DPD6030 12:12 PM 08-12-2011
BC-Axeman 12:13 PM 08-12-2011
Axeman loves these classics.
[Reply]
BC-Axeman 12:33 PM 08-12-2011
Originally Posted by DPD6030:
Image
Axeman sees nothing here although the code says it's a picture.
[Reply]
TheTraveler 06:51 PM 08-12-2011
lou2row 08:57 PM 08-12-2011
Tapout lasted longer here than on cbid. He spent a week following thundergerbil from post to post trying to get Adam going about Gurkhas.
[Reply]
Smokin Gator 09:20 PM 08-12-2011
Originally Posted by poker:
:-)
I'm with Kelly on this one!!
[Reply]
Don Fernando 05:42 AM 08-13-2011
Originally Posted by Skywalker:
:-)
Just because I feel nostalgic!:-)
I really should ding you for this, and I am not kidding
:-)
[Reply]
Skywalker 07:21 AM 08-13-2011
Originally Posted by Don Fernando:
I really should ding you for this, and I am not kidding :-)
:-)
[Reply]
shilala 10:29 AM 08-13-2011
I'd like to add something, but my head is spinning.
Mostly I'm glad that Tom doesn't chew his fingernails.
[Reply]
kelmac07 10:47 AM 08-13-2011
Originally Posted by DPD6030:
Image
What??? Andrew is taller than the Most Interesting Man in the World?
:-) :-)
[Reply]
DPD6030 12:55 PM 08-13-2011
Originally Posted by kelmac07:
What??? Andrew is taller than the Most Interesting Man in the World? :-) :-)
Yes and no, that is not a stripper pole in the bar. However, it "could" be I suppose.
[Reply]
Bill86 01:04 PM 08-13-2011
Originally Posted by kelmac07:
What??? Andrew is taller than the Most Interesting Man in the World? :-) :-)
What you can't see is the 3 foot ladder he's standing on.
[Reply]
The Poet 02:08 PM 08-13-2011
Originally Posted by poker:
I have 3 simple categories I put all cigars I smoke into.
1) It sucked ass.
2) It was alright.
3) I really liked it.
My palate is so unrefined, I do with two:
1) I couldn't finish it.
2) I could.
:-)
[Reply]
Starscream 04:52 PM 08-13-2011
Originally Posted by BC-Axeman:
Axeman sees nothing here although the code says it's a picture.
Me either.
:-)
[Reply]
thebiglebowski 04:01 PM 08-15-2011
but, what does this have to do with the fact that cigars sold in B&Ms are almost certainly of higher quality than their counterparts purchased via the web?
[Reply]
ade06 04:05 PM 08-15-2011
Originally Posted by thebiglebowski:
but, what does this have to do with the fact that cigars sold in B&Ms are almost certainly of higher quality than their counterparts purchased via the web?
Lol, classic!
[Reply]
TheTraveler 08:29 PM 08-15-2011
Originally Posted by thebiglebowski:
but, what does this have to do with the fact that cigars sold in B&Ms are almost certainly of higher quality than their counterparts purchased via the web?
I'd suggest either adding 0.3 to the ratings of all internet-purchased cigars or subtracting 0.3 from the ratings of all cigars purchased at B&Ms, thereby making the ratings comparable.
:-)
:-)
[Reply]
lenguamor 09:13 PM 12-01-2011
Originally Posted by icehog3:
I just review cigars on flavor, construction, etc by describing them. Never saw any need to attach a number scale. :-)
Thank you.
Any review is subjective with regard to flavor, strength, aroma, quality and overall impression. Even external factors such as ambient temperature and humidity, the choice of an accompanying beverage, and even mood influence the outcome.
Any number scale, even CA/CI's—which I do respect and take into account, is an attempt to substantiate a subjective experience.
I'd much rather hear how the cigar tasted to the reviewer; what it felt like, did it hold up all the way through,
is it a cigar of quality—should I bother with it?
Plus, I've read reviews, even those of people whose opinions I respect, and seen a cigar they evidently they did NOT enjoy get scores of 7/10 or even 8/10. It just all seems skewed when you try to quantify the enjoyment in numbers.
[Reply]
BC-Axeman 09:35 PM 12-01-2011
NNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooo.............. ...........
[Reply]
lenguamor 09:50 PM 12-01-2011
