> But with a wine, we are dealing with entirely subjective factors.

True, mostly. But that it's (mostly) true does not argue against
precision, it argues against accuracy. They are two different things.

Even a three point (great, good enough, ugh) scale is entirely
subjective in that sense. After all, some people like White Zinfandel
and Bud Light. But even that isn't quite the analogy, since the object
of making a good wine is to make it true to what it's supposed to be.

Given two wines of the same type, is it valid to be able to say one is
really good and the other is just awful? Granted that sometimes an
awful wine will be better with certain foods, maybe even better enough,
but would you agree that one can make mistakes in making wine, and those
mistakes can show up in wine qualities which are well described as "awful"?

That's a subjective judgement too.

I maintain that the fact that it's subjective does not make the
judgement invalid. Do you agree or disagree?

When you say this wine is "better" than that wine, what exactly do you mean?

Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.