Tick Talk[Moderator Emeritus]
2361
Greetings ampurist
Thank-you for this note. I'm not a curmudgeon (I hope) but there is an interesting evolution that needs to be discussed in the open without pressure to just accept it. Your predecessors, past moderators, came to the role as watch enthusiasts first and writers second. The move to favor wordsmiths first, and allow them to learn the subject matter on the fly, as it were, is worth noting. I realize that other forums have also adopted this strategy, but not under the label of "moderators", which has some history and implies in my view a level of expertise.
Another forum is more upfront in labeling their sponsored writers as "forum journalists" but I might even debate the "journalist" label. Is this a trite argument? Not to me, but others will have different opinions. Why is the word crafting more important than the subject matter? Why does it have a distinctly non-critical flavor, with watches often peripheral to social and status discussions? What are the long-term consequences; will forum success be measured (perhaps already is) by the number of views and not by the posts, by passive eyes and not active fingers? I sense that already most threads are started by moderators, to a schedule arranged by sponsors. My fear is that the forum concept is losing its participatory nature, evolving/devolving into another platform for marketing. That would be ironic as, "in the beginning", watch fora became popular as independent sources, seeing through the fog of hyperbole and filling the information void left by the brands.
I do most sincerely wish you all the best in this fantastic world of fine Swiss watchmaking, and please don't lose sight of your responsibility to the audience to add real value and tell the truth with all its nuances. Cheers