I wouldnt call them stupid if they choose not to use one.
Whoa, hold them thar 'orses. We should probably re-read the thread and understand the context in how the term 'stupid' has been utilised. Let's recap:
#37 - Nick JD: Why do you care what the OG is for K&K? What do you need this number for?
Then despite respondent discussions, a reiteration:
#43 - Nick JD: In K&K brewing, OGs are irrelevant.
To which Muckey posts an image of a cartoon guy with his head on fire and the caption
"The Stupid, it Burns"
A few more responses to challenge Nick JD's comments, but regardless he trucks on, and shares this:
#53 - Nick JD: My suggestion is to worry about the final gravity readings, that the OG is useless to the kit brewer.
More to & fro, then that word pops up again from a handsome member:
#65 - Renegade: A suggestion to the contrary is, well, just plain stupid.
Neither Muckey nor myself called anyone stupid. However the argument certainly lends itself to the use of the word.
Despite there being a
few people who don't measure OG (and honestly I myself do measure, but often forget to log it in my notes -_- ), it is a
very big statement to say, on multiple occasions from the same author, that K & K guys are wasting their time by engaging in the process of measurement at the start of a brew cycle. Minor inaccuracies aside, isn't K & K the beginning point for an overwhelming majority of brewers who might now be making (potentially) award-winning AG beers ? It is
inconceivable to suggest that K & K is such a crass method of beer production, therefore the practitioners of the method should stay so simple and not even attempt to hone their skills base for eventual betterment in what they produce.
What more effective way to bring oneself up to speed is there, if not for regular utilisation of aspects that will be part of the 'brewers arsenal' knowledge base down the track.
To extend upon another comment made, how can you sit there,
Nick JD, and make such a blanket statement that suggests K & K brewers have no regard for attenuation ? It's a pretty bloody simple calculation, even without the use of software. And it's a great way to get to know how different ingredients perform.
Perhaps my intermediate method of brewing also falls under the 'why bother' umbrella, in using liquid malts, LDME, hopping from scratch and mini-mashing a pathetically pointless kilo of grain, both from the pack and home-roasted to my requirements (an inexact science, for sure). And maybe my reserving of yeast trub for future brews is also a lame old dumbass practice because I'm not using a whiz-bang stir plate to spring some life into cultured agar slants, and have no idea of accurately measuring the cell-count. In fact, maybe every method that people use to make good beer that is a variation from your own methods is simply a waste of time. Hell, anyone who's not into making beer outside of the
Nick JD method is probably pissing in the wind.
There are no doubt a huge % of the homebrew population that are going to stay with the can & sugar method, but I would suggest that new K & K'ers who join up here, ask the simple questions, and get some support will stick around if they think their beer is pretty good for a first attempt (whether we think/know it's crap is irrelevant). And you know, they might just keep reading, get interested in using some LDME, then some extra hops, and before you know it they are intrigued enough to start pushing their beers even further into
flavour country with grains beyond the 'enhancer packs'.
To ridicule the K & K'ers by suggesting they shouldn't bother with OG readings is stupid.
