So another anchor
thread was closed. Sigh.
I just want to point out one thing about past anchor
threads - many of which were also closed. In these threads, some people doggedly chip away at seemingly minor points, while others get offended and think that nothing good comes from doing this.
In the past, these people doggingly pursuing issues have served the community very well.
Take the case of Spade, for example. Alain Poiroud came onto this forum with some strange ideas indeed, and went straight into marketing
mode to sell a new anchor design. Many threads were closed because some people hammered away at him and his marketing
and this offended others. The upside was that Alain actually did have some good ideas and buckled down and gave the entire community an education backed by experimental data (some of the first in this field) - as well as ushered in the era of new generation anchors while clearing the field for later products like Mantus
Similarly, Brian at Fortress
has taken the bit in his teeth and persevered to educate us on anchors and design parameters. He also has stood fast through what others perceived as offensive badgering, only to better our community because of it. I think Brian escaped any closed threads.
In a different vein, those badgers are fully and single-handedly responsible for uncovering the Rocna
fiasco. Often at their own personal expense. This also resulted in many closed threads because of delicate sensitivities. We probably would have never found out about that without the dogged determination and blunt language posed by those people. This served a community service
we should all respect and be thankful for.
Likewise, SuperMax and their scope
issue were brought to light by the badgers (yet another closed thread), as well as chasing out a couple of fly-by-night operators.
New manufacturers with new designs should expect this type of intense scrutiny and no wiggle-room. They will come out the better for it if they have truly done their research
on their product, as well as most likely give us all another education in anchoring
. If their product cannot stand up, then we also benefit.
And just think - we are having entire anchor threads that do not include the older styles at all! That in itself is amazing. Past threads used to get closed when the CQR
people railed on the Bruce people - both of whom were being attacked by the Luke Fisherman people, and no one showed any data of any type except anecdotal experiences and discourses on the "art" of how to set an anchor (including which way to hold your mouth and what color socks are necessary).
Now, one would never go to an anchor thread without expecting to see real experimental data given with the expectation of debating it. And we are even getting finite analysis models to boot!
The experimental, metallurgical, computational and physical science arguments on shank strength, burying ability, setability, re-setability, roll stability, etc (thank you Alain, RIP) are considered normal discourse in anchor threads now!
And we have the badgers to thank for it, and the fragile sensitivities to boo.
Of course, civility must be maintained - no ad hominem attacks and no pulling stuff out of one's rear. But some of these threads are getting closed for the same reasons the old ones did - asking hard questions and demanding well-positioned and defendable answers.
Like the examples given above, we are poorer when the questions are left unanswered.
Mark (let's see if this post makes it to daylight)