| Subject: Some good points here... |
Author:
Dean
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 20:57:20 03/05/02 Tue
In reply to:
Troy
's message, "Acrobats, Stingrays and Maxis" on 18:14:22 03/05/02 Tue
>The essence of it is that everybody gets used to them
>own boats and will tend to defend their selection
>'religiously'.
And that's not just boats - it goes for just about anything in life! And the more significant people think something is (or the more our self-image is tied up in something), the more tenaciously we tend to defend it. :-)
>I think some boats have some serious design flaws and
>I believe many paddlers would play better if they
>chose a more appropriate boat design, but they get
>used to what they've got and often resist a change
>(and that's before politics come into over who
>designed the boat or who makes it... AUS designed must
>be superior!!!)...
I've often thought that I'm personally not really qualified to pontificate about the benefits of one type of gear design over another. I've always pretty much used whatever has come my way (with cost being a bigger factor for me than performance). If I am stuck in a heavy boat, well, I'll just have to work a little harder. If my helmet's a bit old and funny-looking and I have to bleach it every so often to stop mould growing in it, well, I'm not there to look good anyway. :-)
I've got a lot of respect for folks who actually grapple with the design issues and come up with a product. These are probably the ones we should listen to when it comes to objective critiques of one design aspect versus another - factoring in any sales-related biases of course, if they should happen to be present. :-) As for me personally, I suspect that my perception is very much conditioned by experience, and that needs to be taken into account (I tend to make do with what I have until it breaks - I played in a Stingray, with a Trilex paddle, for a *long* time). Sorting the opinion from the reality is the trick here, and that's where actual designers can be really helpful.
>Of greatest concern to me is the 'slanderous'
>disregard being shown on this forum to some boat
>manufacturers and designers regarding their choice of
>designs...
>some of these businesses may be in a position to help
>our sport (now or in the future) ... some people who
>read this forum are associated with those
>businesses...
>Do you think it helps at all when their products get
>rubbished an an NZCPA sanctioned site?
This is a really interesting point. It raises the question of how to compare different gear designs. I guess we need to emphasise the positives and work *with* designers wherever we can to get something that benefits everyone, as opposed to unthinking criticisms.
For example, consider the following paragraph:
"I personally really like the design of [a particular boat type] - I just wish it wasn't so heavy. An attempt to address this is the lightweight layup the manufacturers have experimented with, but I have owned two boats of this type, neither of which has lasted more than two seasons without beginning to crack."
Does a comment like that get us on dangerous territory with respect to the way gear providers may see our sport, or is it helpful feedback? And is this an appropriate forum for this sort of thing? Comments like that from senior players could conceivably have an impact on the sales of that particular product. Does that matter? Would it help in the development of a better product? Personally I think that as long as we are posting opinion with consideration and maturity and with an attitude aimed at working *with* gear developers, this sort of stuff can be very helpful. We should perhaps also make sure that any lampooning or humourous joshing is clearly-identifiable as such, and anyone overstepping these sorts of guidelines should expect to get called on it.
Cheers all,
- Dean
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 