or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Manton's Law
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Manton's Law - Page 4

post #46 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton View Post

You're missing the point.

If a thread is supposed to be about "X", it never stays about "X". Other people insist on introducing Y and Z as well, others say that X=A=B=C, while others prefer to ponder "What is X, anyway?" And still others like to declaim "how dare you say that D is not X?? Who are you to say what X is?"

If Y and Z are known to not be X and not to be related to X, that's one thing. So are trolls who just deliberately derail things. If A, B, and C are unknown and can be shown to be equal or equivalent to X, then the thread is still about X because being about X implies that it is about A/B/C and vice versa. However, even if A, B, and C are shown to not be X, the determination of that is still about X.

Addressing the question of definition when ambiguity is present - considering only the reason of a lack of specificity within the thread and not that the person posting has not taken the time to familiarize themselves with all of the information previously presented within the thread - is entirely valid. Since this ambiguity will almost certainly be present given the vagaries of natural language communication, this seems like what you are saying is that "Because there is ambiguity in the definition of X, examples of things which are not X arise in a discussion about X."
post #47 of 142
Thread Starter 
I guess that's OK as long as people really are posting in good faith.

I definitely could do without all the existential attempts to redefine good taste, though.

EDIT: Meant for moo
post #48 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by acridsheep View Post

Don't be retarded. Truly wealthy people drive practical cars like this quite frequently. The suburban middle class dad, his dollar already stretched to the extreme, is the one who buys the luxury car.

My love for Manton has swelled with this additional piece of information.

Inferred suspicion; Acridsheep drives a Vespa.

post #49 of 142
While the Peacock thread may have a miss or hundred, it certainly has not become a WAYWRN free-for-all.

Also, what is left/right winged? confused.gif
post #50 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton View Post

You're missing the point.

If a thread is supposed to be about "X", it never stays about "X". Other people insist on introducing Y and Z as well, others say that X=A=B=C, while others prefer to ponder "What is X, anyway?" And still others like to declaim "how dare you say that D is not X?? Who are you to say what X is?"

One persons X is a Y for someone else, or a D or a Z or A. Hence the problem.
post #51 of 142
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wmb View Post

One persons X is a Y for someone else, or a D or a Z or A. Hence the problem.
There is, however, an underlying truth, which is the issue.
post #52 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton View Post

I guess that's OK as long as people really are posting in good faith.

I definitely could do without all the existential attempts to redefine good taste, though.

EDIT: Meant for moo

Good.

Also... use the powers bestowed upon you. You can delete posts. You can say "hey, stop talking about this or it will be deleted" and then delete the posts if they continue. Maybe some people will get bent out of shape about it, but I bet after a little while the thread has fewer de-railings and fewer BS posts.
post #53 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton View Post

To this I add Manton's Law of SF Threaks: any thread--even if it explicitly excludes certain looks and seeks to promote certain other looks--will in short order become a WAYWRN free-for-all.

This is really the Style Forum Corollary of Godwin's Law rather than O'Sullivan's.

"As an SF thread grows longer, the probability of someone posting a fit featuring a matching tie and pocket square approaches 1."
post #54 of 142
I think we need a "good taste" thread for cars.
post #55 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton View Post

I did that for while, it's sooooo much work. It's like cleaning the wall every day, and you know that overnight the taggers will be back and cover it in graffitti and you have to start all over. Now, if the building were a historical landmark in Indiana limestone, it might be worth it. But as it is, I don't care enough any more.
.

I heard about this in the Fast Track to Business Books audiotapes I listen to every day on the way to work. Bill Gates originally postulated this thread derailing behavior happened in internet forums as part of his "Broken Windows" theory.

But I though he said this was the most important time to clean and monitor threads? Otherwise, it becomes acceptable to graffiti threads and people start becoming pro-abortion and the crime rate falls. frown.gif
post #56 of 142
And I don't mean to brag, but since the precedent has already been set: I also own an accord as a secondary driver/garage queen. These are my "dailys":

post #57 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by edmorel View Post

I found that it wasn't so much a forum but a vehicle for Alden to sell his stuff with a few other posters proselytizing on bespoke but again, a lot of the bespoke there was no better than this forum's WAYWN.
Quote:

fight[1].gif
post #58 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaymanS View Post

My mind is still blown over the fact that a man with several, several hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of bespoke clothing drives such a miserable car.

'96 Accord = not in good taste by any rational standard

Styleforvm members are getting their pents hand stitched in Napoli but eat tuna out of cans...smh

Liking cars is in bad taste (seriously).
post #59 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuuma View Post

Liking cars is in bad taste (seriously).

Who are you(?)
post #60 of 142
And a Cayman S is, of course, always in good taste.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Manton's Law