To sum this whole category up

[wjc]

Originally Posted by Jackster

How about this scenario which happens at times, someone asks a basic question in their own words and in the responses they get they learn a bit of nomenclature to help define their YouTube search better.

Really good point, Jackster! All sports, trades, scientific communities, jobs have their own esoteric language or mumbo jumbo if you prefer. Just a few days ago a guy was talking about "fade" and Silver pointed out that the accepted term for the technique is "drift". I don't think a search of "fly casting, fade" would do anything but return the searcher to his own post- and now this one.

Until you learn the terms and what they really mean, it is hard to learn anything. Even on this board I'm sometimes stymied by anacronyms and abbreviations. That's why I try to type the whole name out the first time followed by the acronym in parentheses.

[silver creek]

Another thing is that a video cannot account for the different ways that an individual learns. We all have some of these prototypical ways of learning.

Some are logicians that learn by having what is happening explained to them. Others learn best by mimicking or copying, and these folks probably will benefit most from videos. Others learn best by having the instructors take their hand through the rod stroke. Others learn by visualization. Others by examples such as flicking water off the end of a paint brush or hitting a nail on the head. Others by pantomiming the stroke without a fly rod.

The point I am making is that a video is not able to adapt to the individual looking at the video. An instructor can. So can this BB. The BB is complementary to teaching videos. Teaching and learning should not be either/or but both/and.