Comments:
Are the rumours that I began a BLOG, that I get PAID for it. True? YES. (part22 of33)
YES.
It's a blog about LIFE. The way I see it...and has little to do with watches.
The big thing there is that I can go BALLISTIC...as in testicular contents kind of ballistic.
And YES.
But the purists, no matter what I get behind the lines, are and will remain my true love. Here, you are protacted from the filth that seeths from my mind, or rather "brain", as mind, sort of equates to a higher organ.
It is always stimulating to be hated and liked, and also.....this is true....I know less tech of watches everyday.
The industry is growing at a rate that anyone who is running a fulltime business that is not watch related....and is not a journalist, just cannot write with full transparency.
But I encourage all, I mean, ALL...to voice opinions, for without, it is not going to grow into a healthy business.
Soon...watch makers will be focusing on how close they can get their products to:
The better to stroke our egos and everything else.
This "RING" which I bought, costs $1200 in STEEL.
What the hell????
But you see...sex sells!!!!
This message has been edited by bernard cheong on 2012-04-27 16:31:01 This message has been edited by AndrewD on 2012-04-29 16:16:12
It Most Certainly Does Sell :))
nice ring by the way This message has been edited by gazoz on 2012-04-27 16:32:08
The "Petting Ring" made in the UK is a GOOD buy!!!!
You need a good partner is all.
And...she will love it!!!!
What on Earth...
...does this nonsense have to do with the purpose and ethos of this forum?
Can't wait for Part 33 of 33.
Cheers,
pplater.
Can't wait for Part 33 of 33.
Cheers,
pplater.
Why don't you tell us
...how you really feel? 
In this instance I do have to agree with you that the content seems, in TM's oft-used term, malapropos for this forum.
Best,
Gary
ps -- to be absolutely clear, I am (I hope obviously) not aware of, nor am I attempting to express, any feelings that Thomas may, or may not, have on this, or any other, matters
To tell you REAL feelings...
...would be "malapropos for this forum".
;-)
Cheers,
pplater.
;-)
Cheers,
pplater.
Not at all, this was once a loupe holder! Vianney Halter's idea.
Ripley's believe it or not.
True!
Yeah; sure, Bernard, sure...
Even the most cursory web search validates your earlier concession that the 'petting ring' is a Betony Vernon design sold on an internet sex toy website. Next you will want us to believe that the 'sanitory [sic] napkin' to which you refer in post 21 of 33 below is in truth a serendipitous by-product of the padded cleaning cloth once used by Philippe Dufour to black polish the countersinks on the bridges of the Duality and that the 'plastic vagina' that you don't have (see also 21 of 33) was originally a transportation case first used by Vacheron Constantin to return their minute repeaters safely from service.
Get real!
Give us some credit, and save this stuff for your blog - or for some under-the-counter publication sold in brown bags. It isn't appropriate here, not by the standards of any language, culture or nationality.
Thomas - sincere apologies for offending your 'dinner party conversation' rule. This is something that would have to be said, at some stage, at your dinner party.
Cheers,
pplater
Yes..chuckles. s below...I must admit defeat.
Cheers and I wish you good.
Thanks for being a gentleman.
Bernard
Goodo...
This poster, at least, chooses to remember you as a passionate, intelligent, informed and articulate advocate for haute horlogerie (and even 'bas' horlogerie), both mainstream and of course non-mainstream. A return to form in the near future is most earnestly hoped for; your influence on the personal collection (and doubtless that of many others) has been profound before now and hopefully will be again.
Best wishes.
Cheers,
pplater.
No intended mischief, but to stimulate thinking and response..
A loupe holder in the year 1995...becomes copied to something totally "else wise"!!!!
Now..is that not mildly curious? how society has "multi platformed" and sees things so differently?
If that can happen to a loup holder...what about a wristwatch to someone in China...where the clock is still popular?
Are we gonna have 33 parts....
.... of self serving crap that has nothing to do with watches? Isn't your blog where you're supposed to stroke your own ego?
It will stop here at 23.
Boastful, self ego..etc...best to leave...and STOP at 23.
Thanks for the good advice.
I feel of course defeated, but you are right.
All the best, and I have no ill feelings.
Cheers.
Bernard, I do not frequently post but...
You are a rock star!!! Your posts cause and generate thought provoking discussion. Thank you!!!!
A rock star?
Sure, inflate him a little more. Maybe he can show us pictures of the professional cheerleading team he dated. That would have been the perfect follow up to the suitcase full of money post. Hey, even better - maybe he can write a rap song about himself! He still wouldn't be a rock star, just maybe a suburban gangsta.
I hope this isn't typical for this forum. I joined because a fellow member of another forum told me there was serious discussion about watches, not raucus flaunting of wealth and sex toys.
Stay with us, Ralph!
I can assure you that there is a great deal of serious watch discussion here -- not to mention a tone of civility and cordial discourse that, with very few exceptions, has pervaded every discussion that I have participated in here over the past 8 years.
At the same time, it is a community -- and a fairly long-standing one at that (over 10 years now). Like any community, it has members who play various roles -- from ardent enthusiast to curmudgeon to provocateur. I'd encourage you to settle in a bit and get to know the cast of characters -- for me it makes this a much more enjoyable place.
As pplater notes, even though some of us may object to some of Bernard's recent posts, Bernard has played a very important role here over many years -- and has influenced the horological tastes of many people. I would rather coax him back toward the purpose of the forum than lose his participation, in the same way that I am pleased that you have joined us here and hope to see many contributions from you over the years to come.
All the best,
Gary G
To echo Gary's sentiment, Ralph...
Please do stay on board.
First, profound apologies for the tone of previous posts in this thread; it was not typical, but was prompted by a somewhat knee-jerk reaction to content which was personally a little difficult to take. As our founding father Thomas Mao would have it: this forum is like a dinner party to which we have been invited by him. Our discussion, language and tone online should be no more and no less than we would deploy as a dinner guest. You will have seen the apology to him for breaking that rule in an earlier post in this thread. It is a matter of keen personal embarrassment that his admonition was briefly forgotten today.
Second, this is a place for some very serious, very insightful and very passionate consideration of all matters horological. We have all spent time on other fora; many of us, like you, are members of other fora as well, but the content and (usually) the tone here are without peer.
Third, there is no doubt that Bernard is an eminence grise of watch collecting. There are watchmakers whose work would barely be known but for his patronage; pieces which would be unheralded but for his review. Have a look back on some of his terrific reviews, particularly in the AHCI forum. For years his posts would be the first that any ardent collector would open and devour - there are now much-loved watches in the personal watchbox which would not be there but for his illumination of their worthiness. There are times, though (as shared with him privately, and more publicly today) when our sensibilities could not be more opposed. Again, sincere apologies: it is regrettable that you should have witnessed such a moment.
Do hang in there - you won't regret it.
Cheers,
pplater.
EVERYONE PLEASE READ ...
... including Bernard, who I have written to off-line as well.
The Moderator team temporarily removed these posts to give us time to converse with Bernard privately. But we feel it is best to reinstate them and clarify our position.
PuristS is a large community of individuals with different approaches, tastes, interests and ideas. We come from all walks of life, many different countries, speak different languages, are different ages and, my goodness, are even different genders! It's that rich tapestry that makes PuristS so wonderful and strong.
Many of you will know and love Bernard's contributions. There are more memorable ones than otherwise. Bernard and a few others here bring a somewhat left field, even iconoclastic view to collecting and life in general. Even his more outrageous posts are often thought-provoking and prompt us to consider other viewpoints. If we all did that, there might be fewer conflicts in this world.
But because of Bernard's somewhat different world view, he sometimes skates a little close to the edge. You may be aware that we have needed to censor or delete the occasional post, particularly given our diverse readership.
I am leaving this post up (with the removal of the petting ring image – those of you who care about this stuff have heard of Google!) as a reminder to all to consider others when you post content on PuristSPro. We try not to be heavy handed here when it comes to censoring content. I have enormous faith in my fellow PuristS to be understanding, balanced and fair, and to treat others as you would want to be treated yourself. The responses in this thread already indicate a degree of self censorship and the application of high standards that makes me proud of all of you
I also hope that Bernard is not using this post as a shill for his personal blog. You all know we delete links to external sites, but I don't want to see any poster manipulating posts for their own gains.
Regards
Andrew
Moderator
The Moderator team temporarily removed these posts to give us time to converse with Bernard privately. But we feel it is best to reinstate them and clarify our position.
PuristS is a large community of individuals with different approaches, tastes, interests and ideas. We come from all walks of life, many different countries, speak different languages, are different ages and, my goodness, are even different genders! It's that rich tapestry that makes PuristS so wonderful and strong.
Many of you will know and love Bernard's contributions. There are more memorable ones than otherwise. Bernard and a few others here bring a somewhat left field, even iconoclastic view to collecting and life in general. Even his more outrageous posts are often thought-provoking and prompt us to consider other viewpoints. If we all did that, there might be fewer conflicts in this world.
But because of Bernard's somewhat different world view, he sometimes skates a little close to the edge. You may be aware that we have needed to censor or delete the occasional post, particularly given our diverse readership.
I am leaving this post up (with the removal of the petting ring image – those of you who care about this stuff have heard of Google!) as a reminder to all to consider others when you post content on PuristSPro. We try not to be heavy handed here when it comes to censoring content. I have enormous faith in my fellow PuristS to be understanding, balanced and fair, and to treat others as you would want to be treated yourself. The responses in this thread already indicate a degree of self censorship and the application of high standards that makes me proud of all of you
I also hope that Bernard is not using this post as a shill for his personal blog. You all know we delete links to external sites, but I don't want to see any poster manipulating posts for their own gains.
Regards
Andrew
Moderator