You said that seersucker pants weren't versatile because they would look like orphans from a suit. That is simply not a remotely common view of seersucker pants in cultures or climates where they are worn. Nor is it in any way consistent with the traditions or history of the garment itself. Your post basically seemed to be completely ignorant of anything but a narrow stereotype of seersucker, and needed to be countered so that you didn't turn the other poster away from a perfectly acceptable mode of dress.
I mistakenly bolded too much of your reply, meant to bold that I am aware they are seersucker pants alone, not that I am aware they are seersucker pants and worn on their own.
Besides, I was giving him my personal opinion. No doubt people would come along with better suggestions than I could give. Also, I would find the jacket more versatile than the pants.