Well, I'll just reply this one time than go back to my little cave. The Foo one shoe thing, was never treated as a "rule". If anything, he got more shit for that than anything anyone else on this forum has ever gotten. The one shoe is actually more of an example of what you are advancing, Foo knows that a one shoe is not going to be appropriate for every outfit, yet he didn't care and went with it. Nothing wrong with that. The white shirt thing, that is actually very interesting. There is a historical context for white shirts (formalwear/"white collar" work etc). Within that context, a solid white shirt in a silky cotton does not make sense with a tweed jacket (country wear). Now can you wear a textured white shirt, or an oxford cloth with a sportcoat? Sure. Actually, you can wear whatever shirt you want but their point was, there is a logical reason why it was not done and once you knew that reason, you can find ways of doing it where it would work. Same thing with patch pockets. Once they became de riguer, they were showing up on DB suits, worsted suits etc. Well, patch pockets have historically been on the casual spectrum. When you take a worsted two piece suit and put patch pockets on it, you are going against the original intent of both the suit and the patch pockets. Is that wrong? Yes, to me it is.
At the end of the day, the suit/sportcoat have been unchanged for 50+ years. We can edit it to fit our times but there is a base, a foundation that needs to be understood. The Classic menswear that we discuss is not an "idea", its something that has existed for many decades. As you mention, we have standards and they have been edited over the years, but editing is different than saying something doesn't exist.
Ahhhh, the good old days...(barf...)
I mean, are you really tone deaf to the social implications of: "At the end of the day, the suit/sportcoat have been unchanged for 50+ years. We can edit it to fit our times but there is a base, a foundation that needs to be understood."????