McPatrickClan made a comment on my review that I agree with 100%, but it's got me wondering again. I've thought about this before but I have not come up with a good conclusion. Y'all being the great thinkers you are, I figured you'd be able to help me find some closure...
McPatrick said, "I think I would rather have a terribly made cigar that tasted great than a well-made cigar that tasted like a cigarette."
Again, I support and agree with that totally, but you know what? I kind of have a problem with the whole "tastes great but not constructed well" theory. Here's my take on that: If a professional reviewer (or anyone for that matter) is able to sit back and enjoy a good cigar's flavor, palette, effect, smell, smoke, etc., how can they then proclaim that it's not well made? Doesn't a cigar being well made imply that you're able to enjoy the aforementioned qualities? Thoughts?
McPatrick said, "I think I would rather have a terribly made cigar that tasted great than a well-made cigar that tasted like a cigarette."
Again, I support and agree with that totally, but you know what? I kind of have a problem with the whole "tastes great but not constructed well" theory. Here's my take on that: If a professional reviewer (or anyone for that matter) is able to sit back and enjoy a good cigar's flavor, palette, effect, smell, smoke, etc., how can they then proclaim that it's not well made? Doesn't a cigar being well made imply that you're able to enjoy the aforementioned qualities? Thoughts?