It's good to have an opinion...and what I read from you is mostly that: opinion...here is mine, with some thoughts....
The respect thing is admirable...not sure why I should respect someone for creating a cool flashlight tube and creating limited runs while pricing it out of the typical person's price range, but hey, we all have our own perspectives on these things...
Clones are not always cheaply made...Furthermore, a general statement like the one you made that states its likely "more often than not" that they are cheaply made and will under-perform doesn't hold up well in real life application....most clones these days, in my experience, are pretty darn well made, not prone to breaking, are close to being 1:1 copies, and in many cases actually have outperformed the originals...
Could you please expand on your statement that a clone might not be safe for vaping? Do you have examples of these cheaply made clones that have been unsafe?....and any blanket guarantees that paying big bucks for an original ensures absolute fine, safe quality and is airtight insurance that it will be safe for vaping?
Refusing to buy clones is a personal decision and an easy one for people to make, especially if they have the means to take such a lofty position...truth is though, most people dont have the means...your message, IMHO, tells the maker to continue limited runs, keep your prices high, and limit availability to the very few who can afford it...I dont see that as good for anyone except the maker and the few with $$$...My position is that these clones aren't really hurting most makers as they seem to sell out regardless, and clones offer many people the opportunity to experience an excellent vape experience while keeping vaping within their financial constraints...some will eventually buy originals, some wont....the important part is they arent smoking....THAT is whats ultimately good for the vaping community and a in general, the right position to take...IMHO....YMMV...
Thank you Spike64 my friend for this well thought out, and articulated post. I do not have any problems with those who are "anti-clone" however, I do take issue with BLATANT misinformation, and opinions founded solely in bias, and a distorted perception of reality.
From my perspective, it takes a lot more than a logo design to make something like the mechanical mod a unique creation. There are also very few logos, and designs (both functional, and aesthetic) that are in fact unique, and original, and that are not borrowed in some way, from something that existed before it ... Almost everything "created" was inspired by something else that existed before it. That is just the nature of Life and Evolution.
Just because a modder was the first to take that pre-existing image, or logo, and stick on their mod or RBA does not in fact make it unique, nor does it truly belong to the modder who was the first to "use it" in their application of choice.
Based on Vwls logic, and reasoning, Pedro Carvalho is thief as the Caravel/Caravela ship itself, and any image depicting it, does not belong to Pedro Carvalho ... The Caravel ship dates back to the 15/16th centuries, and images depicting the Caravel ship existed long before the Caravela mod was created. Pedro Carvalho did not invent the mechanical mod, nor did he invent the spring loaded button that makes it work. He simply created a mechanical mod, according his own personal tastes, that he himself would enjoy using, and utilized pre-existing names, and images in his design, that do not belong to him to do so. FACT!
I have a lot of respect for Pedro Carvalho, so I am in no way criticizing him, his creation of the Caravela mod, or his choice to use the Caravel ship image as his logo. However, the only thing that is unique about the Caravela mod, is the "aesthetic arrangement" applied to the mechanical, even as a large part of that aesthetic is borrowed (the ships image/name). What I am criticizing is the error in the perception of reality (original vs copy/clone) as expressed in Vwls's comment.
Now I could go on, and on calling out the various modders who incorporate pre-existing images, and designs into their own creations ... but I don't need do that, my point has already been made in this singular example.
If you happen to be one who prefers to buy "high end" mods, and RBA's because you "think" they are better, more power to you. But please stop using bias, fallacy, and blatant exaggeration in order to justify your reasons for doing so. To say that the materials used to produce clones are "unsafe" is blatantly FALSE. To say that all high end mods/RBA are 100 % original, and unique in design is also FALSE. And if you are going to make statements like that, you should also be able to provide concrete examples which substantiates the statements being made ... as I have demonstrated above in my own statements. ;-)
Most fully aware, and discerning adults know full well that "everything that glitters is not gold", that "more" most certainly does not always mean better, and that value is subjective. There are certain "high end" devices that I absolutely believe warrant a higher price tag, but there are so many more that do not, but that is just my opinion which I would never attempt to put forth as FACT. Nor do I need to vilify high end vape gear because I, in most cases, do not find it to be worth their price tag.
