I don't consider myself to be a "breed of vaper" personally. It's about finding a device that works best for you. I was a smoker for 20 years and switched to vaping 7 years ago and that's all there is to it as far as l am concerned. Regarding VG/PG or PG/VG; the art of communication is being understood. So if there is any misunderstanding just explain what you mean. Simplez
My point is that people who started at different times are gonna see it differently. I can remember a time when it was universally PG/VG. Gradually, it became VG/PG and there were more misunderstandings.
The problem I see with it has to do with efficiency. With people using both interchangeably, you now have to state which designation you're referring to every time. It creates misunderstandings that don't need to exist or be clarified in the first place. In the past, you could say "90/10" and everyone would understand that you're referring to a juice that's 90% PG. Now, for people to know what you're talking about, you would have to say "90/10 PG/VG or 10/90 VG/PG."
And not everyone clarifies because they're used to saying it one way and have it in their heads that other people will understand simply because that's how it used to be! You could be saying the opposite of what you mean depending on who you're talking to.
There was a time when specifying which was which was unnecessary, as there was only one way to interpret it. Now, there are two, neither of which have any advantages over the others. If the art of communication is being understood, then our language should be based around the simplest, most universally understood terms. The goal is to be as concise and unambiguous as possible while still conveying all of the information. Extraneous terms are undesirable outside of creative writing - they make communication more ambiguous than it has to be. What the split has done is made it so that we now have to include more descriptors to convey the exact same information. Something has been added, but nothing has been gained.
Of course there are ways around the issue, but that's beside the fact that having two designations for the ratio offers no benefit and makes the lexicon clunkier.
Admittedly, I am nitpicking, but it's one of those things that unnecessarily complicates matters and drives me nuts. If everyone would stick to one, we'd all be better off. Which one sticks is arbitrary, so long as there is only one. It's a silly thing to be divided over.
