I am somewhat surprised by the heat this topic has generated. I am
confused as to whether it has to do with aversion to technical tools
which are suppose to work miracles (databases, ick!), or something
more than this.

To clarify, let me ask the following questions:

Do you attempt to buy tea that is clearly labeled as to origin
(preferably including the plantation)?
Do you attempt to buy tea that has brewing instructions?
Do you use a timer when brewing your tea?
Do you use a scale to measure your tea?
Do you verbally express or write impressions of your tea?
If you do, do you use distinct verbal modifiers (e.g. 'astringent,'
'floral,' etc.) when describing your tea?
If you do, do organize these impressions somehow (e.g. keep a tea
journal, blog, etc) ?

I would personally answer yes to all of these, except for the scale.
The problem for me is not whether or not impressions and experiences
should be organized, but how. I also find this daunting, but to me the
daunting factor is largely a factor of a lack of standardization in
the industry. For example, if I was to label a tea as organic or not,
I would need to research each agency that labels such and assess both
their claim and whether or not regular and complete audits are done to
insure product quality, probably ultimately ending up with multiple
categories of 'organic' teas, each meaning something slightly
different. This is not simply a product of something unique to tea,
but lack of standards and unified political structure.

I once (like Dominic) created a database for categorizing teas. It
contained many fields and tables and I think it could have been used
for tea. The main problem I faced in the end was a recognition that to
do this well, one would need other quality reviewers to set the style
starting off. Most other venues I have observed on the web focus on
teas popular to an American audience (flowery teas), and I am not
especially interested in these. I continue to be interested in
creating a 'tea-blogging' platform where impressions of various teas
are easily searchable by type and vendor.

So, to conclude, I am wary of allowing technical means to substitute
and or limit my experience of tea, but do appreciate what organization
is available (albeit, somewhat limited in the case of tea). Why not
make it a little bit better?

On Sep 26, 4:00*am, Joel Dietz > wrote:
> I am somewhat surprised by the heat this topic has generated. I am
> confused as to whether it has to do with aversion to technical tools
> which are suppose to work miracles (databases, ick!), or something
> more than this.
>
> To clarify, let me ask the following questions:
>
> Do you attempt to buy tea that is clearly labeled as to origin
> (preferably including the plantation)?
> Do you attempt to buy tea that has brewing instructions?
> Do you use a timer when brewing your tea?
> Do you use a scale to measure your tea?
> Do you verbally express or write impressions of your tea?
> If you do, do you use distinct verbal modifiers (e.g. 'astringent,'
> 'floral,' etc.) when describing your tea?
> If you do, do organize these impressions somehow (e.g. keep a tea
> journal, blog, etc) ?
>
> I would personally answer yes to all of these, except for the scale.
> The problem for me is not whether or not impressions and experiences
> should be organized, but how. I also find this daunting, but to me the
> daunting factor is largely a factor of a lack of standardization in
> the industry. For example, if I was to label a tea as organic or not,
> I would need to research each agency that labels such and assess both
> their claim and whether or not regular and complete audits are done to
> insure product quality, probably ultimately ending up with multiple
> categories of 'organic' teas, each meaning something slightly
> different. This is not simply a product of something unique to tea,
> but lack of standards and unified political structure.
>
> I once (like Dominic) created a database for categorizing teas. It
> contained many fields and tables and I think it could have been used
> for tea. The main problem I faced in the end was a recognition that to
> do this well, one would need other quality reviewers to set the style
> starting off. Most other venues I have observed on the web focus on
> teas popular to an American audience (flowery teas), and I am not
> especially interested in these. *I continue to be interested in
> creating a 'tea-blogging' platform where impressions of various teas
> are easily searchable by type and vendor.
>
> So, to conclude, I am wary of allowing technical means to substitute
> and or limit my experience of tea, but do appreciate what organization
> is available (albeit, somewhat limited in the case of tea). Why not
> make it a little bit better?

I think these are two different things. Attempting to collect and
aggregate different people's reviews and notes of specific teas is
different than using some scientific method to *enjoy* the tea. A wide
variety of veiws and notes on a particular tea is helpful sicne there
are so many variables. You don't have to worry if the individual
reviewer uses different terms or ideas than another, just that they
all pertain to the tea at hand. After even just a few reviews patterns
will emerge and common themes will be easy to recognize. When 20
people mention "smoky" in some way for a lapsang then the viewer has a
pretty good idea that if they buy/try that tea it will have smoky
characteristics. Among a single type of tea, say our recent
conversation about Shui xian (Hsien) one category contains so many
different flavors and types that seeing a tea labeled as Shui Xian is
not enough to make a purchase. Some want light roasting, some want
heavy, some like the chocolate notes, some prefer raisiny. When you
compile a list of notes/reviews of a specific tea from a specific
vendor you now have information worthwhile in selecting a tea... it
won't help you enjoy it.

- Dominic

Joel Dietz > wrote:
>Do you attempt to buy tea that is clearly labeled as to origin
>(preferably including the plantation)?

This is generally a good thing. However, there are importers who go out
of their way to hide tea origins in order to retain control over a product
and prevent customers from getting similar teas elsewhere. Some of them
are extremely legitimate merchants who sell very high quality tea, like
Roy Fong of ITC. Some of them are not.

I have no qualms about buying a product from Roy Fong because I know he
cares about the quality and he'll stand behind it. But when I do, I
really know nothing about where the tea comes from, other than perhaps
it is from somewhere in Yunnan, for instance. Yunnan is a really big
places.

>Do you attempt to buy tea that has brewing instructions?

No, and I wouldn't trust them anyway. Why should I care about how someone
else liked their tea brewed.

>Do you use a timer when brewing your tea?

No.

>Do you use a scale to measure your tea?

No, I tend to use volume.

>Do you verbally express or write impressions of your tea?

Absolutely, and sometimes I post them here.

>If you do, do you use distinct verbal modifiers (e.g. 'astringent,'
>'floral,' etc.) when describing your tea?

Absolutely. If you don't, how can you be sure anyone knows what you
are talking about? The alternative is saying "This tea is great!"
and because tastes are different, a tea you find great might not be
something I like at all.

>If you do, do organize these impressions somehow (e.g. keep a tea
>journal, blog, etc) ?

No. I generally know what kind of teas I like and what kind I don't.
Most of the time I drink the same tea every day. If I find something
amazing, I'll usually tell people about it but this happens seldom
enough that I have no trouble keeping track of it.

>I would personally answer yes to all of these, except for the scale.
>The problem for me is not whether or not impressions and experiences
>should be organized, but how. I also find this daunting, but to me the
>daunting factor is largely a factor of a lack of standardization in
>the industry. For example, if I was to label a tea as organic or not,
>I would need to research each agency that labels such and assess both
>their claim and whether or not regular and complete audits are done to
>insure product quality, probably ultimately ending up with multiple
>categories of 'organic' teas, each meaning something slightly
>different. This is not simply a product of something unique to tea,
>but lack of standards and unified political structure.

I doubt there are really very many teas at all that fulfill the
California organic labelling requirements. God knows there is nothing
coming out of China that would, and I doubt there is much coming out
of India. The labelling is basically bogus and can be ignored.

Much tea labelling is bogus. There are a lot of people selling single
estate teas that don't come from those estates. The US imports far
more Darjeeling tea than is actually grown in Darjeeling. The rest of
it has to come from somewhere.

>i once (like Dominic) created a database for categorizing teas. It
>contained many fields and tables and I think it could have been used
>for tea. The main problem I faced in the end was a recognition that to
>do this well, one would need other quality reviewers to set the style
>starting off. Most other venues I have observed on the web focus on
>teas popular to an American audience (flowery teas), and I am not
>especially interested in these. I continue to be interested in
>creating a 'tea-blogging' platform where impressions of various teas
>are easily searchable by type and vendor.
>
>So, to conclude, I am wary of allowing technical means to substitute
>and or limit my experience of tea, but do appreciate what organization
>is available (albeit, somewhat limited in the case of tea). Why not
>make it a little bit better?

I think you're getting too hung up on terroir and you're also under the
impression that labelling can be believed. Also you seem to have the
notion that various different people can readily compare their experiences
without a huge amount of common experiences among them. Perhaps these
things are what people are reacting to when they are flaming you.

Calm down, and have a nice cup of tea and don't worry about it.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 01:00:18 -0700 (PDT), Joel Dietz
> wrote:

>I am somewhat surprised by the heat this topic has generated.

Me, too. Why are a few people so threatened / frightened?

>I am
>confused as to whether it has to do with aversion to technical tools
>which are suppose to work miracles (databases, ick!), or something
>more than this.

When I was in college, I took a statistics course designed for
psychology and sociology majors. Very elementary concepts. The
professor went out of his way to talk is very small, non-technical
words.

One day, he put this formula on the board:

mean = (a1 + a2 + a3 + ... + an) / n

The class was horrified. You would have thought he had showed photos
of tortured babies. This was a college class.

>To clarify, let me ask the following questions:
>
>Do you attempt to buy tea that is clearly labeled as to origin
>(preferably including the plantation)?
>Do you attempt to buy tea that has brewing instructions?
>Do you use a timer when brewing your tea?
>Do you use a scale to measure your tea?
>Do you verbally express or write impressions of your tea?
>If you do, do you use distinct verbal modifiers (e.g. 'astringent,'
>'floral,' etc.) when describing your tea?
>If you do, do organize these impressions somehow (e.g. keep a tea
>journal, blog, etc) ?
>
>I would personally answer yes to all of these, except for the scale.
>The problem for me is not whether or not impressions and experiences
>should be organized, but how. I also find this daunting, but to me the
>daunting factor is largely a factor of a lack of standardization in
>the industry. For example, if I was to label a tea as organic or not,
>I would need to research each agency that labels such and assess both
>their claim and whether or not regular and complete audits are done to
>insure product quality, probably ultimately ending up with multiple
>categories of 'organic' teas, each meaning something slightly
>different. This is not simply a product of something unique to tea,
>but lack of standards and unified political structure.
>
>I once (like Dominic) created a database for categorizing teas. It
>contained many fields and tables and I think it could have been used
>for tea. The main problem I faced in the end was a recognition that to
>do this well, one would need other quality reviewers to set the style
>starting off. Most other venues I have observed on the web focus on
>teas popular to an American audience (flowery teas), and I am not
>especially interested in these. I continue to be interested in
>creating a 'tea-blogging' platform where impressions of various teas
>are easily searchable by type and vendor.
>
>So, to conclude, I am wary of allowing technical means to substitute
>and or limit my experience of tea, but do appreciate what organization
>is available (albeit, somewhat limited in the case of tea). Why not
>make it a little bit better?

I'll be interested to see if you generate more heat or light.

what we're drinking (most of us) are not blended/flavored teas that
the manuf/distributor tries hard(and most of the time can) control
from batch to batch
like Dominic already said
there are just so many variables to each category that even if
creating structure it will still be somewhat unreliable to comeback to
for future reference.
i too started trying to categorize and detail and assign number
values, and after a couple years i discovered my taste changed,
preferences fluctuate, the numbers sometimes dont match the current
experience, and most of the time the curiosity drives to try other
stuff - and there is so many kinds and so many sources!, so that
looking back only a couple teas i ended up buying more than once (from
the same source).
if i had the time & money to sit down for hours and to spend day in
and day out drinking and drinking tea then maybe i'd start to number
and categorize again, because i'd really define and refine my
impression of a tea - currently tea's been sort of a "hobby"/relaxed
activity - i'll spend more time with the first couple infusions to get
how the tea behaves and determine if i like it or not, from there i'd
just eyeball other infusions, get my cup and enjoy.

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 19:28:50 -0700 (PDT), SN >
wrote:

>what we're drinking (most of us) are not blended/flavored teas that
>the manuf/distributor tries hard(and most of the time can) control
>from batch to batch
>like Dominic already said
>there are just so many variables to each category that even if
>creating structure it will still be somewhat unreliable to comeback to
>for future reference.
>i too started trying to categorize and detail and assign number
>values, and after a couple years i discovered my taste changed,
>preferences fluctuate, the numbers sometimes dont match the current
>experience, and most of the time the curiosity drives to try other
>stuff - and there is so many kinds and so many sources!, so that
>looking back only a couple teas i ended up buying more than once (from
>the same source).
>if i had the time & money to sit down for hours and to spend day in
>and day out drinking and drinking tea then maybe i'd start to number
>and categorize again, because i'd really define and refine my
>impression of a tea - currently tea's been sort of a "hobby"/relaxed
>activity - i'll spend more time with the first couple infusions to get
>how the tea behaves and determine if i like it or not, from there i'd
>just eyeball other infusions, get my cup and enjoy.

That makes sense. I have no problem with anyone who just wants to
experience something (tea or anything else). Different stokes for
different folks, as they say. I'm not trying to convert anyone. I'm
just puzzled why a simple question gets such a hostile and emotional
reaction. Kinda reminds me of fundamentalists starting a jihad because
someone disrespected some sacred icon. Kinda sad, actually.

> >Do you attempt to buy tea that has brewing instructions?
>
> No, and I wouldn't trust them anyway. *Why should I care about how someone
> else liked their tea brewed.
>

Gives you a starting point in any case. I'm always curious, for
instance, which of the Wulongs I buy from Lupicia they say is supposed
to be brewed at 195 and which at 185.

> Much tea labelling is bogus. *

Granted. I still see this as a place where a better job can be done
and prefer merchants that attempt this.

> I think you're getting too hung up on terroir and you're also under the
> impression that labelling can be believed. *Also you seem to have the
> notion that various different people can readily compare their experiences
> without a huge amount of common experiences among them. * Perhaps these
> things are what people are reacting to when they are flaming you.

No one has flamed me, just Prof Wonmug (who seems to enjoy returning
the favor).


Jd

> I think these are two different things. Attempting to collect and
> aggregate different people's reviews and notes of specific teas is
> different than using some scientific method to *enjoy* the tea.

I absolutely agree. The real trick is qualitative. I'm curious, for
instance, what readers feel is the best Long Jing (Dragonwell)
available for purchase in the US -- which unlike Shui Xian is a fairly
uniform type (notwithstanding that I had some terrible Taiwanese Long
Jing at one point). Even though there will probably be lots of
opinions on this, and not everyone will have tried the same vendors, I
feel that this having a centralized website would be much better than
searching this usenet group (or any of the other options that
currently exist).

Jd


> variety of veiws and notes on a particular tea is helpful sicne there
> are so many variables. You don't have to worry if the individual
> reviewer uses different terms or ideas than another, just that they
> all pertain to the tea at hand. After even just a few reviews patterns
> will emerge and common themes will be easy to recognize. When 20
> people mention "smoky" in some way for a lapsang then the viewer has a
> pretty good idea that if they buy/try that tea it will have smoky
> characteristics. Among a single type of tea, say our recent
> conversation about Shui xian (Hsien) one category contains so many
> different flavors and types that seeing a tea labeled as Shui Xian is
> not enough to make a purchase. *Some want light roasting, some want
> heavy, some like the chocolate notes, some prefer raisiny. When you
> compile a list of notes/reviews of a specific tea from a specific
> vendor you now have information worthwhile in selecting a tea... it
> won't help you enjoy it.
>
> - Dominic

On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 01:08:23 -0700 (PDT), Joel Dietz
> wrote:

>
>> >Do you attempt to buy tea that has brewing instructions?
>>
>> No, and I wouldn't trust them anyway. *Why should I care about how someone
>> else liked their tea brewed.
>>
>
>Gives you a starting point in any case. I'm always curious, for
>instance, which of the Wulongs I buy from Lupicia they say is supposed
>to be brewed at 195 and which at 185.
>
>> Much tea labelling is bogus. *
>
>Granted. I still see this as a place where a better job can be done
>and prefer merchants that attempt this.
>
>> I think you're getting too hung up on terroir and you're also under the
>> impression that labelling can be believed. *Also you seem to have the
>> notion that various different people can readily compare their experiences
>> without a huge amount of common experiences among them. * Perhaps these
>> things are what people are reacting to when they are flaming you.
>
>No one has flamed me, just Prof Wonmug (who seems to enjoy returning
>the favor).

When did I flame you (or anyone else, for that matter)?

On Sep 26, 11:37*pm, Prof Wonmug > wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 19:28:50 -0700 (PDT), SN >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >what we're drinking (most of us) are not blended/flavored teas that
> >the manuf/distributor tries hard(and most of the time can) control
> >from batch to batch
> >like Dominic already said
> >there are just so many variables to each category that even if
> >creating structure it will still be somewhat unreliable to comeback to
> >for future reference.
> >i too started trying to categorize and detail and assign number
> >values, and after a couple years i discovered my taste changed,
> >preferences fluctuate, the numbers sometimes dont match the current
> >experience, and most of the time the curiosity drives to try other
> >stuff - and there is so many kinds and so many sources!, so that
> >looking back only a couple teas i ended up buying more than once (from
> >the same source).
> >if i had the time & money to sit down for hours and to spend day in
> >and day out drinking and drinking tea then maybe i'd start to number
> >and categorize again, because i'd really define and refine my
> >impression of a tea - currently tea's been sort of a "hobby"/relaxed
> >activity - i'll spend more time with the first couple infusions to get
> >how the tea behaves and determine if i like it or not, from there i'd
> >just eyeball other infusions, get my cup and enjoy.
>
> That makes sense. I have no problem with anyone who just wants to
> experience something (tea or anything else). Different stokes for
> different folks, as they say. I'm not trying to convert anyone. I'm
> just puzzled why a simple question gets such a hostile and emotional
> reaction. Kinda reminds me of fundamentalists starting a jihad because
> someone disrespected some sacred icon. Kinda sad, actually.

Well, then please show me how wrong I am. The reason it raises ire is
that it goes against almost all of the history and tradition. That is
a pretty bold move. It's like claiming you have a perpetual motion
machine in a scientific convention. See how much support and help you
get. My guess is the same as with these magical calculations that can
create perfect tea.

- Dominic

On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 12:25:23 -0700 (PDT), "Dominic T."
> wrote:

>On Sep 26, 11:37*pm, Prof Wonmug > wrote:
>> On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 19:28:50 -0700 (PDT), SN >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >what we're drinking (most of us) are not blended/flavored teas that
>> >the manuf/distributor tries hard(and most of the time can) control
>> >from batch to batch
>> >like Dominic already said
>> >there are just so many variables to each category that even if
>> >creating structure it will still be somewhat unreliable to comeback to
>> >for future reference.
>> >i too started trying to categorize and detail and assign number
>> >values, and after a couple years i discovered my taste changed,
>> >preferences fluctuate, the numbers sometimes dont match the current
>> >experience, and most of the time the curiosity drives to try other
>> >stuff - and there is so many kinds and so many sources!, so that
>> >looking back only a couple teas i ended up buying more than once (from
>> >the same source).
>> >if i had the time & money to sit down for hours and to spend day in
>> >and day out drinking and drinking tea then maybe i'd start to number
>> >and categorize again, because i'd really define and refine my
>> >impression of a tea - currently tea's been sort of a "hobby"/relaxed
>> >activity - i'll spend more time with the first couple infusions to get
>> >how the tea behaves and determine if i like it or not, from there i'd
>> >just eyeball other infusions, get my cup and enjoy.
>>
>> That makes sense. I have no problem with anyone who just wants to
>> experience something (tea or anything else). Different stokes for
>> different folks, as they say. I'm not trying to convert anyone. I'm
>> just puzzled why a simple question gets such a hostile and emotional
>> reaction. Kinda reminds me of fundamentalists starting a jihad because
>> someone disrespected some sacred icon. Kinda sad, actually.
>
>Well, then please show me how wrong I am.

OK. I'll try once last time, then I give up.

I have no interest in showing you that you are wrong. I am not
claiming that you are wrong. I never said anything about you or anyone
else being wrong. I simply asked a question about collect data.

>The reason it raises ire is
>that it goes against almost all of the history and tradition.

I'm sorry that a simple question raises your ire. I never said my way
was right or your way was wrong or anything. You just went off.

If this upsets you, why do you not just ignore the posts or killfile
me?

I'm done. Bye.

On Sep 27, 3:50*pm, Prof Wonmug > wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 12:25:23 -0700 (PDT), "Dominic T."
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> >On Sep 26, 11:37*pm, Prof Wonmug > wrote:
> >> On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 19:28:50 -0700 (PDT), SN >
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >what we're drinking (most of us) are not blended/flavored teas that
> >> >the manuf/distributor tries hard(and most of the time can) control
> >> >from batch to batch
> >> >like Dominic already said
> >> >there are just so many variables to each category that even if
> >> >creating structure it will still be somewhat unreliable to comeback to
> >> >for future reference.
> >> >i too started trying to categorize and detail and assign number
> >> >values, and after a couple years i discovered my taste changed,
> >> >preferences fluctuate, the numbers sometimes dont match the current
> >> >experience, and most of the time the curiosity drives to try other
> >> >stuff - and there is so many kinds and so many sources!, so that
> >> >looking back only a couple teas i ended up buying more than once (from
> >> >the same source).
> >> >if i had the time & money to sit down for hours and to spend day in
> >> >and day out drinking and drinking tea then maybe i'd start to number
> >> >and categorize again, because i'd really define and refine my
> >> >impression of a tea - currently tea's been sort of a "hobby"/relaxed
> >> >activity - i'll spend more time with the first couple infusions to get
> >> >how the tea behaves and determine if i like it or not, from there i'd
> >> >just eyeball other infusions, get my cup and enjoy.
>
> >> That makes sense. I have no problem with anyone who just wants to
> >> experience something (tea or anything else). Different stokes for
> >> different folks, as they say. I'm not trying to convert anyone. I'm
> >> just puzzled why a simple question gets such a hostile and emotional
> >> reaction. Kinda reminds me of fundamentalists starting a jihad because
> >> someone disrespected some sacred icon. Kinda sad, actually.
>
> >Well, then please show me how wrong I am.
>
> OK. I'll try once last time, then I give up.
>
> I have no interest in showing you that you are wrong. I am not
> claiming that you are wrong. I never said anything about you or anyone
> else being wrong. I simply asked a question about collect data.
>
> >The reason it raises ire is
> >that it goes against almost all of the history and tradition.
>
> I'm sorry that a simple question raises your ire. I never said my way
> was right or your way was wrong or anything. You just went off.
>
> If this upsets you, why do you not just ignore the posts or killfile
> me?
>
> I'm done. Bye.

Aww, c'mon, did I hurt your feelings? I never said you claimed I was
wrong, I never said you were wrong, I said you were foolish. I'd love
to see the fruits of your labor, in a year or so when you realize it
doesn't work (if that long), please publish what you've compiled.

- Dominic

Prof Wonmug > writes:

> On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 01:08:23 -0700 (PDT), Joel Dietz
> > wrote:
> >[...]
> >No one has flamed me, just Prof Wonmug (who seems to enjoy returning
> >the favor).
>
> When did I flame you (or anyone else, for that matter)?

The way I read it was "No one has flamed me, they've just flamed Prof Wonmug..."

/Lew
---
Lew Perin /
http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html

On 28 Sep 2009 10:36:40 -0400, Lewis Perin > wrote:

>Prof Wonmug > writes:
>
>> On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 01:08:23 -0700 (PDT), Joel Dietz
>> > wrote:
>> >[...]
>> >No one has flamed me, just Prof Wonmug (who seems to enjoy returning
>> >the favor).
>>
>> When did I flame you (or anyone else, for that matter)?
>
>The way I read it was "No one has flamed me, they've just flamed Prof Wonmug..."

Yup, I think you're right.