Flemke - Is this your McLaren? (Vol 5)
Discussion
flemke said:
AlmostUseful said:
McAndy said:
hkz286 said:
However, my lack of understanding on general good design...
Subjective. There are many general design rules that satisfy the majority, but it cannot be quantified, so there is no right or wrong, just a majority opinion. Your ability to pick what you like is embedded in your opinion of what you see, not what somebody else tells you looks good, so choose what you like! 
AlmostUseful said:
flemke said:
AlmostUseful said:
McAndy said:
hkz286 said:
However, my lack of understanding on general good design...
Subjective. There are many general design rules that satisfy the majority, but it cannot be quantified, so there is no right or wrong, just a majority opinion. Your ability to pick what you like is embedded in your opinion of what you see, not what somebody else tells you looks good, so choose what you like! AlmostUseful said:
You'd think that, and you'd be wrong.
Have you read the history of Flemke's colour choice? Bloody hell, I never knew there were so many reasons for something to be wrong! But then what do I know, I liked it in the paler blue with the silver/gold wheels...
I'll argue the first point until I'm pale blue in the face! Have you read the history of Flemke's colour choice? Bloody hell, I never knew there were so many reasons for something to be wrong! But then what do I know, I liked it in the paler blue with the silver/gold wheels...
flemke said:
Yes and no.
There is a difference between personal taste, which by definition is in the eye of the beholder, and judgment, which all eyes and brains do not possess to the same degree. Just because something cannot be quantified does not mean that it cannot be judged.
Agreed, but judgements are still subjective. If all judgements were perfect to everybody then the appeals courts would be quiet. There is a difference between personal taste, which by definition is in the eye of the beholder, and judgment, which all eyes and brains do not possess to the same degree. Just because something cannot be quantified does not mean that it cannot be judged.
Anyway, I'm derailing somewhat. I'll, rather aptly given the last couple of posts, go back to my race blue Skoda.
Another random question(s) that popped into my head the other day.
Flemke
When was the last time you were in the F1, (or even one of your other cars) and just by chance you saw another one (i.e Not at an event or place where it was likely)
Last time you saw an F1 driven by an owner you don't know personally? (I'm guessing it's something of a club where everyone knows everyone)
Flemke
When was the last time you were in the F1, (or even one of your other cars) and just by chance you saw another one (i.e Not at an event or place where it was likely)
Last time you saw an F1 driven by an owner you don't know personally? (I'm guessing it's something of a club where everyone knows everyone)
McAndy said:
flemke said:
Yes and no.
There is a difference between personal taste, which by definition is in the eye of the beholder, and judgment, which all eyes and brains do not possess to the same degree. Just because something cannot be quantified does not mean that it cannot be judged.
Agreed, but judgements are still subjective. If all judgements were perfect to everybody then the appeals courts would be quiet. There is a difference between personal taste, which by definition is in the eye of the beholder, and judgment, which all eyes and brains do not possess to the same degree. Just because something cannot be quantified does not mean that it cannot be judged.
Anyway, I'm derailing somewhat. I'll, rather aptly given the last couple of posts, go back to my race blue Skoda.
Do you think that, in judging how well someone plays the violin, the opinion of a randomly chosen lay person is going to be as worthwhile as the opinion of a professional violinist?
Rich_W said:
Another random question(s) that popped into my head the other day.
Flemke
When was the last time you were in the F1, (or even one of your other cars) and just by chance you saw another one (i.e Not at an event or place where it was likely)
Last time you saw an F1 driven by an owner you don't know personally? (I'm guessing it's something of a club where everyone knows everyone)
- That has happened to me twice, although in both cases you could say that it was in a place that was (more) likely (than random).Flemke
When was the last time you were in the F1, (or even one of your other cars) and just by chance you saw another one (i.e Not at an event or place where it was likely)
Last time you saw an F1 driven by an owner you don't know personally? (I'm guessing it's something of a club where everyone knows everyone)
The first was when I was driving my car up the M40 in the direction of Silverstone and I was overtaken by the F1 owned by Tony Smith (his ownership is public knowledge) who was on his way to a vintage race meeting at Silverstone.
The second was when I was driving away from Woking towards the M25 (I think it was on the A320) and another F1 came towards me from the opposite direction. I did not recognise the car, but presumed it was either a car that had been serviced and was being taken for a test drive or a car being driven by its owner to McLaren.
- Those were the only times I have seen an F1 driven by anyone on the public roads (apart from meet-ups with a couple of my friends).
Actually it is very much not a club-type thing in which everyone knows everyone else. In the past three or so years there have been some Continental cruising events organised by a former owner. I avoid such things, but inevitably some acquaintances have been formed through those activities.
Apart from that however, I think you would be surprised by how little owners interact with each other or even know each other. Until recently, McLaren had a strict policy that no two F1 owners could be at the F1 service centre in Woking (now MSO) at the same time. They were obsessive about maintaining client confidentiality.
In I think 2010, they had that "gathering" at MTC, which was attended by about 30 F1 owners, mostly current but a few former. Not that many of the owners had met each other previously, and not that many are "famous" people whom one would recognise by sight.
flemke said:
Until recently, McLaren had a strict policy that no two F1 owners could be at the F1 service centre in Woking (now MSO) at the same time. They were obsessive about maintaining client confidentiality.
Was it really all about confidentiality? I could imagine it happening more as a marketing thing so that each F1 owner felt like they had the whole factory dept. focussed on them flemke said:
Depends on what you mean by "subjective". If you mean that judgments (usually although not always) cannot be quantified, or quantified easily, then I would agree. If you mean that all judgments are mere matters of personal opinion in the sense that any one is as good as another, then I could not possibly agree.
Do you think that, in judging how well someone plays the violin, the opinion of a randomly chosen lay person is going to be as worthwhile as the opinion of a professional violinist?
On that last sentence, I gather from these threads that your profession is linked to the field of design and/or manufacture. I'm aware of your past life as a cabinet maker and also come to this conclusion from the many diversions this thread has taken into the aesthetic and practical design of a great many things (bicycles was my favourite).Do you think that, in judging how well someone plays the violin, the opinion of a randomly chosen lay person is going to be as worthwhile as the opinion of a professional violinist?
I appreciate that you value your privacy but is your line of work linked to products that we the general public could purchase or even commission? Would you be able to show us any examples? As you are able to wax lyrical on things such as the intricacies of font design I'm interested to see what the products are like that you put your name to.
Of course I may be wrong and you're just another stockbroker made good. In which case, Mabrook!
LaurasOtherHalf said:
flemke said:
Until recently, McLaren had a strict policy that no two F1 owners could be at the F1 service centre in Woking (now MSO) at the same time. They were obsessive about maintaining client confidentiality.
Was it really all about confidentiality? I could imagine it happening more as a marketing thing so that each F1 owner felt like they had the whole factory dept. focussed on them Whenever a car got to their shop, the first thing they did was to remove the reg plate so that no other client could see even that much. If a client was already at the shop, they would never allow another customer to visit, even to drop something off. (That particular practice is no longer possible with 15-18 diverse McLarens at MSO at one time.)
Since the internet and social media have become ubiquitous, many owners' names have got drawn into the public domain. Before then, however, complete confidentiality was more feasible. Although over the years McLaren have told me a lot of things off the record, they have never revealed to me the confidential identity of another owner (not that I have asked, but many times we have referred to "chassis #123", when it would have been easier to say, "Jeremy Corbyn's car").
shirt said:
flemke said:
Depends on what you mean by "subjective". If you mean that judgments (usually although not always) cannot be quantified, or quantified easily, then I would agree. If you mean that all judgments are mere matters of personal opinion in the sense that any one is as good as another, then I could not possibly agree.
Do you think that, in judging how well someone plays the violin, the opinion of a randomly chosen lay person is going to be as worthwhile as the opinion of a professional violinist?
On that last sentence, I gather from these threads that your profession is linked to the field of design and/or manufacture. I'm aware of your past life as a cabinet maker and also come to this conclusion from the many diversions this thread has taken into the aesthetic and practical design of a great many things (bicycles was my favourite).Do you think that, in judging how well someone plays the violin, the opinion of a randomly chosen lay person is going to be as worthwhile as the opinion of a professional violinist?
I appreciate that you value your privacy but is your line of work linked to products that we the general public could purchase or even commission? Would you be able to show us any examples? As you are able to wax lyrical on things such as the intricacies of font design I'm interested to see what the products are like that you put your name to.
Of course I may be wrong and you're just another stockbroker made good. In which case, Mabrook!
What I would say is that I made my money doing something that almost everyone who does it tries to do by quantitative means, but my way is purely qualitative and reliant on unquantifiable judgment and opinion.
More important: yes, I could wax lyrical on font design, although that would well and truly kill this thread.
flemke said:
Do you think that, in judging how well someone plays the violin, the opinion of a randomly chosen lay person is going to be as worthwhile as the opinion of a professional violinist?
Perhaps an example that may help me to express myself is that of art. A qualified artist may be able to pass respectable judgement upon a piece, but how an individual perceives it is entirely down to them, and I don't believe that anybody should ever be called "wrong" for not liking a renowned work. For example, I've seen the Mona Lisa. I was hugely underwhelmed. However, I do not believe that the experts are wrong; I do appreciate that I'm in the minority.
McAndy said:
flemke said:
Do you think that, in judging how well someone plays the violin, the opinion of a randomly chosen lay person is going to be as worthwhile as the opinion of a professional violinist?
Perhaps an example that may help me to express myself is that of art. A qualified artist may be able to pass respectable judgement upon a piece, but how an individual perceives it is entirely down to them, and I don't believe that anybody should ever be called "wrong" for not liking a renowned work. For example, I've seen the Mona Lisa. I was hugely underwhelmed. However, I do not believe that the experts are wrong; I do appreciate that I'm in the minority.
Timing is also measurable, although I believe (but again could be wrong) that whilst one might choose to depart from the composer's instructions, there will be occasions when artistic deviations are considered to improve or at least not to degrade from the overall quality of a performance.
Those two technical criteria are not however the only criteria by which to judge a musical performance, which is why people such as Barbra Streisand and Whitney Houston had absolutely glorious, almost incredible vocal instruments but were not necessarily the best "singers".
Wrt your saying that no-one should be called "wrong" for not liking a renowned work, I completely agree. That was my point - we are all free to like or dislike anything, as that is a matter of our personal taste. That does not however mean that we are all equally able to judge whether the artist did a good or bad job.
Absolutely.
On a side note, thank you for entering into an interesting debate with aplomb and good manners: a rare occurrence on the internet today!
On another side note: this seems pertinent!
On a side note, thank you for entering into an interesting debate with aplomb and good manners: a rare occurrence on the internet today!
On another side note: this seems pertinent!
Joe911 said:
There is hope ...
http://www.sciencealert.com/a-chemist-discovered-t...
Posted at 4:43 this morning...?http://www.sciencealert.com/a-chemist-discovered-t...
flemke said:
Joe911 said:
There is hope ...
http://www.sciencealert.com/a-chemist-discovered-t...
Posted at 4:43 this morning...?http://www.sciencealert.com/a-chemist-discovered-t...
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff