Reply With QuoteI asked a simple question and you made a very very simple statement. There is a big difference between asking a question and making a rubbish statement that you cannot back up.Originally Posted by sarky
I can see you're one of those bandwagon jumpers. Ever thought of trying something yourself.
The day I justify an industry accepted point to a fella who asks about shoe sole material on a watch forum, is not close.
I asked a simple question and you made a very very simple statement. There is a big difference between asking a question and making a rubbish statement that you cannot back up.
Bandwagon?
What industry would this be?
Lighten up eh kid - you get your shirt in a knot too easily - this place is for discussion, not sulking.
Remember that and you'll enjoy it here. :)
Well there's a lot of categories. Antique watches are 100 yrs plus apparently but vintage is more clouded. What I mean by that is that there are more than one definition of vintage in horology. Whilst it could be argued rightly or wrongly that a vintage piece should be 25 yrs old at least, personally I feel the term does not refer to the watch but rather to the era in which it became popular so a swatch from the early 80s could be considered vintage whereas a submariner from the 80s would be more likely NOT to be considered vintage? Does that clear things up or just confuse the issue further.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I agree with a lot of what you say, but must admit using terms like dumb and rubbish seems slightly unnecessary.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A good angle.
Antiques are pre-Reform Act only. At least that was the rule when I was growing up ;)
Sorry Mick. Just because you think something doesn't make it true.
Try Google. It tells you things.
Well perhapsbut the 100 yr thing was borne out of the hunt for import duties by the USA Customs Office. Duty was collected on anything younger than 100 yrs apparently.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
For what it's worth. I consider plexi to be vintage, sapphire and trit to be on it's way and luminova to be modern.
But in case it's eluded you, "generally accepted" doesn't necessarily mean what I think or what you think no matter how much bellowing you intend to do on the subject.
Not about shoes!
I'm sure you can still be omniscient and not know how to adequately clad your feet when partaking in your secondary hobby of walking on water.
Sort of.
I like you Verv.
I'm looking to create a friends list larger than an ignore list, but it's tough here.
sarky, the comments about you in the Bear Pit are mostly positive. You seem a good fit for this forum.
Welcome!
Another one - I'm on a roll
It appears that, by being the enemy of some people's enemies, you are (currently) their friend.Another one - I'm on a roll
Ignore list for me, please, sarky.
All a bit serious bongo - it's a watch forum, not that it's easy to tell sometimes.
So, verv and Ally are on the most wanted list?
I think it's my list isn't it, but feel free to clone my log in and add yourself.
Eh? I think you overthink... Bedtime maybe?
Sorry for not coming back, I popped out for a curry.
It is obvious that there is no consensus on either what term should be used, when it should be used and even if we have different dates for different models.
The start of this little squabble was the rather flamboyant reference to "Those with any real knowledge of the hobby would agree 25 years or older is correct." So the simple unanswered question which sarky still will not answer is - who are these knowledgeable people and where is the evidence. If he had said something like verv had said - "The accepted consensus is that a watch becomes vintage at 25+", then there would not have been any flak because an opinion is different from stating what appears to be a fact.
My position is unchanged, a 25 year old watch is nothing more than a 25 year old watch and that is purely an opinion. There is nothing wrong with anyone coming in with another opinion as long as it is not put across as a fact.
sarky, I think you'll fit in here but you're attracting a lot of attention by shooting from the hip so early.
It's either a sign you've been here before or you've sussed the forum quickly. Either way, welcome.
There are other parts of TZ that will unlock if you can keep your powder dry for long enough.
There's only one mod and he sees everything.
Thanks.
I'd say the best thing I've learned this far is to use the ignore function for those members who are rude, or simply set in a wrong mindset. Currently there's only three. I was rude after being baited, but to a member caught in the crossfire, for which I've apologised by PM. Didn't get a reply, but one tries.
I'm happy to be judged by anyone who can make a call on that judgement, which I understand is one man, however, I see nothing said which warrants any contact in that regard.
It was a request, not a demand, hence the please. Also, now it's not hacking, since I have your explicit permission ;)
Sounds like Masonic Lodge
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sarky - stop using this thread for an argument and a way of bumping up your thread count. There are other sections of the Forum for bickering.
And other TZ'ers, its about time you also remembered the appropriate forum etiquette.
My question was less about establishing when something becomes vintage e.g. 25 years old or more, such as SD I'm considering, but whether you would still consider it a tool watch as it was originally intended, or treat it more respectfully, as you might do a vintage?
Thanks to those who have stayed on topic and provided their thoughts.
I like how the mods introduce themselves here. Thanks.
Getting involved in this forum is impossible. You're new, so can't have an opinion and if you post more than once in a blue moon, you're bumping your count. The only reason to bump a count is to access parts of the forum I've no interest in. The BP I keep being told about sounds like a gang of bullies and I wouldn't buy a watch here, as most seem to have a pretty poor knowledge of the timepieces they sell.
That said, Watch Talk is pretty tedious, based on the reception so far.
I'm not a Mod but the thread creator, and forum etiquette should be respected by all. Watch Talk, especially someone else's thread, is not for personal insults, which this thread degenerated to. To all - start your own threads elsewhere if you want to bicker.
Well, thanks for now opening the telling off to all. I made a reasonable contribution in my opinion to the topic posed. I'll respect your view as the OP, however, that doesn't entitle you to moderate the content. As for etiquette, it's sadly lacking here.
Did you settle your own mind as to what the term tool watch means to you?
I'm not sure this affects anything other that dive watches (there doesn't seem to be inherent risk in continuing to use a chronograph for what it was intended), but for me, it would be the point where, if water got in, or the bezel/insert got damaged, and the repair was either impossible due to lack of parts, or would seriously devalue the watch (service dial rather than original).
It's a shame when something stops getting used for it's intended purpose, but unless you're in a position where you could essentially afford to write of a watch, then that's the point I'd stop, for example, diving or swimming with a vintage diver.
Then there is:
It instantly becomes vintage when listed on eBay.
Good for you.......this has turned into a series of flounces.
Life's too short!
Bursting in the front door of a house and shouting "Hey everybody, I've arrived, and I know better than you!" is unlikely to immediately endear a new member to those who have been here far longer.
I would caution against comments such as "most seem to have a pretty poor knowledge" - the knowledge base of TZ is unbelevably deep and profound concerning watches, and many other areas without any doubt whatsoever. In fact it is a mine of insight and experience in almost any field you can think of. Just try a post in the George and Dragon requesting some advice on any obscure topic you like.
Getting involved in this forum isn't impossible at all - many do, everyone here had a first post, and a second, and over time came to appreciate it's uniqueness.
Watch talk goes through phases, it has been in a Rolex phase for a few years now, and I would love to see more variety, but hopefully it will return in due course.
I hope you enjoy your time here. Best wishes.
So clever my foot fell off.
Speaking of variety banana when can we have a nose at some of your weird and wonderfuls? I remember the sc threads and have always wanted to see what remains if the leavers are anything to go by.
Many thanks FB for constructive words.
I know I can be loud, but there really is a bullying culture here and those should be made aware of it. My reference to those with little knowledge were to those afore mentioned bullies, who contribute nothing other than a dig. Being sworn at through the private messaging system by an established member who doesn't know one end of a watch to the other is unacceptable. I can see the knowledge base here is good and in time will no doubt benefit from that.
Many new guys will leave and not return and some of you established members wouldn't be doing wrong looking at it from our side of the fence. Member for a decade or a day, no one deserves the stick being dished out by some. Thankfully, not everyone is like a mouse, but that's another reason to get 'shouted' at.
No there isn't. A few members are rude sometimes.
Indeed it is and not tolerated by almost everyone here.. Being sworn at through the private messaging system by an established member who doesn't know one end of a watch to the other is unacceptable.
I still think I'm new but I've been here about 2 years now. 'Loud' is fine. 'Witty' even better (and you've made me laugh). 'Informative' is brilliant. 'Impatient and demanding' tends to lead to early burnout.
Just my observations.
Many thanks for your thoughts. I disagree (obviously, it's me) with the bullying aspect - it's something the internet is still hiding behind - but it's here.
I'm happy to be informative, but tough when you're fighting constantly. Your comment and the previous one are what communities are all about. Shame I had the rude lot the front of the queue!
Last edited by sarky; 21st July 2017 at 14:41.
Can anyone join in? Re your question (without a question mark), please see my post at #81.
Then, you say "their knowledge of the English language is rather poor". I'm afraid I don't know what you mean.
Not sure about that distinction, Dave. if I used a watch as a tool, had a multitude of parts replaced/renewed and then listed it for sale as vintage, what would your reaction be?
To my mind there are some key factors that define vintage, the main (and possibly only) two worth thinking about being age and availability.
Can we please, finally, stop the non-watch discussion.
The original point, for anyone who's lost the thread of what was supposed to be discussed, was 25-year old SD, serviced: Treat as tool or not?
Pressure test, fresh spring bars, treat as tool.
I agree, good point Tony, but the point I am making is that, regardless of age, if the capability is there and maintained, it can be called a tool and used or treated as such. It may well be a vintage tool, that is perfectly possible. But, if you are maintaining vintage originality at the price of functionality, the tool aspect is gone, and it becomes a vintage piece only.
Make sense? Hope so
Dave
Sorry OldHooky.
My Father-in-Law ran a business for 30 years that often saw him working outdoors in all weathers, sometimes in quite physical situations. He wore the same Datejust every day for about 25 years because he need a reliable, robust watch that just worked whether he was in a boardroom or a field of mud with 50,000 people. I'd say he always saw it as a tool watch even though it would be vintage by most people's understanding now. It stayed all original throughout that time.
Tool and vintage are not mutually exclusive.
We see some senior members prove the point every day:-)
The meaning of vintage, very much depends on the product. Even quite new things could have the term 'vintage' appended to them especially if they are no longer produced.
Take iPods for example.
https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...tors-item-ebay
Now I must go and check what I have done with my iPod that still had its original packaging and 'origami' box.
Mitch
I know Tony Ime just a tart!Damn you, Bob
Posting Permissions
