "accepted" tomorrow. It's up to you to sort it out, just like in the rest of the world. If you don't want to exercise that sort of judgment, arm yourself with whatever comprehensive reference book you prefer and choose to believe it all. But don't rely on two, because they'll contradict one another... then you'll need a moderator again. Darn! Gathering information and making your own informed choices seems almost inevitable, huh?

djt17 said:

Exactly; I belong to several different forums, some technical & others like this one for my hobbies. They are all the same.

Click to expand...

So we should just accept things the way they are? I'm proposing a way to help the situation.

I don't think there is really a problem with misinformation.
If somebody does post something obviously wrong folks will be quick to let them know.
A lot of times there are more then one correct answer to a question, and more then one solution to a problem.
Don't believe everything you read, and if you are not sure what to believe get the answers verified elsewhere.

This would let the beginners know who to trust when it they get 10 different replies to a question with 10 different answers.

Well, this here is a big issue. If there exists a singular factually correct response to a given question, it can usually be found elsewhere or through some research, e.g. "What does BU/GU mean?"

If the question is something that resides more along the lines of opinion or preference, one can even usually find a great bit of disparity even amongst professionals, e.g. "How much Munich malt should I put in my bock?"

As far as the perpetuation of misinformation, I understand where you're coming from, but I don't feel that bad for people not willing to do their research. If someone is willing to spend the hundreds of dollars and hours of free time to do this, I would hope they could take the time to properly investigate the topic enough.

Let me put it this way - you remember that yokel on youtube who makes beer by spraying the hose into the bucket who said 'you want more alcohol in it, you just put more sugar in it!"? The same guy who popped the top off and slugged a beer like a frat boy? If anyone takes his advice, they deserve the **** results that would most likely follow.

BrookdaleBrew said:

So we should just accept things the way they are? I'm proposing a way to help the situation.

Click to expand...

What I am saying is all internet forums have people who post mis-information. It is the peer review that will point them out.

It's all relative... What YOU consider to be misinformation is not to someone else... People often go by their own experiences in these things. So what one person encountered, and considers true information, could be opposite of what you encounters, or consider good information...

Sample a dozen people asking the same question, which has subjective components, and you'll get at least 4-6 different answers. Just like if you look at a dozen home brewers rigs, chances are, you won't see two identical setups... They will probably share some components, depending on the processes they use, but you'll still have a wide range of options shown.

I'm tending to agree with most of the others in this area... Well, except for what pwndabear said about a rating system (the moderators have enough to do already)...

Methods and techniques change over time. What was considered great even a decade ago can be considered outdated by many, with newer, better methods taking it's place. Not to say you can't do it the old way, it's just not the only way.

The easiest solution is for the "thumbs up/thumbs down" buttons to be used more readily, and the current tallies shown. Plenty of other forums you can see quickly the responses that seem to reflect the consensus. It's not perfect (the consensus can be wrong, especially in the beginner forums), but it's a fairly simple improvement.

As noted, much of what we talk about doesn't HAVE a "right" answer.... although some answers are more right than others.

BrookdaleBrew said:

So we should just accept things the way they are? I'm proposing a way to help the situation.

Click to expand...

If you want proven data, open a published book. You're on a public internet forum. I think people (or at least they should) realize we're not all professional brewers and don't know everything. That said, it's brewing. There are lots of ways to achieve the same result. There are also a lot of theory's that just don't matter in the real world. You just have to learn who to trust by doing your own research and deciding whose methods work for you. Yes, I know, figuring something out for ourselves based on our own actions is not the American way, but it should be. If you notice a lot of bad info in a thread where you post the "right" info, then the way to make your post stand out is to provide backing for your info. That's what will separate you from others. If you can't back up your claim, you're just as fly-by-night as the rest of the posts.

Pilgarlic said:

This forum isn't an authoritative reference or a peer-reviewed academic environment. It's a forum. You'll get good accurate information, inaccurate information, something in between and information that might be thought "bad" today only to be "accepted" tomorrow. It's up to you to sort it out, just like in the rest of the world. If you don't want to exercise that sort of judgment, arm yourself with whatever comprehensive reference book you prefer and choose to believe it all. But don't rely on two, because they'll contradict one another... then you'll need a moderator again. Darn! Gathering information and making your own informed choices seems almost inevitable, huh?

Click to expand...

You're making it harder than it has to be. There are some members here that routinely give great advice. Why not recognize them in some way? Then when a beginner is making their own informed choice, they can say "hey, this person has obviously given good advice in the past, maybe their advice will weigh more heavily in my final decision."

With home brewing being as much art as science, and taste, a wholly subjective trait, being the most important to "success", this idea might sound good, but in practice it's really no more helpful than some of the "misinformation". I would argue other than blatant misstating of facts, incorrect math, et al, everything else is somewhat subjective.

Your best bet is to read multiple sources. Maybe start with John Palmer's How to Brew (ideally the latest edition, as he's modified some of his information), Charlie Papazian's Complete Joy of Homebrewing (again, slightly dated, 2005), Designing Great Beers, Yeast or Brewing Classic Styles by Jamil, and I'm sure others could suggest many more.

Don't want to spend a bunch on books? John Palmer's first edition (dated) is on the internet (just google John Palmer, how to brew), and most home brew shops have tons of faqs on their websites covering nearly every topic.

What am I saying, well, if your first (and only) place to go is to post on a forum, it's a bit of a crap shoot. However, if you use the forums to get exposure to the terminology and can use a search engine, you'll do fine. Forums are really best suited when you want to seek an opinion. They are fantastic places to explore various sides of an argument. Some of the best reading I've done on this site has left me to make my own decision, after reading many informed opinions.

Best of luck and happy brewing!

BrookdaleBrew said:

You're making it harder than it has to be.

Click to expand...

I'm not "making it" anything. I'm observing "the way it is", in my opinion, and not jousting at windmills.

the_bird said:

The easiest solution is for the "thumbs up/thumbs down" buttons to be used more readily, and the current tallies shown. Plenty of other forums you can see quickly the responses that seem to reflect the consensus. It's not perfect (the consensus can be wrong, especially in the beginner forums), but it's a fairly simple improvement.

As noted, much of what we talk about doesn't HAVE a "right" answer.... although some answers are more right than others.

Click to expand...

I think this is a great idea and would achieve exactly what I'm attempting to accomplish.

There's a thumbs-up/thumbs-down button for every post, although individual posts don't have a score listed. The website Reddit uses a community scoring system that does this and it works out very well. One possibility is to use such a voting system on HBT could be good at pointing out good and bad advice, and help new brewers sort out proper advice.

Of course, it's very easy to abuse, especially for new members who don't understand the rating system. Beginning homebrewers could be voted down for asking a "stupid" question which could drive people away. Certain members who have a reputation for giving consistently good advice could be voted up without proper consideration. It can be an ego boost, leading to "karma whoring" where people post nonsense that they know will garner the favor of the community. People can use negative votes as a weapon when tempers rise. It can also bury unconventional advice that isn't necessarily wrong.

So, I don't know. Is there a way to sort out stuff painlessly that doesn't cause more problems than it solves?

you know, im thinking about this, i have to say in searching for an answer when ive needed one and getting all kinds of responses back, i have become a better brewer and more knowledgable from it.

yea, its been a little frustrating at times, but in doing research, if there wasnt ONE RIGHT ANSWER, i've been able to determine how to go about something and actually figure out my own preferences.

dzlater said:

I don't think there is really a problem with misinformation.
If somebody does post something obviously wrong folks will be quick to let them know.
A lot of times there are more then one correct answer to a question, and more then one solution to a problem.
Don't believe everything you read, and if you are not sure what to believe get the answers verified elsewhere.

Click to expand...

I think this is the best answer on here. I think we are pretty good at self policing the obviously wrong answers or misinformation.

But at the same time usually there is more than one way to do things on here, the only best way, is the one that works best for us.

I do hate some of the things that get parroted rotely on here with little thought or understanding "Don't squeeze the grain bag/Don't boil your grains else you'll AUTOMATICALLY get tannins." Is one that bugs me, because it's a little more complicated and a little less a given as that answer would suggest.....but that's where we "police" those things and hopefully fill in the answer further.

And often most of those answers that we think are misinformed are often simply outdated. Look at the whole autolysis issue. It's simply outdated info in light of OUR experiences and the rest of the brewing community slowly catching up to us. But every new brewer that reads the online version of how to brew, and then posts on here that we've got to get the beer off the yeast, doesn't know that Palmer had changed his tune on that, and we have the sources to prove it.

But it is the internet, and there's always the risk of bad info. But I don't think this is a haven for misinformation, in fact just the opposite, I think we here have done a lot for clearing up those misinformed answers. And providing some of the best, most state of the art brewing knowlege and wisdom on here...which often goes against, conventional brewing wisdom....

*shrug*

I come here knowing that this is an public Internet forum and anyone can post replies. Knowing that, I usually do further research beyond this forum to ensure that the replies I'm getting will work for me.

I guess you have to know why you're here and weed though the responses appropriately. Are you here to copy what the Yoopers and Revvys do or are you here to get a variety of opinions and experiences for your own experimentation?

BTW, that should not be taken as an insult to Yooper or Revvy or anyone else on this forum. There are people here who I highly respect for their opinions, experiences, and willingness to help and they are two of them.

Brookdale,

I love where your head's at here. I too have read countless threads where there are contrary opinions and it can be quite frustrating to a new brewer with endless questions. A perfect example is the topic of using a secondary fermentation. There is no shortage of back and forth discussion on the matter.

The problem comes in, though, when so much of brewing is personal preference. To use my above example, the most respected posters on this sight mostly come down on the side of no secondary. With respect to their opinions, every beer I've done without a secondary I've been less than pleased with. Does that mean I'm right and they're wrong? Of course not. BUT it does mean in my opinion, secondary is needed based on how I brew.

What you have proposed (a mod designation of "worthy" contributors) puts personal opinion into play. Mod A likes the methods of member B so he gets a gold star. Problem is, that doesn't mean they are right, just of the same mind.

The one thing I could see, though, is to expand the "thumbs up" system. I will occasionally receive a "thumbs up" to one of my posts. To the best of my knowledge, this isn't displayed to the membership as a whole. If there was a running tally of thumbs ups (displayed either as a whole number or a % of posts) this may establish a peer reviewed method of what you propose as opposed to a moderator established system.

But in the end, I think the system you have come to rely on (knowing who gives good advice) is the most reliable, despite the ramp up time needed to figure it out.

BrookdaleBrew said:

You're making it harder than it has to be. There are some members here that routinely give great advice. Why not recognize them in some way?

Click to expand...

Because then, though inadvertently, you're pinning every single other person on this forum as brewers who don't know what they're doing, which simply will not be the case.

IrregularPulse said:

If you want proven data, open a published book.

Click to expand...

But that's not always the best either. Look at Palmer who changed his tune on several things since the first edition...autolysis for one, he even said in Basic Brewing several years back that he got his explanation of IBUs wrong, and realized it after.

Besides, A book is a snapshot of the author's body of knowlege and the "common wisdom" at the time the author wrote the book, which may mean 3 years before it was even published. Papazian's book is 30+ years old. The basic knowlege is good, but brewing science and experience has progressed to where some things an author believes or says at that time may no-longer be valid...even to the author.

John Palmer has changed many ideas since the online version of the book went up several years ago.

And so has CHarlie Papazian.

Most of the time when someone "revises" a book they don't necessarilly "re-write" the entire thing...and unless they annotated the changes, often all a "revised" edition has to make it up to date is a new introduction, and maybe the addition or removal of some things. But Rarely is a revision in a book a serious comb through of the entire book.

For example Charlie, JUST discovered the idea of using rice hulls in his mash tun to prevent stuck sparges....So just maybe he could even maybe have learned some other things in the last 30 years as well, and just not gotten around to writing about it?

I think just the opposite, that places like this with over 40,000 active participants contributing to the knowlege base, is where the best, most state of the art info can be had. Heck a lot of stuff starts here, that later ends up in the pages of BYO and Zymugy.

The thumbs up doesn't really do anything. I have a ton of them, there all for humorous/snarky comments.

I've learned 90% of everything I know about brewing here, you just have to pick and choose whose advice to follow. Eventually you'll learn who to trust and who to avoid. There is a metric s#it ton of nutso info on here, but some good stuff as well.

Plus, if you had read my sig, this thread wouldn't be necessary.

Glad I am not the only one who thinks this is a case of a solution without a problem.If we use our heads, we'll be fine.

Example: I am a complete been. Nothing in my Sig. Nothing in my gallery. Very few posts. I submit that you would be a fool to take my advice without checking it against other sources.

The first thing I did when I got here was read the FAQs and Wikis...all of them. Right there, you already know a dozen trustworthy posters.

So then say I ask for advice in a thread. Who am I gonna listen to? Someone like me, or someone with three beers fermenting and pictures of there brews and rigs in a gallery and a list of favorite recipes?

Not trying to pick on you, but we have to put our big boy pants on. Even newbs giving you bad advice, think they are helping.

BrookdaleBrew said:

I'll start off by saying that I have learned 90% of what I know about brewing from this site and it has been essential to me throughout my journey as a homebrewer. .

Click to expand...

Try other forums>
http://www.homebrewersassociation.org/forum/index.php#1

http://forum.northernbrewer.com/

http://www.babblebelt.com/newboard/forum.html?tid=1108752780&pg=1

http://forums.morebeer.com/

http://www.probrewer.com/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=19

http://thebrewingnetwork.com/

wildwest450 said:

The thumbs up doesn't really do anything. I have a ton of them, there all for humorous/snarky comments.

Click to expand...

That's usually the only reason I get them, but there's no reason that HAS to be the way that they're used. One of the market forums I spend time on, seekingalpha.com, uses this system and it's pretty good; you tend to see a fairly high number of votes on each response, and can tell fairly easily who seems to have something interesting or insightful to say, and who's just bull****ting or misinformed.

I'm not convinced this is a real problem, either; let me make that clear. If you WANT to "fix" this, though, the thumbs up/down are a great tool.

unionrdr said:

But what if said noob gives you sound advice,& you don't trust it 100%? Is it bad advice then? Like Jimi Hendrix said once,"you can learn something from everyone". That's the point. You don't have to be a pro to give sound advice. Just back it up with your own facts as the righter or the reader.

Click to expand...

... there are also guys on here with only a handful of posts, who clearly know what they're talking about. Like this 42-post "n00b".

the_bird said:

... there are also guys on here with only a handful of posts, who clearly know what they're talking about. Like this 42-post "n00b".

Click to expand...

That guy has no idea what he's talking about.

I read the information in the stickies as the more proven methods and ideas.

the_bird said:

... there are also guys on here with only a handful of posts, who clearly know what they're talking about. Like this 42-post "n00b".

Click to expand...

Lmao. Even as nooby as I am, I know Jamil. Besides look at his friend list.

My only point is if you stay sharp, misinformation can't hurt you.

My 0.02 on the topic is that all you get from someone on a discussion forum is THEIR 0.02 on a particular topic. Even the so-called "experts"....read and act accordingly.

As for a "system" to promote one persons' view over another (i.e. some are "more equal" than others)...I'd probably be out of here if this happened (and I don't think I'd be the only one).

It would really change the dynamic of this board. (again, in my opinion...cause that is what you get on a discussion forum).