I'm puzzled you don't peeve about atomizer. I had a beef with that one at first
Hm... yeah... I could think of a number of people whom I'd like to "atomize"
However, my atomizer does not do that. Think I should take it back for a refund?
- Status
Hm... yeah... I could think of a number of people whom I'd like to "atomize"
However, my atomizer does not do that. Think I should take it back for a refund?
Vapin' Candy Corn Melvin here!!!!
Nice to hear you are off the smokes Mike ... everyone who has commented in your thread are sincerely nice folks who may have been put off a bit about your OP ... however, I am sure everyone is happy to see you off the analogs
We are all becoming friends and are totally supportive.
Cheers
Nice to hear you are off the smokes Mike ... everyone who has commented in your thread are sincerely nice folks who may have been put off a bit about your OP ... however, I am sure everyone is happy to see you off the analogs
We are all becoming friends and are totally supportive.
Cheers
Ditto WillyZ....
WTG Mike!!!!!
do fill me in, please
If you hover your mouse over underlined terms it will pop up a definition.
OP = "Original Poster"
Of course, this can sometimes be humorous, like The ANTZ have their heads up their....
Oops, it didn't underline? Hover over the word "heads" in that last sentence.
I noticed the underlines don't show up if someone has a darker skin on the site.
^ I did a double-take when I first read this. LOL! For a second I thought I was in the wrong forum.
I kinda like Melvin...tastes better than it soundslol:
This is quite sexy. Subliminally speaking, of course.
My best pickup line ever: [smile] "Hi. I'm Melvin."
"Melvin? Mmmmmm...tasty!"
Silly, down in the left corner of the site is the option to change the skin of the site.
OK, I'm a newbie. Picked this up as about a month ago as what I believe to be a better alternative to smoking tobacco. I've spent much more time than necessary understanding what's what. All I read/hear in the "vaping" world reminds me of all the BS in the audiophile world of subjectivity over objectivity, form over function, obscure terminology for obfuscation instead of understanding.
I don't know anything about the audiophile world, or everything about the vaping world. But I am familiar with BS. I am not sure we both have the same understanding of the concept.
Subjectivity over objectivity
I'm not sure I can agree with you that this should be considered BS. Can we have one without the other? Without objectivity, how can we frame, or reference, our own experiences and form opinions? How can we share this with others? Without our experiences and individual points of view, how can we trust the objectivity of anything? How can we say something is indeed fact or truth, if our experiences tell us otherwise? And if we do not have such conversations with others, is there any value at all in objectivity or subjectivity?
Form over function:
Again, I don't see how this is BS. When discussing anything tangible, is not the consideration of form and function (or form over function, or vice versa) absolutely essential?
Obfuscation...
I find that generally speaking, more obfuscation occurs when people use words like obfuscation, or indeed fluff up their language in an effort to make a lot of noise.
The terminology just seems to be part of an exclusive, private club. You're either in or out, and it's a bar to entry.
Peeves:
"Vaping." OK, I understand the desire to differentiate from smoking tobacco, I really do. But please understand that "vaping" is likely to convey (illegal) drug connotations to the general public, right or wrong. I can't pretend to have come up with something better, but "smoking alternative" or "vapor smoking" is probably better received, whether it looks like a cigarette or not.
Please understand that Including any form of the word smoking is counter-productive to differentiating the process from smoking.
"Analogs." Just call them cigarettes, which is what everyone else does. If you want to make people think they're not part of the club, calling them analogs is a good start.
Is the meaning of this very casual, tongue-in-cheek nickname for cigarettes so difficult to grasp that it would be sufficient to make someone feel like they are being excluded from a group?
"Cartos." "Attos." "Clearos." "Glassos." etc. They're all atomizers/vaporizers (pick a term). I get the whole custom/differentiation thing, but lose the cuteness and use one all encompassing term to refer to this part. Groucho, Harpo, Chico, and Zeppo are OK.
Yes they are all atomizers. And apples, oranges, peaches and pears are all fruits. But if I order a slice of fruit pie at the diner hoping for Apple do I yell at the wwaitress for bringing me cherry? Do I make her bring me piece af ter piece until she finally gets it right?
As for the "cuteness" you refer to, are you suggesting that we be more formal by using the entire word (cartomizer, clearomizer, etc.) or do you truly think that Groucho, Harpo, Chico and Zeppo are less cute? And should we as a community decide to use these names, would we not be sending a message to everyone under the age of 55 who have no idea who the Marx brothers are, that this is an exclusive club with ssecret code words?
"e-juice," "e-liquid." It's not the juice of anything. It's not electronic ("e") in any way. It's a liquid, just call it that. Or maybe "e-cigarette liquid."
I am afraid your logic is lost on me. Of course it's not electronic jjuice, or liquid. You seem intelligent enough to realize that is not the intended meaning. The current terms of e-juice and e-liquid are simple to use and their meaning is apparent, even to the most novice of users. Are you suggesting that, in the spirit of creating a more literal vernacular that we create even more confusion for the beginner? If we call it liquid, might we not have thousands of users dumping water or beer or gin in their tanks? "I don't know why I ended up in the hospital, the directions said to use liquid, so I used rubbing alcohol because I had it around.
... does "mod' mean? Perhaps it at one time meant modified. But, if you can buy a "mod" off the shelf, it's not modified, is it? Just call it a battery. Maybe it's fancy. It doesn't matter, it's a battery (holder).
Really? Forgive me, but you seem to be nitpicking here. Mod, whether it stands for modified or modification, is not simply a battery or a battery holder. I have a feeling you know better than that. The term could be related to the fact that many people made modifications to the earliest and limited e-cigs.
VV/VW. VV is really CV - sure, you control (vary) it, but you're telling it to deliver a Constant Voltage. VW is the same only different, it's actually Constant Wattage. Plain batteries with no electronics provide VV/VW - the Voltage/Wattage varies as you drain the battery. And that terminology come from a long history of professional, lab grade, voltage sources/power supplies, don't try to change it. But it is, first and foremost, a battery.
So you wish to simplify the language and terminology of this community so folks aren't intimidated and don't feel like outsiders, correct? And in an effort to do this, you would like us all to first acquire "a long history of professional, lab grade, voltage sources/power supplies" experience? Or maybe an electrical engineering degree? How is this going to help simplify things? If one of our members makes a post stating her excitement about her new VV device, should we first scold her and say, actually that's not a variable voltage device at all.?
Having said all that (and I'm sure I could think of more), I don't expect to change the industry. But many here seem to want to encourage this to go mainstream faster than it already is. The whole terminology thing makes that hard, and presents a barrier to entry - fundamentally there are only three things involved - a power source (call it a battery), a liquid, and a vaporizer. Don't make it harder than it is, that comes later. If you try to get someone into it, tell them to get a battery (and charger), a vaporizer which fits it, and a liquid which tastes good to them - the detail comes later.
I am not sure who you talked to when you first started, but when I purchased my first set up I was told that all I really needed was a battery, a tank to hold my ejuice, and the ejuice itself. Then I was told that there is a wide variety of options but in an effort to keep things simple and not too overwhelming, that it is a great place to start. Should I wish to learn more, there is plenty to learn about, but if the basics work for you, great.
No one told me that well, we (the vaping community) know you want to use e-cigs as a healthier alternative, but first you have to know about every single battery option, understand voltage, wattage, Ohm's Law, go looking for a cartomizer, Grouchomizer, and some liquid. Give it a whirl and get back to us with questions. Then maybe we'll let you in our little club.
Or, don't. But expect that big tobacco will make it easy to understand/buy/use, and that's where the market will go.
This industry is its own worst enemy.
With very little involvement from Big Tobacco, the industry has already attracted millions of smokers desperate to quit, and has given hope and success to those same people who have been fighting the addiction to smoking for years. While few of us trust big tobacco, should they find a simple, easier way to give people an opportunity to quit harming themselves through smoking, so be it. Unfortunately, I don't see big tobacco rushing out to create competition for itself. They would much rather buy off politicians and the FDA.
The biggest enemy of the industry is not the industry itself. If it were, would there be a CASAA? Would we be concerned about unfair regulations prohibiting us from access to the very thing we believe has saved our lives, and has the ability to save millions more? Would we hear search tory after story from each other about yet another news report stating false information about e-cigs and vaping? Would we find ourselves constantly rebutting anti-e-cig arguments about inhaling antifreeze and that we just want to get kids hooked do on nic by having gumming bear flavored juice?
If indeed the industry is its own worst enemy, would we be more concerned about addressing the myths and misinformation about vaping? Or would we be more concerned about semantics?
I don't know anything about the audiophile world, or everything about the vaping world. But I am familiar with BS. I am not sure we both have the same understanding of the concept.
Subjectivity over objectivity
I'm not sure I can agree with you that this should be considered BS. Can we have one without the other? Without objectivity, how can we frame, or reference, our own experiences and form opinions? How can we share this with others? Without our experiences and individual points of view, how can we trust the objectivity of anything? How can we say something is indeed fact or truth, if our experiences tell us otherwise? And if we do not have such conversations with others, is there any value at all in objectivity or subjectivity?
Form over function:
Again, I don't see how this is BS. When discussing anything tangible, is not the consideration of form and function (or form over function, or vice versa) absolutely essential?
Obfuscation...
I find that generally speaking, more obfuscation occurs when people use words like obfuscation, or indeed fluff up their language in an effort to make a lot of noise.
The terminology just seems to be part of an exclusive, private club. You're either in or out, and it's a bar to entry.
Peeves:
"Vaping." OK, I understand the desire to differentiate from smoking tobacco, I really do. But please understand that "vaping" is likely to convey (illegal) drug connotations to the general public, right or wrong. I can't pretend to have come up with something better, but "smoking alternative" or "vapor smoking" is probably better received, whether it looks like a cigarette or not.
Please understand that Including any form of the word smoking is counter-productive to differentiating the process from smoking.
"Analogs." Just call them cigarettes, which is what everyone else does. If you want to make people think they're not part of the club, calling them analogs is a good start.
Is the meaning of this very casual, tongue-in-cheek nickname for cigarettes so difficult to grasp that it would be sufficient to make someone feel like they are being excluded from a group?
"Cartos." "Attos." "Clearos." "Glassos." etc. They're all atomizers/vaporizers (pick a term). I get the whole custom/differentiation thing, but lose the cuteness and use one all encompassing term to refer to this part. Groucho, Harpo, Chico, and Zeppo are OK.
Yes they are all atomizers. And apples, oranges, peaches and pears are all fruits. But if I order a slice of fruit pie at the diner hoping for Apple do I yell at the wwaitress for bringing me cherry? Do I make her bring me piece af ter piece until she finally gets it right?
As for the "cuteness" you refer to, are you suggesting that we be more formal by using the entire word (cartomizer, clearomizer, etc.) or do you truly think that Groucho, Harpo, Chico and Zeppo are less cute? And should we as a community decide to use these names, would we not be sending a message to everyone under the age of 55 who have no idea who the Marx brothers are, that this is an exclusive club with ssecret code words?
"e-juice," "e-liquid." It's not the juice of anything. It's not electronic ("e") in any way. It's a liquid, just call it that. Or maybe "e-cigarette liquid."
I am afraid your logic is lost on me. Of course it's not electronic jjuice, or liquid. You seem intelligent enough to realize that is not the intended meaning. The current terms of e-juice and e-liquid are simple to use and their meaning is apparent, even to the most novice of users. Are you suggesting that, in the spirit of creating a more literal vernacular that we create even more confusion for the beginner? If we call it liquid, might we not have thousands of users dumping water or beer or gin in their tanks? "I don't know why I ended up in the hospital, the directions said to use liquid, so I used rubbing alcohol because I had it around.
... does "mod' mean? Perhaps it at one time meant modified. But, if you can buy a "mod" off the shelf, it's not modified, is it? Just call it a battery. Maybe it's fancy. It doesn't matter, it's a battery (holder).
Really? Forgive me, but you seem to be nitpicking here. Mod, whether it stands for modified or modification, is not simply a battery or a battery holder. I have a feeling you know better than that. The term could be related to the fact that many people made modifications to the earliest and limited e-cigs.
VV/VW. VV is really CV - sure, you control (vary) it, but you're telling it to deliver a Constant Voltage. VW is the same only different, it's actually Constant Wattage. Plain batteries with no electronics provide VV/VW - the Voltage/Wattage varies as you drain the battery. And that terminology come from a long history of professional, lab grade, voltage sources/power supplies, don't try to change it. But it is, first and foremost, a battery.
So you wish to simplify the language and terminology of this community so folks aren't intimidated and don't feel like outsiders, correct? And in an effort to do this, you would like us all to first acquire "a long history of professional, lab grade, voltage sources/power supplies" experience? Or maybe an electrical engineering degree? How is this going to help simplify things? If one of our members makes a post stating her excitement about her new VV device, should we first scold her and say, actually that's not a variable voltage device at all.?
Having said all that (and I'm sure I could think of more), I don't expect to change the industry. But many here seem to want to encourage this to go mainstream faster than it already is. The whole terminology thing makes that hard, and presents a barrier to entry - fundamentally there are only three things involved - a power source (call it a battery), a liquid, and a vaporizer. Don't make it harder than it is, that comes later. If you try to get someone into it, tell them to get a battery (and charger), a vaporizer which fits it, and a liquid which tastes good to them - the detail comes later.
I am not sure who you talked to when you first started, but when I purchased my first set up I was told that all I really needed was a battery, a tank to hold my ejuice, and the ejuice itself. Then I was told that there is a wide variety of options but in an effort to keep things simple and not too overwhelming, that it is a great place to start. Should I wish to learn more, there is plenty to learn about, but if the basics work for you, great.
No one told me that well, we (the vaping community) know you want to use e-cigs as a healthier alternative, but first you have to know about every single battery option, understand voltage, wattage, Ohm's Law, go looking for a cartomizer, Grouchomizer, and some liquid. Give it a whirl and get back to us with questions. Then maybe we'll let you in our little club.
Or, don't. But expect that big tobacco will make it easy to understand/buy/use, and that's where the market will go.
This industry is its own worst enemy.
With very little involvement from Big Tobacco, the industry has already attracted millions of smokers desperate to quit, and has given hope and success to those same people who have been fighting the addiction to smoking for years. While few of us trust big tobacco, should they find a simple, easier way to give people an opportunity to quit harming themselves through smoking, so be it. Unfortunately, I don't see big tobacco rushing out to create competition for itself. They would much rather buy off politicians and the FDA.
The biggest enemy of the industry is not the industry itself. If it were, would there be a CASAA? Would we be concerned about unfair regulations prohibiting us from access to the very thing we believe has saved our lives, and has the ability to save millions more? Would we hear search tory after story from each other about yet another news report stating false information about e-cigs and vaping? Would we find ourselves constantly rebutting anti-e-cig arguments about inhaling antifreeze and that we just want to get kids hooked do on nic by having gumming bear flavored juice?
If indeed the industry is its own worst enemy, would we be more concerned about addressing the myths and misinformation about vaping? Or would we be more concerned about semantics?
Last edited:
Just trying to offer a few responses to the OP that I have thoughtfully considering since last night. I can assure you that I was not trying to start or continue any pattern of negative behavior.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
