Comments on: Your recommendations for improvement?

By: Okay, now here’s what you can do. | What Does John Know?

Okay, now here’s what you can do. | What Does John Know? — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 04:14:24 +0000

[...] here in January, I asked you what I could do to make WDJK better for you. Many of those recommendations I [...]

By: smsmmns

smsmmns — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 14:18:57 +0000

H. Diaz,
I think your post at 100 substantiates your request at 99.
Pleas see 54 and 67.
Cheers.

By: John Hansell

John Hansell — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 14:27:00 +0000

H. Diaz, I’ve made note of everyone’s suggestions, and will attempt to implement the ones that we can. Not all are do-able.

By: H.Diaz

H.Diaz — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 03:08:47 +0000

Dr. Whisky, go ahead, chime in already. Your professional opinion is long over due.

By: H.Diaz

H.Diaz — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 00:06:44 +0000

John, although you asked for content rather than design recommendations for this blog, I agree with Neil, #92.

Often times, especially after several days or more, I cannot remember then find where I last posted. I am unable to follow-up and post any additional comments. Searching for myself can be cumbersome.

Not sure how much trouble it is, but to click on my name and see my posting history would be fantastic and would likely bring me back more often.

As for content, it provides for both the novice and the expert.

By: John Hansell

John Hansell — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 13:44:31 +0000

Tim F., JC: My friends, I appreciate your thoughts, but let’s move on, okay? Thanks.

By: JC Skinner

JC Skinner — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 12:59:43 +0000

Perhaps the quotes should go around ‘Whisky’ instead, given that’s not actually his surname?
Look, I made no personal attack on the man. As I said, I don’t know him at all. I know his blog and ironically found that it fulfills all the offputting criteria that he levels at John’s blog here.
Rather than seek to prescribe to other writers how and what they should write, I believe he could address the same issues as they affect his own output.
And finally, I reserve the right to dismiss the opinions of anyone on the payroll of a distiller as being potentially swayed by the facts of their employ.

By: Tim F

Tim F — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 08:59:39 +0000

JC, I take your point and as I said before, I do respect your right to an opinion. I just think there’s a rich irony that when you chose to publish yours couched in the form of a personal attack to refute Dr. Whisky, you actually ended up proving his original point – harsh personal abuse is the biggest buzzkill of all. Incidentally, you don’t need the quotation marks around ‘Doctor’ when referring to Sam – he finished his PhD in 2008.

By: Holysinner

Holysinner — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 06:47:38 +0000

Like Neil Fusillo’s request above, this isn’t about content or to appeal to newcomers. I’d love to see something like a “view new comments” button (like you’d have on a forum), which presents comments posted since your last visit. Such a feature may not be feasible in your blog software (maybe with cookies? I can understand your wanting to avoid registration), but it would be much easier than having to open each post in a separate tab and scroll to the bottom, trying to remember which was the last comment I’d read yesterday. Also, if someone now comments on an older post, it will likely never be seen, but such a feature could revive a long inactive topic.

By: Alex

Alex — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 05:15:45 +0000

I would be hard pressed to find commentary here that would be detrimental to new whisky drinkers. At times perhaps too much content detail or specifics for the casual fan but that is what makes WDJK so interesting. The only buzzkill may be for the marketers when they read certain rants about industry trends, specifically on costs or marketing gimmicks, that drive great malt out of reach of a loyal fan base.

By: Neil Fusillo

Neil Fusillo — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 02:19:30 +0000

You know, John, one thing I WOULD like to see added to the blog that has nothing whatsoever to do with content (and it may be there and I just don’t know about it) is a way to search for previous comments by a poster. Myself, for instance. I’ve often found myself remembering an article based strictly on the comment I made about it, but not remembering the article itself exactly. It’d be nice if I could pull up a post history of my comments and see which articles I’ve commented upon.

By: JC Skinner

JC Skinner — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 01:33:07 +0000

As I said, it’s a personal opinion I’d have kept to myself had this context not arisen.
I don’t know him personally but am sure he’s a fine chap.
All I know is his blog, and I find his writing style off-putting. His reviews, for me, are all about his adjectival overload and often very little about communicating a sense of the whiskey to me.
Now, that’s my personal reaction. His blog is popular, so clearly others think otherwise.
I’m happy for them to do so, so long as they don’t mind my having my opinion.

By: Tim F

Tim F — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 01:00:11 +0000

JC, I think your comment is very unnecessarily harsh, particularly the ego comment. Dr. Whisky is one of the most self-deprecating people you could ever meet despite his vast knowledge of the subject and his blog frequently illuminates the history or provenance of whiskies in a very easy-to-understand way. I’ll declare an interest in that I actually know him and am proud to call him a friend. I really respect your comments in general, but I honestly think you’ve got the wrong end of the stick with this one. To suggest that his current job is affecting his output is also very unfair and a insulting, in my opinion he is taking pains to remain as impartial as possible with his blogs since he took the job and has frequently written stuff that few in the industry would dare to reveal, at his own risk. Your opinion is your own but I really think you’ve gone wrong on this one, and I suspect John would say the same. He doesn’t need you to stick up for him, and I honestly think you’ve gone too far on this one, much as I respect and enjoy your posts in general.

By: Red_Arremer

Red_Arremer — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 18:48:48 +0000

Forget about this beginners guide stuff, John. That’s would be like you giving out free promotion.

Some better ideas would be to start a thread about whiskies that are good for beginners and as many have suggested to simply post up reviews of conventional, long time, whisky staples that aren’t here– In fact you could do a whole article in Malt Advocate about that.

By: Todd

Todd — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 17:31:49 +0000

John, post #86 prompts a follow-up comment that combines two earlier discussed threads, 1) good entry malts and 2) batch variation. I know it is some work, but it would be helpful if you could occasionally update reviews on the more affordable and widely accessible whiskies. Nine years is a long time and things change. For example, IMO, Lagavulin 16 went through a rough patch sometime around 2002 or 2003 (due to low stocks) and suffered a triple hit of a dramatic increase in price, decreased availability, and a dip in quality. I loved the older bottlings so I searched around for all of the older 1990s “White Horse” Lagavulin 16s I could find (there were other subtle bottle age identifying label changes around this time). Based on tasting 4-5 different batches of Lagavulin 16 bottled between 2007-2009, I am very happy to say that the current bottlings of Lagavulin 16 are back to their former grandeur.