From an engineering standpoint, a system which requires less maintenance by design is always better than a system that needs maintenance, no matter the willingness of the rider to do said maintenance (most bike riders aren't dedicated nutheads like ourselves ).

Star nuts are not consumable parts and are not meant to break. The only time I've seen them break is when the user doesn't understand that they are there to simply eliminate play in the bearings, and not to be tightened until the bolt can turn anymore. If this concept is understood, changing stems or adjusting spacer/stem position is a 2 minute job, I have done it on the road before and it is just as quick and easy as in the shop.

I think a lot of C&V enthusiasts like working on their bikes and doing maintenance on old parts because they find them beautiful, engrossing, and fun. And in many cases these parts are just what we're used to. Acknowledging that habit, aesthetic appreciation, and mechanical curiosity can contribute to the love of a part separate from its design superiority or inferiority to modern parts is an exercise I think we all would benefit from. In other words, rather than scrambling to come up with ways in which threaded is better than threadless, and spouting off conspiracies on how the bike companies are just trying to get us to buy the newest thing, we should just say "I like C&V parts, and that's it."