BMX General > BMX Chat
S&M Neal Wood - which category @ MK ???
midschooljon:
--- Quote from: Dannywhac on October 19, 2014, 02:22 PM ---Yep - had a little bet someone would turn it into the mid debate again.
--- End quote ---
The tilte of the thread has been changed. The original one was very much a question about if the bike would fit into either category. A subject that requires the eras to be debated in order for a conclusion to be found. ;) It would be hard to lose that bet. :daumenhoch:
--- Quote from: Dannywhac on October 19, 2014, 02:22 PM ---... I just find it a bit disappointing that the minority of people who didn't agree with the dates to start with use threads like this to turn it into the same old date debates. Instead of doing that, post more in the Mid section and make it a bit more lively.
--- End quote ---
If people disagree with the dates why would you expect them to participate more? I still post a fait bit on here, it a great forum with lots of good people. On the flip side, how many people with these 2003-2005 "mid" bikes are posting on here????? I dont see many myself. The difference is all the rest of us who do post keet getting told new school bikes are mid school, when none of us even build them. ;)
And to get back on topic. Its good to see 60% of people agree its new school. :daumenhoch:
Dannywhac:
--- Quote from: midschooljon on October 19, 2014, 04:22 PM ---If people disagree with the dates why would you expect them to participate more?
--- End quote ---
'Cos I'd hope people weren't childish enough to stop participating because they don't agree with the dates, but love the period enough to not waste energy in a constant debate and post something nice and cuddly in the MS section.
You don't see too many 2003-5 bikes posted as I don't think we've hit the right age range of posters yet to see em up here, although they're starting to post more nowadays (people in their early 30's) and it's great to have em on board. I've got a fair few 03/05 bikes, but I admit I rarely pop up build threads. Maybe I'll start.
I've said me two penneth - posted in here as MS mod to clarify that we agreed on MS dates (although some don't agree, but like I said you can't please everyone) and as Gish's frame is a 2003 it's MS, not NS. Nothing personal to anyone, no wanting to win or owt, just stating what we as a majority agreed on.
Betty:
Internal headset = new school
I did warn Gish that this would drag the mid years argument back up ;D
I'll run away and hide now :LolLolLolLol:
stidds:
Don't we just love this midschool era crap? :LolLolLolLol:
With my Admin hat on, the reason we have a midschool moderator in Danny is that essentially what he says goes. This is one of the jobs we asked of him, to make decisions on where a bike will sit and his decision is final.
Also even though we all would like to think that a 2003 bike is newschool there really is nothing 'new' about a bike that is 11+ years old.
What we think a Neal Wood looks like...
What a Neal Wood really looks like....
:LolLolLolLol: :LolLolLolLol:
MartyC:
--- Quote from: Dannywhac on October 19, 2014, 02:22 PM --- I just find it a bit disappointing that the minority of people who didn't agree with the dates to start with use threads like this to turn it into the same old date debates.
--- End quote ---
I was going to let this one die a death but having just noticed this point I feel compelled to respond to you Danny.
Firstly, I was not aware that the gods of BMX had decreed that the years of Mid School be redfined, but now I know I have to say I am very disappointed and not in agreement as is my right. You obviously are wedded to the opinion that because a few people agreed with you that you are right and despite this you are not entirely comfortable with your decision as you clearly try to shut down anyone that proffers an opinion that differs with yours or dare I suggest questions that ask about the rationale employed to arrive at your decision. If you were 100% behind your decision then you would ignore posts like mine or at the very least acknowledge the point and state why but instead you choose to try and belittle/dismiss any debate or questioning of your opinion by using the image of Captain Picard which to my mind is pretty insulting although I am pretty sure you didn't intend it to be.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version