Cuemaker vs. Cue Builder
- Thread starter Arnot Wadsworth
- Start date
Everyone has their points, but for me the end product is what matters most...
I see why you took offense -- you call yourself qbuilder. I was not trying to offend anyone.
Last edited:
You can also add in cue assembler, which to me means you assemble other peoples parts. Still very close to cuemaking and cuebuilding. Of course no one seems too eager to asssume the cue assembler title even if they are.
I appreciate your concern. But really, I think I must have missed something. Why am I supposed to be offended? You surely don't think I am serious about self appointed titles, do you? Did my first post not express how silly self appointed titles are? And my second post express how amusing & surprising it is to see people actually take it seriously? It's unrealistic. It's fantasy. It can be amusing & funny at times, sometimes even clever. But when it becomes serious then it's just pointless. I assure you none of it is offensive to me. I'm not that petty.
It's not offensive, Kelly. And you shouldn't have to worry about something like that offending people. Nobody buys cues because of the guy's user name on an internet forum. They don't buy or not buy because he calls himself a builder when they prefer a maker. That's retarded.
To design and to construct are totally different skills. A cuemaker might not ever need to design a cue, depending on who he works for or with.
Being able to do both is a blessing.
How about aspiring cuemaker? Or maybe wooden cone maker? I've made dozens of those. One of these days I'll graduate to cue maker. Cue builder? To me, that insinuates a dependence on prefabricated parts. That's only my definition and it's only worth the paper it's printed on. This IS paper, right. Anyway, it's really a matter of splitting hairs. 5.9 of one and half a dozen of the other.
Last edited:
