Best High-End Mild smokes

[Aithos]

Mild, medium or full strength has absolutely nothing to do with flavor.

This is one of the reasons I hate the terminology of this hobby.

First, he said strength but he's not talking about strength and neither am I.
Second, strength absolutely does have something to do with flavor - generally the stronger the body the more full and strong flavors you'll get.
Third, I never said a thing about strength, I specifically said flavorful and by that I meant full flavored not the types of flavors.

Finally, your post brings nothing to the conversation but bad manners - so how about in the future you keep it to yourself.

Thanks.

[HabanoMan]

I am looking for suggestions for high end mild smokes

Seems to me like that is exactly what he is talking about.

No worries though. I will just humble myself to your superior knowledge of cigar terminology.

[Herf N Turf]

This is one of the reasons I hate the terminology of this hobby.

First, he said strength but he's not talking about strength and neither am I.
Second, strength absolutely does have something to do with flavor - generally the stronger the body the more full and strong flavors you'll get.
Third, I never said a thing about strength, I specifically said flavorful and by that I meant full flavored not the types of flavors.

Finally, your post brings nothing to the conversation but bad manners - so how about in the future you keep it to yourself.

Thanks.

Sadly for you, the guy's actually RIGHT! The distinctions he makes are completely valid and widely accepted among people WHAT ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.

You can "hate the terminology of this hobby" all you want, just as you can hate your boss, or anyone else who's your superior in life. Thing is, that doesn't change the fact that it's the vernacular of your hobby, or profession. It just IS. Get over it.

You can try to shout a more knowledgeable member down, but you can never put down SUPERIOR KNOWLEDGE.

Take some good advice, BACK OFF.

Let me try and put this in a more peaceful way.

You may not like the language of a country you love to vacation in, but the fact of the matter is, that's the language of that country. It's the same with hobbies. We may not like the specifics of how the existing hobbyists communicate, but at the end of the day, it's a tried and true method that's worked for them, and the industry, for YEARS.

It's best to learn it and work within it, than to fight it and be left out.

Just sayin'.

[Aithos]

Sadly for you, the guy's actually RIGHT! The distinctions he makes are completely valid and widely accepted among people WHAT ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.

You can "hate the terminology of this hobby" all you want, just as you can hate your boss, or anyone else who's your superior in life. Thing is, that doesn't change the fact that it's the vernacular of your hobby, or profession. It just IS. Get over it.

You can try to shout a more knowledgeable member down, but you can never put down SUPERIOR KNOWLEDGE.

Take some good advice, BACK OFF.

Let me try and put this in a more peaceful way.

You may not like the language of a country you love to vacation in, but the fact of the matter is, that's the language of that country. It's the same with hobbies. We may not like the specifics of how the existing hobbyists communicate, but at the end of the day, it's a tried and true method that's worked for them, and the industry, for YEARS.

It's best to learn it and work within it, than to fight it and be left out.

Just sayin'.

Sadly for you, you completely missed the point of what I was saying. I didn't mention strength, I mentioned flavor specifically. He chimed in to correct me about a statement I didn't make and was a dick about it without adding anything substantial to the post in the way of information. There is a good way to make a point and a bad way, his way was the latter. If he had come in and said "this is how we normally define blah blah, and this is what he meant blah blah" and was nice about it...that's a whole different story.

Now you come in here as a Moderator to tell me off and tell ME to back off? With all due respect, you need to have a bit more tact and your priorities are completely out of whack. If being "left out" is the result of expecting people to have some respect, then I'd rather be left out. Also, I take exception to you implying that he is my "superior" in any fashion. You don't know the first thing about me and quite frankly, that's insulting and I don't appreciate it.

[Aithos]

Seems to me like that is exactly what he is talking about.

No worries though. I will just humble myself to your superior knowledge of cigar terminology. [/COLOR]

I never said anything about knowledge of cigar terminology or the definitions of such. You read something into my original comment that wasn't there, I corrected you on your observation and clarified my comment. I was pointing out that there is a correlation between strength and flavor, not that strength determines flavor. You need to stop reading things into my statements that aren't there.

[Herf N Turf]

Sadly for you, you completely missed the point of what I was saying. I didn't mention strength, I mentioned flavor specifically. He chimed in to correct me about a statement I didn't make and was a dick about it without adding anything substantial to the post in the way of information. There is a good way to make a point and a bad way, his way was the latter. If he had come in and said "this is how we normally define blah blah, and this is what he meant blah blah" and was nice about it...that's a whole different story.

Now you come in here as a Moderator to tell me off and tell ME to back off? With all due respect, you need to have a bit more tact and your priorities are completely out of whack. If being "left out" is the result of expecting people to have some respect, then I'd rather be left out. Also, I take exception to you implying that he is my "superior" in any fashion. You don't know the first thing about me and quite frankly, that's insulting and I don't appreciate it.

Okay, let's get a few things straight, here. First of all, you were the one who went combative in the first place. There's no need for that, but all that is easily forgiven.

Secondly, all the brother was trying to do was not to back you into a corner of outing your ignorance, but rather to get some pretty common definitions straight, so we all have some common ground upon which to communicate. Sorry if that "common ground" isn't your chosen vernacular, but it just so happens to be that which we sign up for as hobbyists. Maybe we can change it, maybe we can't, but we sure ain't gonna change it all in one post. For instance, if we want to communicate according to accepted vernacular, there is NO correlation between strength and flavor. One has nothing to do with the other. Don't shoot the messenger.

Another unfortunate assumption made here is the idea that I, or any other member of staff comes swooshing in with some sort of presumed authority ("as a moderator"). I find the implication tremendously offensive and I can tell you right now, if any member of staff comes into a thread flexing muscles and fails to identify themselves as anything other than a member, THAT is a problem.

When I reply to a post here, I am a member. If you've been around these forums for long, you'd know this. I am a MEMBER FIRST. When I post, I post as a MEMBER.


I reserve the right to disagree with you, as a member. I reserve the right to take issue with you waxing a bit too touchy, when another, very experienced member calls your definitions to task. Okay, you were't actually talking about this and that? Fair enough. What I would have done, would have been to take responsibility for the miscommunication, rather than try to blame someone else. Perhaps, and I mean, JUST perhaps, you didn't communicate your meaning accurately? I mean, you're not exactly talking to a couple of guys who are prone to misinterpretation. No one's looking for a fight here. No one wants contention. The whole point of this place is to get along and have an "additive" affect upon one another's experience. When we DO disagree, we seek to do so respectfully and in a way that can help us learn from one another, not just fling handfuls of dung.

Just food for thought. Think about it. If you're STILL pissed, we can try and ferret it out a different way.

[HabanoMan]

I never said anything about knowledge of cigar terminology or the definitions of such. You read something into my original comment that wasn't there, I corrected you on your observation and clarified my comment. I was pointing out that there is a correlation between strength and flavor, not that strength determines flavor. You need to stop reading things into my statements that aren't there.

@Aithos I apologize if I came off "sounding like a dick". That was not my intention I assure you. I definitely wasn't attacking you with my original post. There is a fairly well defined definition of the terms strength, flavor and body in the cigar community. Below is a link to a discussion about it. I was the original Op and there is some good, friendly discussion in the thread. Once again, I apologize if I sounded like I was trying to berate you or your opinion. Just trying to help educate which I have been trying to do in the cigar community for quite a long time now. We got off on the wrong foot but there is no reason that can't be mended and we can share this passion and this forum in harmony.

http://www.cigarbum.com/forum/showthread.php?2120-Strength-flavor-body-What-is-the-difference

[Aithos]

Okay, let's get a few things straight, here. First of all, you were the one who went combative in the first place. There's no need for that, but all that is easily forgiven.

Secondly, all the brother was trying to do was not to back you into a corner of outing your ignorance, but rather to get some pretty common definitions straight, so we all have some common ground upon which to communicate. Sorry if that "common ground" isn't your chosen vernacular, but it just so happens to be that which we sign up for as hobbyists. Maybe we can change it, maybe we can't, but we sure ain't gonna change it all in one post.

Another unfortunate assumption made here is the idea that I, or any other member of staff comes swooshing in with some sort of presumed authority ("as a moderator"). I find the implication tremendously offensive and I can tell you right now, if any member of staff comes into a thread flexing muscles and fails to identify themselves as anything other than a member, THAT is a problem.

When I reply to a post here, I am a member. If you've been around these forums for long, you'd know this. I am a MEMBER FIRST. When I post, I post as a MEMBER.


I reserve the right to disagree with you, as a member. I reserve the right to take issue with you waxing a bit too touchy, when another, very experienced member calls your definitions to task. Okay, you were't actually talking about this and that? Fair enough. What I would have done, would have been to take responsibility for the miscommunication, rather than try to blame someone else. Perhaps, and I mean, JUST perhaps, you didn't communicate your meaning accurately? I mean, you're not exactly talking to a couple of guys who are prone to misinterpretation. No one's looking for a fight here. No one wants contention. The whole point of this place is to get along and have an "additive" affect upon one another's experience. When we DO disagree, we seek to do so respectfully and in a way that can help us learn from one another, not just fling handfuls of dung.

Just food for thought. Think about it. If you're STILL pissed, we can try and ferret it out a different way.

I went combative first? He posted a one line post specifically to tell me I'm wrong without even understanding what I was saying and without any reason for it. You both misinterpreted what I meant by my statement and proceeded to get personal and start insulting me. I didn't insult anyone, but you've been tremendously insulting, offensive, arrogant and condescending in each post you've made tonight. You think I'm waxing a bit too touchy because another "very experienced member calls your definitions to task"?

Here is my original post:
"I'm not sure why everyone thinks this, I had smoked some fairly expensive mild smokes (Ashton, Rocky Patel) and I never liked any of them. Honestly, it's a big reason why my New Years cigar was the only one I smoked all year. It wasn't until I had some more flavorful cigars that I really got interested. I mean I enjoyed the RyJ Vintage 1875 and Montecristo Classic and White, but the Flor de las Antillas, LADC and LP#9, Ave Maria and Oliva MB3 are the cigars that I enjoyed significantly more. I'd get some solid medium cigars and then ask them if they would like milder or fuller from there..."

So let's break this down:
- first, I make a statement that I have smoked some fairly expensive mild smokes and I never liked any of them
- second, I mention a follow-up statement that those cigars are a big reason why I never smoked more than my single New Years cigar.
- third, I switch gears and make a NEW statement that it wasn't until I had some more flavorful cigars that I got interested
- fourth, I mention some cigars, blah blah nothing important here
- finally, I say I'd get some medium cigars and then move to mild or full cigars depending what they think

None of those things are definitions, I'm not attempting to change the vernacular. Yes, I made a rather awkward transition in thoughts, I'm ADD, it's been a really long and stressful day and I'm not necessarily putting my thoughts together as well when I post something quickly like that. In either case, his response was worthless, it didn't bring anything to the conversation, it didn't touch on anything in my post that's debatable - just a statement of the kind of cigars that got me interested in the hobby. I considered it rude and tactless and I said as much in a slightly rude but non-insulting manner by saying maybe just keep those kinds of thoughts to yourself.

You say "When we DO disagree, we seek to do so respectfully and in a way that can help us learn from one another, not just flint handfuls of dung."

Oh, you mean like this:

Mild, medium or full strength has absolutely nothing to do with flavor.

Riiiiiggghhht. What a respectful and helpful way to respond to my post.

Yes, I'm still pissed and after this post I'm going to bed because I have another long day tomorrow and now I've spent the better part of an hour on this garbage. I don't care if you post as a member, you're welcome to your opinions and you can disagree with me all you want - but you're a moderator and you represent the authority on this website, the two things can't be divorced. Regardless of your opinion on that other people who come into this site will see how you've addressed me in this thread and take that behavior to be acceptable, and if you think it is then you need to seriously re-read your posts and the tone you're coming off with. It's negative, elitist, disrespectful and whether you like it or not you're a moderator and I hold you to a higher standard because of it. It's just the way it is and it's been like that in online communities since the early days of the Internet (<--that's irony and sarcasm btw).

In case you still don't understand here's what I find offensive about your posts:
"widely accepted among people WHAT ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT" - thanks for calling me stupid and ignorant
"or anyone else who's your superior in life. Thing is, that doesn't change the fact that it's the vernacular of your hobby, or profession. It just IS. Get over it." - accept it or get the fuck out, they're your superiors
"You can try to shout a more knowledgeable member down, but you can never put down SUPERIOR KNOWLEDGE." - where exactly did any knowledge or point of contention come from in my original post again?
"Take some good advice, BACK OFF." - don't post here if you don't agree
"It's best to learn it and work within it, than to fight it and be left out" - if you don't agree with us you're not part of the group

I could keep going but if you don't get it yet it isn't worth discussing further, your later post was even more insulting. If you act that way...guess the kind of response you're going to get? I don't back down from people who start shit like this and I don't really care that you're a moderator, you're a person being a jerk and I'm going to call you out on it.

I've said this about half a dozen times - I never made a statement about strength being related to flavor at all in my first post. It isn't there, you're making a stupid assumption and taking me to task for asking another member who posted rubbish that was WORTHLESS to keep his thoughts to himself. Oh, and by the way, if you want to get all technical about this then let's talk about context and semantics for a moment.

He said:

Mild, medium or full strength has absolutely nothing to do with flavor.

Oh really, tell me more about this "flavor" you speak of. Are you talking about different kinds of flavors? How strong the flavors are? How complex they are? Please tell me again how the strength of a cigar impacts NONE of those things in any way. Oh right....it does affect SOME of those, because the characteristic of what makes a cigar are inexorably intertwined. You can't change the strength of a cigar without affecting flavor in some way, sorry, but science is a thing and doesn't give a shit about your vernacular when it comes to the chemical compositions of an organic plant. Unless you're implying that the cigar companies artificially add strength to cigars by some means other than growing, aging or blending the Tobacco...

So yeah... Semantics - when you say they have nothing do with one another you're talking specifically about how they are rated or discussed, not how they actually interact or come to be, which is what I was talking about with my second post and if you think there isn't a correlation you're wrong. All it takes for a correlation is for the case to be true in a statistically significant (measurable) number of cases, I didn't say causation, two completely different things.

Just saying.

[Aithos]

@Aithos I apologize if I came off "sounding like a dick". That was not my intention I assure you. I definitely wasn't attacking you with my original post. There is a fairly well defined definition of the terms strength, flavor and body in the cigar community. Below is a link to a discussion about it. I was the original Op and there is some good, friendly discussion in the thread. Once again, I apologize if I sounded like I was trying to berate you or your opinion. Just trying to help educate which I have been trying to do in the cigar community for quite a long time now. We got off on the wrong foot but there is no reason that can't be mended and we can share this passion and this forum in harmony.

http://www.cigarbum.com/forum/showthread.php?2120-Strength-flavor-body-What-is-the-difference

Apology accepted, don't worry about it. Sorry if I was less than friendly in my post as well. I had a really rough day today and it just rubbed me the wrong way, the proverbial straw so to speak. I sometimes mix up the terms, but in this case I just make some awkward jumps in my train of thought when I was writing the post and not confusing things. I will check out that post when I have time though. I'm tired and I should have gone to bed two hours ago.

[CamoSutra]

I can't recommend that many "really high-end" cigars that are mild-to-medium flavor, but if mere premiums will do I have a few suggestions.
Macanudo is very well made, mild and very consistent within each of its lines. I'm fond of the Cafe and Maduro, also the Vintage years. Vintage 19688 is very good IMHO.
H. Uppmann original is pretty nice.
I'll echo the recommendations for Montechristo original and White.
The Arturo Fuente 8-5-8 is a mild-to-medium introduction to that brand.
And I am very fond of Romeo y Julieta 1875 -- tasty but not overwhelming.