When someone, be it an individual, a youtube reviewer, or even Luca Turin proclaims, "DHI is a date scent," any reasonable person would understand that statement to be an opinion and not a stated, objective fact.
The comment above about Live Jazz is totally correct. There is no mint. It smells like nasty fake cilantro. Horrible fragrance.
Not sure if its groupthink but descriptions annoy me too because they dont mean anything yet they are repeated over and over.
A fragrance smells balmy? What does that mean? No one knows.
Oud Isp has a "jammy" rose. ????
Secretions Magnefique has a "bilge" note? No it doesnt. And you have never even been on a boat.
Balsamic? Sounds fancy but I have no idea what your talking about.
Too much dihedrahymotychinol??? Ugh....
I just want to vent a little. Please dont let me keep you from continuing to use these descriptions.
Date frags, night frags, work frags, winter frags, summer frags, gym frags....I will never understand. If you want to have certain frags for certain occasions that is fine though. And if people want to listen to you and believe that certain frags are only to be worn in certain situations that is fine also. It doesnt take much looking around to figure out that most people are unable to form their own opinions.
In my opinion, phrases like "date scent" or "office scent" make perfect sense, but the reader does have to be intelligent enough to realize the person who uses such phrases is just giving his or her opinion. It's no different than someone talking about a jacket and saying it's perfect for a date or perfect for the office. It's also no different than foodies talking about different deserts. Anyone can enjoy port and chocolate (ok, anyone 21 and up, at least, in the U.S.), but it's definitely more of a desert for a date than for a football party. Certain foods, certain clothes and, yes, certain scents fit certain occasions better than others. That's not to suggest they can only be worn on those occasions of course, just as port and chocolate can be enjoyed on a date or during a football party (so says the guy who is debating what desert to bring for tomorrow's Colts/Patriots game. GO PATS!!!).
The whole youtube groupthink thing cracks me up because, sometimes, it's brutally obvious. There's one reviewer in particular who mostly just repeats what he's heard other reviewers say as if the opinions are his own. He seems to like whatever he thinks he's supposed to like, and he says whatever he thinks he's supposed to say.
It doesn't take long to figure out which youtube reviewers give their own opinions and which ones just want to be part of the hype herd... and that has nothing to do with what scents they're reviewing or how much experience they have. Some of my favorite youtube reviewers don't have much experience. I love their reviews because they just tell it like they smell it, even if their opinions are totally different than what everyone else is saying.
Last edited by L'Homme Blanc Individuel; 11th January 2014 at 01:43 AM.
"Follow your nose. It always knows." -- Toucan Sam
Group think happens everywhere and with all things. Advertising is built upon these principals, but anywhere you find a group of people networked together there will be opinions that are highly affected by group think principles. Some influential factors that control conclusions through group think are: frequency of mentions, boldness or assertiveness of opinions expressed, association of an opinion with highly visible authority figures, indirect associations with other desirable opinions. The book Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kanehman (a Nobel prize winner) goes into great detail to discuss how people form conclusions by thinking but, without really thinking for themselves. Very interesting subject.
Last edited by Buzzlepuff; 11th January 2014 at 05:14 AM.
This phenomena is present in any group of people. I think much of it comes from the simple desire to fit in and be accepted as having the correct opinion. There was some group think going on to the extreme in Nazi Germany. It does take courage to swim against the tide. But there is also a distinction between that and people who argue and rebel for the sake of being contrary. Some folks have the natural inclination to be independent thinkers. Some need to conform. Some are natural born nonconformists. Life can be difficult for them.
Last edited by Buysblind; 11th January 2014 at 06:39 PM. Reason: wrong thread
My belated reply: thankfully, groupthink is still thankfully largely counterbalanced by very diverse, versatile and distinct fragrance tastes and opinions on the male fragrance boards and on Basenotes in general.
Citing 'groupthink' responsibility for the London = Christmas impression that many apparently have is a lazy, backhanded jab at those that hold this view. It infers that enough of those that have this view were not thinking for themselves. Pretty offensive (admittedly, to a real small degree )
So...What credible evidence does the OP have access to that led him to such a conclusion? Did he do a survey of all that hold such an opinion? Did he learn that many/most of those opinions were not sincere, but rather simply a 'go with the flow' lemming vote? Of course he didn't.
It's cologne. Overthink THAT and you might just look a little silly.
Simplex Sigillum Veri
It could be worse
I don't think there is group think on here now. There was before but people buy what they like at the end of the day. Obviously if something is praised and dare I say hyped at all, you will appreciate the fragrance more when you purchase it, but you decide if you like a fragrance or not.
This is an interesting concept, I have taken the time to read the responses and have enjoyed the commentary. In thinking about how I feel about the concept of groupthink I am reminded of the age old dilemma of which came first, the chicken or the egg.
Is it that groupthink is a situation whereby people within a group conform for harmony, attempt to minimize conflict, and reach a consensus without critical evaluation? Or, is groupthink just a term that attempts to explain a phenomenon that is more far reaching and may be unsettling to some; that phenomenon being that within open or closed small groups, the microcosm, and indeed in the macrocosm, that the majority of people are just average. Average, not only in the physical within the microcosm, but also average in their beliefs, preferences, opinions, perceptions, desires, vocation, wage, cognition, thinking, etc., staying within a particular bandwidth, tending toward the center of a bell curve.
I tend to believe the latter, that the majority of people are just average, in every way, and that's O.K., that's exactly why focus groups can be employed during product development.
Regarding fragrance, there are always going to be those fragrances, whether unintentional or by design, that tick the right boxes for the majority of people that encounter them, the Aventus', DHI's, LIDGE's, GIT's, Pure Malt's, etc, that those in that majority discuss and create "hype" about, countless threads, this batch/that batch, silver collar/black collar, etc.
Then you have those outliers, those who don't tend to the average and purposely seek out "daring, NSFW, challenging" compositions, those who may have discovered a fragrance from the hype, got it and didn't find it to be all that, at all. As well as those houses that typically make those scents that are described as "safe", and houses that make fragrances that are purposely not trying to appeal to the average, houses like Slumberhouse.
"Follow your nose. It always knows." -- Toucan Sam
Interestingly, outlier opinions are necessary as seed values for when conditions change. The crazy "prepper" ants that are prone to explore new nests will already have critical data when the flood comes. The "hype ants" provide critical communication that the options exist. The resistant stay-at-home ants embody the ecological sensibility of not moving unless conditions warrant. But you can't trust single ants at all times on all decisions. They have to be crazy until they make sense. If the logic propagates, it's good for the conditions. If it meets resistance, the time is wrong. Gaming the system by hindering social communication selectively for hidden reasons is what causes problems, IMO.
Ideas will catch if they make sense to lots of people and amplify on their own, but otherwise, not. Even reputation and visibility can't make a bad idea fly without gaming the system. I've noticed this as a mod. When I have held unpopular ideas, I am unable to tell if they are valid seed values that will catch, or bad ideas that simply will never fly. When I was one of the early adopters of Bleu de Chanel, I was surprised that people started liking it. But when I liked Polo Red, I was surprised that I remained one of the very few who did like it - that it seemed to get LESS popular. I think the group knew something that I didn't in both cases.
The question is, is it amusing?
The population of regulars in this forum has a handful of some of the brightest and most articulate people I've ever seen on an internet message board but, yes, as with pretty much everywhere else, there's a lot of groupthink, pandering to the perceived majority for attention, and astroturfing. Again, there are some really bright gentlemen here but there's also a lot of groupthink. But there's less groupthink than there was maybe a year ago, I think.
I suppose we all need a bit of shared experience, which is why, even in a highly fragmented, balkanized media world, just about everyone still watches the Super Bowl. The need for shared experience sort of manifests itself here as about at least a third - off the cuff - of the dialogue focusing on no more than two or three fragrance labels. I find that part of it to be really tedious.
There are some outstanding reviewers here. The best of the best here is better than the best of anywhere else. But I use the reviews mainly to learn about notes and product quality, not to pick my drobe for me. My nose makes my drobe decisions, but I learn more about what I like and don't like by coming back here, after trying something myself first, and reading everyone else's descriptions. Before finding basenotes, for example, I was completely unaware of why I find Green Irish Tweed to be nauseating. Now, I have a better understanding of why I find it to be nauseating. And that will help me avoid some mistakes going foward.
Last edited by Wheatstraw2; 12th January 2014 at 01:09 AM.
I have watched very few youtube reviews so I can't really speak to them, but I think the "hype" concept makes more sense for a site like Basenotes. Sometimes the hype is justified, at least to some degree, so I'm not entirely against it, and moderators can only make sure forum rules are followed, which is fine with me. I just refrain from reading threads that I don't think I'd be interested in. Where some conception of "groupthink" might begin to form is in something like "House" assessment on a site like BN. I know I haven't paid as much attention to Joop! releases as I have to Guerlain's or Mugler's, for example, and my guess is that is related to how much attention certain Houses get relative to others. However, this hasn't affected my "blind" purchases or swaps, because that is determined by notes, reviews, and the deal I can get.
Visit my huge swap page: http://community.basenotes.net/showthread.php?t=211135
Or visit my Sales page: http://community.basenotes.net/showthread.php?t=211407
Samples, etc. for Sale at my Crystal Flacon page: http://flacon.ambaric.net/viewtopic.php?t=282
My fragrance blog: http://bigslyfragrance.wordpress.com/
Seems like a lot of argument here for a group supposedly driven to conformity
Group think does exist here and all other boards and YouTube. I feel that as a free thinking individual you need to absorb various opinions as reference points but in the end draw your own personal conclusions. Does Burberry smell like Christmas or is A*Men a super long lasting sillage monster.