This was something I had cause to reflect upon while my father-in-law and wife’s stepmother stayed with us on Saturday night. They live in Hobart, in a magnificent house overlooking the Derwent, and keep wine in a passive cellar. They do lots of overseas travel, and generally live a pretty affluent lifestyle. I always assumed that people who bothered to buy ‘more wine than they need this week’ often, or even occasionally, buy something a bit decent, especially if they’re not short of a quid. But not in this case. At their place we’ve been served Mildara Shareholder’s Reserve, plenty of Rosemount diamonds, Minchinbury sparkling; I think the best we’ve ever done was a 96 Wynns red stripe CSM a few years ago. It’s always struck me as strange when people who like to eat well are happy with nasty little wines. (To forestall the obvious comments, I should point out that it’s not just us as guests who get to drink this…)
Well, they dined with us on Saturday, in our rented fibro house! I hit them with a 1996 Rosemount Balmoral Syrah (McLaren Vale) which is drinking very nicely – rich plum & warm spice fruit, softened tannins, long rich finish – all in all a very attractive wine. Well, Roger was very taken – never heard of this wine before, and he’s a big fan of Rosemount (they did bring with them a 2000 diamond label cabernet which I tactfully insisted they take with them as they journeyed further north, as we had no shortage of wine at our place). In fact, he liked it so much that he finished off the 30ml of sediment still in the bottle; I had decanted the wine and got it onto the table at a reasonable drinking temperature. (He also very much enjoyed the 2001 McWilliams Botrytis Semillon (Griffith), which I think just needs a little more acid to remain truly endearing.)
Much as I would like to think a wine like this should be an epiphany, I can’t help but feel that he would think $50 a frightening amount to spend on a wine. You hear people say ‘I couldn’t tell the difference between a $10 wine and a $50 wine’ but it’s simply not true. And despite the fact he could very easily afford to spend twice what I do on wines, and I’m sure would enjoy the higher level of ‘drinking pleasure’ I can’t help but feel that it will make no difference whatever to the standard of wine under that house in Hobart.
We were eventually left with one bottle from that cellar – it’s a Rosemount split-label Semillon Chardonnay from 1999 – a wine I assume was made to be drunk within 6 months of bottling. That will certainly be an interesting tasting experience.
Maybe getting him to increase his bottle spend is a forlorn hope. Trouble is, I think I’d struggle just as much to get him to direct it to screwcapped Rieslings at the same price – a wine which might actually repay a bit of time spent under the floorboards.
What can you doÂ…!?
Cheers,
Graeme
People who cellar wine - but only cheap cr*ppy ones...
Hi Graeme,
Do what I do! For every birthday and Xmas present over the last 4-5 years my father has received a bottle of wine in the $50-$100 range. This way he has a good mixture of some of the cheap wines he enjoys during the week, as well as some of the good quality wines $20-$40 he drinks on special occasions at home and now the very nice, more expensive that he can cellar for an extended period and enjoy 10+ years down the track.
Cheers
Popov
Do what I do! For every birthday and Xmas present over the last 4-5 years my father has received a bottle of wine in the $50-$100 range. This way he has a good mixture of some of the cheap wines he enjoys during the week, as well as some of the good quality wines $20-$40 he drinks on special occasions at home and now the very nice, more expensive that he can cellar for an extended period and enjoy 10+ years down the track.
Cheers
Popov
-
Guest
Yes Graeme, I agree absolutely.
Why only last weekend my in-laws invited us for dinner and had the nerve to serve us some of that Rosemount Balmoral crap. Rosalind’s mum even made a point of highlighting the fact that it was the ’96 vintage! Then came the ’94 Henschke Hill of Grace, a Penfolds 707 from 1990 and, knock me down with a feather, a 1989 Grange! 1989 I say! For goodness sake! Couldn’t he have at least pulled out a ’71??
I just don’t understand these people. They have the capacity to buy Bordeaux 1st’s and DRC’s every year (regardless of poor vintage), and yet they offer their well-educated guests nothing more than quaffers! What’s the point of having all that money if you don’t show people how clever you are and how exciting your wine cellar is?
Well, next time they come to our place we’ll show them. I’ll be pouring the ’82 Mouton (probably nearing the end of its drinking window but at least they can see what a truly great wine looks like after 20 years), the ’94 La Chapelle, the last of my ’66 La Tache, a couple of d’Yquems (haven’t decided vintages yet), and I might even crack a ‘55 Grange just to rub salt in.
What do you think? Any Suggestions?
P.S. Rosalind’s mum will be sloshed after the Krug with oysters so I’m probably wasting my time on these clots.
Why only last weekend my in-laws invited us for dinner and had the nerve to serve us some of that Rosemount Balmoral crap. Rosalind’s mum even made a point of highlighting the fact that it was the ’96 vintage! Then came the ’94 Henschke Hill of Grace, a Penfolds 707 from 1990 and, knock me down with a feather, a 1989 Grange! 1989 I say! For goodness sake! Couldn’t he have at least pulled out a ’71??
I just don’t understand these people. They have the capacity to buy Bordeaux 1st’s and DRC’s every year (regardless of poor vintage), and yet they offer their well-educated guests nothing more than quaffers! What’s the point of having all that money if you don’t show people how clever you are and how exciting your wine cellar is?
Well, next time they come to our place we’ll show them. I’ll be pouring the ’82 Mouton (probably nearing the end of its drinking window but at least they can see what a truly great wine looks like after 20 years), the ’94 La Chapelle, the last of my ’66 La Tache, a couple of d’Yquems (haven’t decided vintages yet), and I might even crack a ‘55 Grange just to rub salt in.
What do you think? Any Suggestions?
P.S. Rosalind’s mum will be sloshed after the Krug with oysters so I’m probably wasting my time on these clots.
-
Muscat Mike
- Posts: 425
- Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 10:05 pm
- Location: Sydney - North West.
-
Guest
Graeme you seem a little arrogant to me. If your in laws were applying the same attitude to you and your house they would never come to visit(perhaps a good thing?)
Every one has their own priorties- yours is wine, but obviously a house is not. So what? Get over it. Much as I love wine and sharing it with appreciative people, I also respect the fact that there are many out there who simply enjoy what they enjoy without regard to wine and snobbery- a little like art in that regard.
My father in law comes for dinner regularly and without fail will scull the rest of his glass before going outside for a smoke 3-4 times a night. I just know what his level is and serve something I am happy to drink but equally happy to see tossed past the tonsils. This business of imposing our own myopic view of the world on others just does not work and only brings stress.
Every one has their own priorties- yours is wine, but obviously a house is not. So what? Get over it. Much as I love wine and sharing it with appreciative people, I also respect the fact that there are many out there who simply enjoy what they enjoy without regard to wine and snobbery- a little like art in that regard.
My father in law comes for dinner regularly and without fail will scull the rest of his glass before going outside for a smoke 3-4 times a night. I just know what his level is and serve something I am happy to drink but equally happy to see tossed past the tonsils. This business of imposing our own myopic view of the world on others just does not work and only brings stress.
Oh. Clearly I've not been very precise in laying out my puzzlement with parents-in-law. I am not meaning to disparage someone else's taste in wine. I have no problem whatever with people
a) serving me crappy wine because they're not madly interested in the subject, or
b) having wine with dinner at our place but NOT giving an extended tasting commentary.
It only struck me as odd that people maintain a large cellar (the split-label has clearly been there 2 years at least) but are not much selective about the wines they drink. Or, to rephrase, they may be selective, but the choices are certainly NOT driven by lack of funds.
And he spoke more about the Balmoral than I did - it didn't arrive at the table with a trumpet fanfare and a short speech from me, that's for sure.
I have no problem with other people not being interested in wine. It just struck me as unusual that people behave just like wine lovers, except apparently they're not...
And I don't dignify anonymous posts with a response.
cheers,
Graeme
a) serving me crappy wine because they're not madly interested in the subject, or
b) having wine with dinner at our place but NOT giving an extended tasting commentary.
It only struck me as odd that people maintain a large cellar (the split-label has clearly been there 2 years at least) but are not much selective about the wines they drink. Or, to rephrase, they may be selective, but the choices are certainly NOT driven by lack of funds.
And he spoke more about the Balmoral than I did - it didn't arrive at the table with a trumpet fanfare and a short speech from me, that's for sure.
I have no problem with other people not being interested in wine. It just struck me as unusual that people behave just like wine lovers, except apparently they're not...
And I don't dignify anonymous posts with a response.
cheers,
Graeme
Last edited by GraemeG on Tue Dec 23, 2003 10:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
Anonymous wrote:Graeme you seem a little arrogant to me. If your in laws were applying the same attitude to you and your house they would never come to visit(perhaps a good thing?)
Every one has their own priorties- yours is wine, but obviously a house is not. So what? Get over it. Much as I love wine and sharing it with appreciative people, I also respect the fact that there are many out there who simply enjoy what they enjoy without regard to wine and snobbery- a little like art in that regard.
My father in law comes for dinner regularly and without fail will scull the rest of his glass before going outside for a smoke 3-4 times a night. I just know what his level is and serve something I am happy to drink but equally happy to see tossed past the tonsils. This business of imposing our own myopic view of the world on others just does not work and only brings stress.
Guest,
I think you are being a bit harsh. I am sure that Graeme actually is quite fond of his in-laws. I think the point is that they have no idea. I understand this quite well. I have very, very good friends who love drinking wine and have a cellar full of 1970s Bin 444s and the like. No idea! I keep saying that you must drink the wine very, very soon but they just don't get it. Then they serve me Chivas Regal and other expensive beverages that I simply don't enjoy.
Adair
Adair,
I've seen this quite a few times. Some people go through a phase and buy heaps and then move on to other things, leaving a lot of wine to become undrinkable in often less than ideal cellaring conditions. That being said, some of the 70's Bin 444 were quite good wines and would certainly last up to 10 years in a good cellar, I used to drink a fair bit of it in the mid-late 70's. I very much doubt they would survive 30 years though.
About 18 years ago I helped the father of my partner go through some old wines in his (fully underground) cellar. He had reduced his wine drinking due to health issues. Apart from the home made Italian styles there was a lot of wine in the Jacobs Creek class. I knew he didn't like me, but after opening and sampling quite a few 10 or more yo cheapies I thought he was trying to poison me! The best of them was actually a nearly 10 yo Jacobs Creek red, fairly mature, but fresh as a daisy.
I've seen this quite a few times. Some people go through a phase and buy heaps and then move on to other things, leaving a lot of wine to become undrinkable in often less than ideal cellaring conditions. That being said, some of the 70's Bin 444 were quite good wines and would certainly last up to 10 years in a good cellar, I used to drink a fair bit of it in the mid-late 70's. I very much doubt they would survive 30 years though.
About 18 years ago I helped the father of my partner go through some old wines in his (fully underground) cellar. He had reduced his wine drinking due to health issues. Apart from the home made Italian styles there was a lot of wine in the Jacobs Creek class. I knew he didn't like me, but after opening and sampling quite a few 10 or more yo cheapies I thought he was trying to poison me! The best of them was actually a nearly 10 yo Jacobs Creek red, fairly mature, but fresh as a daisy.
Cheers
Brian
Life's too short to drink white wine and red wine is better for you too! :-)
Brian
Life's too short to drink white wine and red wine is better for you too! :-)
Red Bigot wrote:Adair,
I've seen this quite a few times. Some people go through a phase and buy heaps and then move on to other things, leaving a lot of wine to become undrinkable in often less than ideal cellaring conditions. That being said, some of the 70's Bin 444 were quite good wines and would certainly last up to 10 years in a good cellar, I used to drink a fair bit of it in the mid-late 70's. I very much doubt they would survive 30 years though.
About 18 years ago I helped the father of my partner go through some old wines in his (fully underground) cellar. He had reduced his wine drinking due to health issues. Apart from the home made Italian styles there was a lot of wine in the Jacobs Creek class. I knew he didn't like me, but after opening and sampling quite a few 10 or more yo cheapies I thought he was trying to poison me! The best of them was actually a nearly 10 yo Jacobs Creek red, fairly mature, but fresh as a daisy.
Quite interesting parrallels here except for the fact that I don't think my friend (it is actually my friend's father who is now a good friend) wants me dead!
They are an Italian family and also have old bottles of Jacobs Creek asa well. I did not know these were around in the 70s. I realise that there has been a decline in the Bin 444, 888, etc range as I noted a few years back (like 10-15) that the Gold Book had the 888, I think, as a 5 star wine(pushing the memory here). There are only 2 wines that are in his "under the bar next to the expresso coffee machine" wine cellar where all wines have been kept since release that I want to be around to try - a 1989 St. Henri and 1980 WB Black Label (which will probably be gone). The other 20 or so are going to be absolute disasters.
Adair.
-
Guest
GraemeG wrote:
a) serving me crappy wine because they're not madly interested in the subject
There you go again. Crappy wine? There's no such thing as bad wine, only wine you don't like.
I think you've missed the point. If I drank Moutons every day I'd probably consider Rosemount Balmoral crap let alone split labels.
There are plenty of lurkers here who probably love Rosemount split labels. You've just told them that they drink crap wine. Get a grip sunshine.
GraemeG wrote:
And I don't dignify anonymous posts with a response.
So you're GraemeG, an accountant from Sydney. Wow, how un-anonymous.
Don't reply - I don't usually accept responses from Accountants.
The next response in this thread will probably contain a reference to Nazis or Hitler and hence:
"Godwin's Law prov.
[Usenet] "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." There is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress. Godwin's Law thus practically guarantees the existence of an upper bound on thread length in those groups.
The same goes for any mailing list and any discussion in general!"
Merry Christmas, and to all a good night!
"Godwin's Law prov.
[Usenet] "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." There is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress. Godwin's Law thus practically guarantees the existence of an upper bound on thread length in those groups.
The same goes for any mailing list and any discussion in general!"
Merry Christmas, and to all a good night!
Ciao,
michaelw
You know it makes sense!
michaelw
You know it makes sense!
Anonymous wrote:GraemeG wrote:
a) serving me crappy wine because they're not madly interested in the subject
There you go again. Crappy wine? There's no such thing as bad wine, only wine you don't like.
I think you've missed the point. If I drank Moutons every day I'd probably consider Rosemount Balmoral crap let alone split labels.
There are plenty of lurkers here who probably love Rosemount split labels. You've just told them that they drink crap wine. Get a grip sunshine.GraemeG wrote:
And I don't dignify anonymous posts with a response.
So you're GraemeG, an accountant from Sydney. Wow, how un-anonymous.
Don't reply - I don't usually accept responses from Accountants.
Mr Guest,
I think there are some general wine principles that you are forgetting about - for example, there is a list of generally accepted wine faults that help in determining what crappy wine could be. Also, I suggest that a wine with its most prominent feature being a long acidic aftertaste could be described as crappy wine. I would call a person who enjoys such wine as "Lucky" or exceptionally drunk!
Also, I think trying to compare a person whose full name we all know, who has a history of posting on this and other forums and who has written a lengthy WAI, with yourself in terms of anonymity is showing yourself to be a bit silly.
Kind regards,
Adair
Hi Graeme,
I agree with Popov re: giving the gift of wine especially to people who enjoy wine but don't have the exposure to wine that perhaps wine lovers do.
Remember that it can be a frightening/stessful experience trying to buy that 'right' bottle(s) for guests who are wine obsessed.
Having said that, people do have different priorities but I can understand how upsetting it is when people serve/bring you crap only to drink the host's "good stuff."
A great friend of mine recently attempted to served/poison me with a bottle of 12yo Seppelts Fleur de Lys. Thank goodness it stunk so badly that she realised it was off!
I agree with Popov re: giving the gift of wine especially to people who enjoy wine but don't have the exposure to wine that perhaps wine lovers do.
Remember that it can be a frightening/stessful experience trying to buy that 'right' bottle(s) for guests who are wine obsessed.
Having said that, people do have different priorities but I can understand how upsetting it is when people serve/bring you crap only to drink the host's "good stuff."
A great friend of mine recently attempted to served/poison me with a bottle of 12yo Seppelts Fleur de Lys. Thank goodness it stunk so badly that she realised it was off!
-
Guest
Dear Guest 1,
There's no such thing as bad wine, only wine you don't like. Seriously? You really believe that? Let's say that again: THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS BAD WINE. Wow. Sheesh. Man. Woman. Now THERE'S a statement worth keeping in mind. Really, when you think about it, it's genius. There's no such thing as bad wine. I just can't get over it. It's BRILLIANT. Why the hell don't you work in marketing, you'd have a ball!
Though why you're reading a wine forum I'm not sure - though I'm sure the genius can explain.
Guest 2.
There's no such thing as bad wine, only wine you don't like. Seriously? You really believe that? Let's say that again: THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS BAD WINE. Wow. Sheesh. Man. Woman. Now THERE'S a statement worth keeping in mind. Really, when you think about it, it's genius. There's no such thing as bad wine. I just can't get over it. It's BRILLIANT. Why the hell don't you work in marketing, you'd have a ball!
Though why you're reading a wine forum I'm not sure - though I'm sure the genius can explain.
Guest 2.
-
Guest
Anonymous wrote:Dear Guest 1,
There's no such thing as bad wine, only wine you don't like. Seriously? You really believe that? Let's say that again: THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS BAD WINE. Wow. Sheesh. Man. Woman. Now THERE'S a statement worth keeping in mind. Really, when you think about it, it's genius. There's no such thing as bad wine. I just can't get over it. It's BRILLIANT. Why the hell don't you work in marketing, you'd have a ball!
Though why you're reading a wine forum I'm not sure - though I'm sure the genius can explain.
Guest 2.
Dear Guest 2, thought you were on my side. Boy you can't trust anyone can you.
Love, Guest 1.
Hey, now I'm no longer anonymous! I am "Guest 1", here me roar!
PS. I can afford a Jaguar but I drive a crappy Nissan. What an uneducated goof I am.
-
Guest
Adair wrote:I think there are some general wine principles that you are forgetting about - for example, there is a list of generally accepted wine faults that help in determining what crappy wine could be. Also, I suggest that a wine with its most prominent feature being a long acidic aftertaste could be described as crappy wine. I would call a person who enjoys such wine as "Lucky" or exceptionally drunk!
Adair, love your work, but you say tom-ay-to and I say tom-ah-to. Seriously, faults can be pretty subjective in terms of beliefs and threshholds. I get your point - I'm sure you understood mine.
Adair wrote:Also, I think trying to compare a person whose full name we all know, who has a history of posting on this and other forums and who has written a lengthy WAI, with yourself in terms of anonymity is showing yourself to be a bit silly.
I am a silly billy sometimes. I also post here a lot. Just don't want to be chased off the forum over challenging someones arrogant comment. It happens.
Anyway, sillier still is chastising people for their drinking choices (indirectly and probably unintentionally, but...). Bit elitist really.
-
buzza
-
Stan Graham
What a lot of antagonism!
I can't get over some of the hyper sensitivity to anyone showing passion about wine with the slightest bent to 'The wine was bad/poor/not to a good standard.' Can you imagine criticising some poor food and people jumping on your back as a food snob for criticising some crap dish?
Or can't I say crap dish? Am I food snob for this?
If you really love wine, cherish it, think about it and embrace it can't you have a heirachy? Sure, others should never be asked to embrace it but when they do it is exciting and when they fane interest/drink names without care/bullshit about it/ pretend to know but don't then aren't you allowed to say 'shit!'?
If you are a passionate person in any field with any interest and you lay it out for others to see/share and they have no interest is it not a sign of disrespect/lack of capacity to empathise?
I don't care for hot cars but is someone comes to my place and loves cars and spends their time restoring cars and loving them then I will pay attention and embrace their passion and interest because it it respectful to them and emcourages their interest...and I may learn something and be a richer person for it.
This bullshit of criticising people for loving wine and hoping others will share this and enjoy better bottles and respect the thought of passionate wine interested people is a perverse desire to perpetrate some 'Oh, but just 'cos you like it doesn't mean others should.'
And there are no bad wines....? Oh dear.
Of course there are.
There are no bad cars, just some don't run.
There are no bad eggs, just some are rotten.
Why is in necessary to protect mediocre wines? Why are poor wines so clearly defended? Because someone can't afford better wines? Political sensitivity?
Bloody hell, Wynns Hermitage/Shiraz is a cracker, but Chave Hermitage is heaps better. Wolf Blass riesling is a wonderful drink but Loosen Mosel are benchmarks.
And Bin 65 is sweet rubbish and Rosemount cheapies are laden with sugar and are dogs. It's not about price.....it's the respect the producer shows the customer and the inherent quality in the bottle. Some cheap wine is fantastic, some is crap. Simple.
Oh well.
I can't get over some of the hyper sensitivity to anyone showing passion about wine with the slightest bent to 'The wine was bad/poor/not to a good standard.' Can you imagine criticising some poor food and people jumping on your back as a food snob for criticising some crap dish?
Or can't I say crap dish? Am I food snob for this?
If you really love wine, cherish it, think about it and embrace it can't you have a heirachy? Sure, others should never be asked to embrace it but when they do it is exciting and when they fane interest/drink names without care/bullshit about it/ pretend to know but don't then aren't you allowed to say 'shit!'?
If you are a passionate person in any field with any interest and you lay it out for others to see/share and they have no interest is it not a sign of disrespect/lack of capacity to empathise?
I don't care for hot cars but is someone comes to my place and loves cars and spends their time restoring cars and loving them then I will pay attention and embrace their passion and interest because it it respectful to them and emcourages their interest...and I may learn something and be a richer person for it.
This bullshit of criticising people for loving wine and hoping others will share this and enjoy better bottles and respect the thought of passionate wine interested people is a perverse desire to perpetrate some 'Oh, but just 'cos you like it doesn't mean others should.'
And there are no bad wines....? Oh dear.
Of course there are.
There are no bad cars, just some don't run.
There are no bad eggs, just some are rotten.
Why is in necessary to protect mediocre wines? Why are poor wines so clearly defended? Because someone can't afford better wines? Political sensitivity?
Bloody hell, Wynns Hermitage/Shiraz is a cracker, but Chave Hermitage is heaps better. Wolf Blass riesling is a wonderful drink but Loosen Mosel are benchmarks.
And Bin 65 is sweet rubbish and Rosemount cheapies are laden with sugar and are dogs. It's not about price.....it's the respect the producer shows the customer and the inherent quality in the bottle. Some cheap wine is fantastic, some is crap. Simple.
Oh well.
-
michael
-
Guest
Stan Graham wrote:What a lot of antagonism!
I can't get over some of the hyper sensitivity to anyone showing passion about wine with the slightest bent to 'The wine was bad/poor/not to a good standard.' Can you imagine criticising some poor food and people jumping on your back as a food snob for criticising some crap dish?
Or can't I say crap dish? Am I food snob for this?
If you really love wine, cherish it, think about it and embrace it can't you have a heirachy? Sure, others should never be asked to embrace it but when they do it is exciting and when they fane interest/drink names without care/bullshit about it/ pretend to know but don't then aren't you allowed to say 'shit!'?
If you are a passionate person in any field with any interest and you lay it out for others to see/share and they have no interest is it not a sign of disrespect/lack of capacity to empathise?
I don't care for hot cars but is someone comes to my place and loves cars and spends their time restoring cars and loving them then I will pay attention and embrace their passion and interest because it it respectful to them and emcourages their interest...and I may learn something and be a richer person for it.
This bullshit of criticising people for loving wine and hoping others will share this and enjoy better bottles and respect the thought of passionate wine interested people is a perverse desire to perpetrate some 'Oh, but just 'cos you like it doesn't mean others should.'
And there are no bad wines....? Oh dear.
Of course there are.
There are no bad cars, just some don't run.
There are no bad eggs, just some are rotten.
Why is in necessary to protect mediocre wines? Why are poor wines so clearly defended? Because someone can't afford better wines? Political sensitivity?
Bloody hell, Wynns Hermitage/Shiraz is a cracker, but Chave Hermitage is heaps better. Wolf Blass riesling is a wonderful drink but Loosen Mosel are benchmarks.
And Bin 65 is sweet rubbish and Rosemount cheapies are laden with sugar and are dogs. It's not about price.....it's the respect the producer shows the customer and the inherent quality in the bottle. Some cheap wine is fantastic, some is crap. Simple.
Oh well.
Which brings me to writing ability. I can't understand why some people write so badly. Above is an example of crap writing and we should all endeavour to avoid this poor phrasing, spelling and bombast. If people would only listen. They generally have the capacity to take their literary skills to a new and greater level but still they proudly bandy this shit about.
I am so passionate about writing. I will not protect mediocre writing.
Wine? As a wise man once said to me - "Its just liquid in a bottle mate. Some will love it, some will hate it, and they will argue about it all night long".
Along with beauty, crap is in the eye of the beholder.
I have sat on the sidelines watching this debate with interest as some of it has been fascinating.
A few points.
There is a lot a lot of crappy wine out there, in fact the vast majority of world wide wine produced by volume is very ordinary to say the least. Why do so many French people put ice cubes in red wine in summer? Because the stuff they are drinking is basically crappy wine.
Most of the posters in this thread have tried very hard to remain civil and not enter into personal attacks which is great, they are discussing the subject rather than attacking the poster.
In an earlier post "guest" said as a reason for staying anonymous
Interesting reason. For what I have seen over the years on this forum is that normally the forum members don't put up with a lot of bull s*it and the people who get chased off are usually the one who are full of BS, or are rude or attack people personally.
Its interesting to note your response to Stan Grahams comments
Guest, you are not debating the issue here, you are having a personal dig at Stan.
I don't buy your reason for remaining anonymous. Looks to me like you are just a wind up merchant trying to cause trouble. Something which you have been doing in a veiled way since the start of this thread.
No doubt now you will attack me personally too, but that OK, I have broad shoulders and its all been said before. And then Gavin will nuke the post anyway.
Have a Happy Christmas all.
A few points.
There is a lot a lot of crappy wine out there, in fact the vast majority of world wide wine produced by volume is very ordinary to say the least. Why do so many French people put ice cubes in red wine in summer? Because the stuff they are drinking is basically crappy wine.
Most of the posters in this thread have tried very hard to remain civil and not enter into personal attacks which is great, they are discussing the subject rather than attacking the poster.
In an earlier post "guest" said as a reason for staying anonymous
"I also post here a lot. Just don't want to be chased off the forum over challenging someones arrogant comment. It happens.
Interesting reason. For what I have seen over the years on this forum is that normally the forum members don't put up with a lot of bull s*it and the people who get chased off are usually the one who are full of BS, or are rude or attack people personally.
Its interesting to note your response to Stan Grahams comments
Which brings me to writing ability. I can't understand why some people write so badly. Above is an example of crap writing and we should all endeavour to avoid this poor phrasing, spelling and bombast.
Guest, you are not debating the issue here, you are having a personal dig at Stan.
I don't buy your reason for remaining anonymous. Looks to me like you are just a wind up merchant trying to cause trouble. Something which you have been doing in a veiled way since the start of this thread.
No doubt now you will attack me personally too, but that OK, I have broad shoulders and its all been said before. And then Gavin will nuke the post anyway.
Have a Happy Christmas all.
-
David Lole
TORB wrote:In an earlier post "guest" said as a reason for staying anonymous"I also post here a lot. Just don't want to be chased off the forum over challenging someones arrogant comment. It happens.
Interesting reason. For what I have seen over the years on this forum is that normally the forum members don't put up with a lot of bull s*it and the people who get chased off are usually the one who are full of BS, or are rude or attack people personally.
Its interesting to note your response to Stan Grahams commentsWhich brings me to writing ability. I can't understand why some people write so badly. Above is an example of crap writing and we should all endeavour to avoid this poor phrasing, spelling and bombast.
Guest, you are not debating the issue here, you are having a personal dig at Stan.
I don't buy your reason for remaining anonymous. Looks to me like you are just a wind up merchant trying to cause trouble. Something which you have been doing in a veiled way since the start of this thread.
No doubt now you will attack me personally too, but that OK, I have broad shoulders and its all been said before. And then Gavin will nuke the post anyway.
Ric,
Herein lies the problem. Being able to post anonymously fosters such recalcitrant behaviour. I prefer Gavin's original login system where some form of ID was necessary to post.
And on a more pleasant note, would like to wish you all the best for the festive season, too. It was a pleasure meeting you at the two offline's in Canberra this year. Hopefully, we can do it all again (perhaps in your neck of the woods) next year. Have a good one!
michael wrote:GraemeG wrote:And I don't dignify anonymous posts with a response.
cheers,
Graeme
Graeme,
the above posts are not mine, but this part of your response seems to be a bit weak.
Hi Michael,
Well, essentially I'm not going to get into a long debate with an unregistered poster. It's really pointless. If someone's registered, you can take the debate to Private Message, or e-mail (if it's something worth arguing that passionately about). Often the real spirit in which sonething is said doesn't come through on a BB - most of us are not professional writers, especially accountants! - and slanging matches with strangers are only, as someone pointed out, going to descend into name-calling and Nazi accusations! (You did start it. You invaded Poland). So that's why I don't persist.
My original point was never clearly made - I never intended the thread to be about criticising someone for their wine choices. It was about the fact that sometimes you find people with large-ish cellars - something which you would think is indicative of a wine enthusiast - but then discover the cellar is full of unimaginitive, undistinguished commercial wines. I did not mean that to be interpreted to say I thought they were inferior people.
I'm happy to have robust discussions with regular, registered posters, but I'm not going to follow someone down a troll-hole, however provocative they manage to be!
Cheers and a merry Christmas to all. See you all back in a week or so!
Graeme
Guest
I suspect that the first two anonymous posts were from the same person. This would be a shame as, the first one I felt was valid (just) - humorous and satirical, giving an alternative perspective, yet not a personal attack.
The second however was both personal and unnecessary, as it added nothing to the first post and also included a personally targeted insult. All it seemed designed for was to provoke a fight. I can't respect this, especially from someone who hides behind the cover of anonymity. I'd suggest that you
a) Show yourself
or
b) Treat others with respect
or
c) Go visit winepro's
Life's too short to waste.
Ian
I suspect that the first two anonymous posts were from the same person. This would be a shame as, the first one I felt was valid (just) - humorous and satirical, giving an alternative perspective, yet not a personal attack.
The second however was both personal and unnecessary, as it added nothing to the first post and also included a personally targeted insult. All it seemed designed for was to provoke a fight. I can't respect this, especially from someone who hides behind the cover of anonymity. I'd suggest that you
a) Show yourself
or
b) Treat others with respect
or
c) Go visit winepro's
Life's too short to waste.
Ian
Ian S wrote:I'd suggest that you
c) Go visit winepro's
Hahaha! Very funny comment.
I can't believe I logged on to this post this morning and found it going this wild.
Mr Guest, you are obviously having too much fun with this post and I sincerely hope that you can see the impression others have of your comments. I think you probably can.
Have a great Christmas and may your wines not be crappy,
Adair
-
Guest