Why sebenza?

[Cliff Stamp]

When Dave says ...

That was not the post being responded to.

Censorship is backed by government power.

A private individual can censor something. I can run a website and censor information directly. Censorship can also be done indirectly, which means not deleting information but by acting so as to prevent the information from being posted by altering the enviroment.

The suggestion on this seems to be that if someone's opinion disagrees publicly with the opinion of another, he's trying to silence the former.

No, again it has nothing to do with disagreement. It has to do with crossing the line and bringing the people into question, moving away from posting facts and logic and simply condemming the other opinions as valueless and inflammatory. Again, can the post in question really be considered to be neutral in encouraging further opinions of a similar nature. Hardly.

Take a newbie posting a review like :

"Yeah, I just used this knife, the Blackbird from Jumper Knives. It was sharp when new but it went blunt quickly. It is junk. I also could not sharpen it at all. The lock also had problems and it broke readily in a piece of plastic and frankly I fell like I was ripped off. This knife just sucks compared to the Cougar from Wildmans."

This post actually has little to no information and is highly inflammatory. Now lets take a responce from me of :

"Your review has almost no information, you are too vague to actually provide any point of contention and you pepper it with statements which serve no purpose but to induce a flame. Troll."

This is a direct act to censor the post as it is obvious, especially if that reply was supported by other members, that the individual would not return.

Now how I would likely respond would be :

"How long did you use it and for what before it went dull? What other knives have you used with better edge retention. What did you use to sharpen it, have you worked with other knives with a similar edge and steel? Were you twisting or prying with the knife in the plastic when the lock failed? Did the lock disengage or actually break apart?

I have used a Blackbird before, it doesn't stay sharp as the Cougar from Wildmans, but it does sharpen readily, you may need to adjust the angle if you are using jigs. I found the lock on the one I had to be decent in security but the strength rather low, I broke mine with just wrist strain. The Cougar is indeed better in many respects but I found the handle ergonomics to be really poor."

Now you see here I both questioned what he wrote, ignored the personal statements and posted a different experience. The post also acts to encourage him to write more and hopefully offer more information next time. The difference in the responces should be fairly clear.

There are also various levels of censorship, it isn't just perfect freedom and complete lack of freedom, there are multitudes of gradients. DaveH's was very mild because he didn't extend the arguement to personal labeling, such as I did in the above example with the Troll conclusion which makes it several times more powerful a comdemnation.

You also don't extend one act to a general one, for example anyone can have an off day and be short with someone, you don't then smear that across their personality and ignore everything else they did. However you also don't defend that as not being out of line either. It is what it is, one incident.

I for example have done this indirectly without meaning to when I have responded to someone and critized the method too harshly. I usually try to be more suggestive than direct, but at times when reviewing my posts I feel they could have been better so as to encourage further posts and may have done the opposite. I usually follow this up with an email to clearify the issue if the poster didn't respond.

-Cliff

 

[tortoise]

...Take a newbie posting a review like :

"Yeah, I just used this knife, the Blackbird from Jumper Knives. It was sharp when new but it went blunt quickly. It is junk. I also could not sharpen it at all. The lock also had problems and it broke readily in a piece of plastic and frankly I fell like I was ripped off. This knife just sucks compared to the Cougar from Wildmans."

This post actually has little to no information and is highly inflammatory. Now lets take a responce from me of :

"Your review has almost no information, you are too vague to actually provide any point of contention and you pepper it with statements which serve no purpose but to induce a flame. Troll."

This is a direct act to censor the post as it is obvious, especially if that reply was supported by other members, that the individual would not return...
-Cliff

Hey Cliff,

Ah but you are not censoring our hypothetical newbie here, you are censuring him. His review, valid or not, exists. It remains in place, you are unable to affect it. If your response discourages him from future posts that is, ultimately, his choice, not your enforcement. The proof of error here is in the final contention that after receiving a reply like the above, the biased poster "would not return..." when we see, too often lately, that regardless of prevailing wisdom or reasoned debate, people do return. -Because they can. If I understand you correctly you are suggesting that to expose his bias, or flawed reasoning, is to censor him. It is not.

-To marginalize him? Yes. To ostracize him? Yes. To employ collective public pressure to try to change his behavior? Perhaps. But not to censor him. Only the government can actually do this. Others may enforce private rules over private enterprises like the forums, TV networks, etc. (and simple users like us can't even do that) but in the end although Spark, or ABC may prohibit you from saying something in their arenas, only the government can stop you from saying something.

 

[thombrogan]

LarryM,

Those photos hurt and I already own a 705BC1CFHS (I think you're the guy who let me know it was being sold).

Why Sebenza? Because Larry's pics make me want one! (now to get some money and further justification... ..this could take awhile....)

 

[mschwoeb]

42. The answer is 42

 

[Vermont woodsman]

A sebenza is a sebenza, is a sebenza...perfection every time....what more do you need to know........now what was the question again.

 

[Scott Dog]

As a southpaw I really appreciate the fact that CRK makes and has available left hand versions of the Sebenza. My only other coice to get similar quality is to order custom and most of the good makers usually have at least a year waiting list. As a lefty, it leaves me out of about 99% of the market. The only upside is that it has saved me a lot of money. It would be very hard for me to resist buying some of the nice right handed ones out there. No impulse purchases for me.

 

[stjames]

I find the Large Regular Sebenza to be very comfortable, the ergonomics of the knife fit my hand well. The lock is solid and reliable and has never failed, and has always engaged despite the dirt or debris in the various environments I have used it in. The blade has excellent cutting ability combined with good edge retention and toughness; I have not chipped or damaged the blade even when accidentally contacting unintended materials like nails and staples. This is based on actually using the knife for the last six years in my work as a Stagehand, not any kind of scientific testing or idle speculation. You can decide if that holds any weight for yourself.

 

[A Dogs Best Friend]

To me it seems as if the Sebenza is simply a collectors item....or an item that folks like to use if they can afford a $400 knife. Kind of like the Rolex.
I wouldn't buy a Jaguar just because it's a Jaguar when a Honda Accord will outlive it and is much more useful for the price . Not to mention will require less maintenance.

This is all just my opinion of course.

Isn't that funny. I mean our justification for things. I have three Sebenzas and four Mnandis, but wouldn't even consider paying four hundred dollars for a watch. Give me a $30 Timex and I'm happy. It does it's job.
Also drive around in a little Saturn SC2 'cause it's reliable, fuel effecient and economical to own. Also great service from the manufacturer! But, again I wouldn't even consider paying Jaguar prices for a car.
And I don't know why I personally need the 'Rolls Royce' of knives in my pocket, but am happy with economy elsewhere.

And all we have is our personal opinion. (for the most part)

 

[A Dogs Best Friend]

In the knife world, sometimes Spyderco, for instance, will tell an ELU to retire a knife. It's difficult to imagine Chris Reeve doing this. Greater initial expense often leads people to be willing to spend more in upkeep. I read an article once about BMW motorcycles. It focused on how many old BMWs you see out on the roads (also applies to Harley Davidson.) The author questioned the common wisdom that the large number of high-mileage bikes seen is necessarily related to a higher quality of bike. He offered that it might be the high initial price of purchae that led owners to take better care of their bikes throughout their service lives. Additionally, the perceived value of these bikes often causes people to repair/rebuild/re-animate basket cases. Meanwhile Japanese manufacturers offer lower priced products that are accordingly seen as disposable. When a seven thousand dollar bike starts to show wear, its owner may simply discard it and replace it with a new model. Somebody buys it secondhand as a learner or beater, neglects it further, and ultimately the bike becomes unserviceable. However, the owner who has spent two, three or four times that on a BMW/HD is willing to support his investment with additional monies. Someone who buys one of these bikes secondhand often feels that he has something of value and is unlikely to allow it to deteriorate to the point of scrap.

Anyway, as always everyone has to answer for themselves if any of this is worth the price.

Just think this discussion of initial value versus upkeep is right on the money to a large extent. It's not the whole picture but is a big part of it, I'm sure. Great post!

Ahh! One more point. The greater initial expense in regards to quality! justifies the time and expense in upkeep. If you have a knife, for instance, made of even slightly inferior materials would the upkeep be even worth the owners' while?

 

[A Dogs Best Friend]

Simple, because it's a beauty! (IMHO)

sorry, had to give this forever lasting discussion a twist

Ted, Great photo of a very well used and obviously loved Sebenza. It was refreshing to see it here amidst all the "is the Sebenza really worth it?" rehash. Love the Seb!

 

[LaBella]

man it is getting DEEP in this one!

I like sebenzas a lot and carry 2 daily.

I also carry a RJ Martin avenger and a Jen Anso Rock Lobster
*edited to add a Mnandi in a small sebenza slip in the bottom of my pocket*

so, yeah that about covers it!

opinions, everybody has some...just like toenails!

come on fellahs, were ALL here for the love of the blades..and the OCD of course!

 

[fewpop]

Maybe someone should move this thread to "The 1st Amendment Forum"

Oh, btw, nice sebbie Ted Voorde

''Americans cherish the liberty to speak out — and sometimes go into fuming convulsions when they see it exercised by people with whom they do not agree.''

A. Barton Hinkle
columnist

 

[Scott Dog]

Not use a $400 knife? Hmmm seems relative to me. I have an ivory Mnandi that see's alot of pocket time and gets frequently used. To mee it seems silly to spend a decent amount of money on a knife and leave it in a safe. Life's just too short!

 

[James Green Dragon]

I would have a tough time spending $400 for a folding knife (or any other knife for that matter, really). That is as much as a decent quality handgun goes for. I guess everything is relative though from an economic perspective...

Nevertheless, if I did spend $400 for a folder, it would have to be an EDC knife & not a drawer queen. Additionally, it would have to offer some significant advantages in terms of either performance, asthetics and / or design features, when compared to other knives half its price.

So some of it is subjective. Personally, the Sebeneza just doesn't do the above for me. I am very happy with my Chinook II instead. I'd be even happier with the three of them which one could reasonably attain for the price of one Seb...

That's just me though.

 

[Rat Finkenstein]

-To marginalize him? Yes. To ostracize him? Yes. To employ collective public pressure to try to change his behavior? Perhaps. But not to censor him. Only the government can actually do this. Others may enforce private rules over private enterprises like the forums, TV networks, etc. (and simple users like us can't even do that) but in the end although Spark, or ABC may prohibit you from saying something in their arenas, only the government can stop you from saying something.

This is untrue. The Government cannot prevent anyone from saying anything, short of cutting out the tongue or executing you, or any number of extreme measures. Thus a dictatorship can censor people, but a democracy cannot. They also can censure people, and there are penalties for saying things that are threatening towards others, etc. But freedom of speech still prevails. Self censorship is the only type that we, in a democracy ever really have. You ultimately decide what you will say. You could get in legal troubles over saying the wrong thing, but you still would have said it. Likewise, there is no government censorship of Television- the Networks censor themselves.

 

[Cliff Stamp]

If your response discourages him from future posts that is, ultimately, his choice, not your enforcement.

Of course it is his choice, it is always the individuals choice. If the goverment put in a policy that anyone speaking out against an issue would be jailed would this not be censorship? Of course, but you still have the ability to speak, you just have to face the consequences. They have created an enviroment in which information is suppressed.

There is no fundamental difference, just of course one of degrees of enviroment and consequence, as I noted in the above, it is pretty mild in this case, but it gets pretty bad at times on the forum when the same idea is taken to more extremes. I recieve posts from people all the time who discuss issues which they won't post on the forums because of cultist support which creates an enviroment which is suppressive to contrary opinion.

-Cliff

 

[Cliff Stamp]

This is based on actually using the knife for the last six years ...

And in which of the aspects you mentioned does it exceed a decent high end production folder such as the Benchmade 710, Paramilitary, Rat Trap, Ka-Bar Dozier D2, etc. .

-Cliff

 

[digdeep]

only the government can stop you from saying something.

Sorry if this is off topic but just for clarification:

Amendment I (to the United States Constitution)

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Note: this applies to the government only - not to individuals, companies, or corporations.

 

[stjames]

And in which of the aspects you mentioned does it exceed a decent high end production folder such as the Benchmade 710, Paramilitary, Rat Trap, Ka-Bar Dozier D2, etc. .

-Cliff

I have had the Axis lock and lock-backs jam and fail because of debris, and find the compression lock and lock-back difficult to use one handed, especially with gloves on. I also don't like to use knives with G-10 scales, the material feels slick to me unless heavily textured (ala Simonich Gunner Grips). D2 is a good steel but prone to rust in many environments so I prefer it on a fixed blade as opposed to a folder with it's nooks and crannies.

 

[tortoise]

In re: censorship: Yes, some of you seem to be getting it, at the very same time you aren't getting it.

Only a government can censor someone. The Constitution addresses this specifically. If a citizen tells you to shut up, that is not censorship. If a TV network tells you to shut up, that is not censorship. If the government tells you to shut up, it is.

That's precisely why our government is regulated by the Constituion. That document protects us from the government, not from fellow citizens. No "person" can violate your Constitutional right to speech, only the government (generally in the form of some agent thereof) can.

If a bully tells you to shut up or he'll punch you, you don't, he does; he has committed a crime but your rights have not been violated. If a government agent does that, then they have. That's censorship.