Nominate the best posts on the forum and (maybe) win a prize - ongoing Front Page contest

[LA Guy]



That dude in the winning looks like an 'Edward of Twlight fame' wannabe

Stop whining and find better posts, then.

 

[dieworkwear]

That's actually a really good thread.

 

[Synthese]



That dude in the winning looks like an 'Edward of Twlight fame' wannabe

I suppose that I could take the usual internet stance and be all "U jelly" and whatnot, but really it's the only reason I have a girlfriend.

 

[bellyhungry]



I suppose that I could take the usual internet stance and be all "U jelly" and whatnot, but really it's the only reason I have a girlfriend.

Good on you. And congrats on winning...

 

[LA Guy]

http://www.styleforum.net/t/164384/the-waywt-discussion-thread/58650_50#post_5089299

SWD 2; MC 0
StanleyvanBuren nominated by Parker. You guys are getting your asses handed to you.

Show a little bit of that old man strength I keep hearing about.

 

[StanleyVanBuren]

I'm crossing the fence to nominate NOBD's masterpiece, Second Life for a Suit

it's an old post, but it's hands-down among the best content ever posted to the forum and it deserves to be frontpaged!

 

[The Thin Man]

A short, simple, helpful post:
http://www.styleforum.net/t/307451/lapel-question-for-bespoke#post_5586621

Each element of the jacket, shoulder, chest, waist etc. should be in proportion to each other and look balanced with your physical attributes. Talk with Chan, discuss this with them and be sure they understand that proportion is important to you and is the reason you are using them to build a suit for you. Listen to their ideas and how they will create a good line for your build. Decide if you agree with their approach, ask questions if you don't.

This may not be the post of the week, but I wanted to make sure some Despos posts get represented in this thread/contest. To me, everyone interested in the Men's Clothing side of the forum should subscribe to Despos's posts. While many address technical questions for a particular user, he imparts a lot of knowledge about fit issues. Just as usefully, Despos has vast knowledge of classic style, so when he makes stylistic suggestions, they're hugely valuable. While you could find a lot of knowledgeable posters three years ago (if not at Despos's level), their ranks haved thinned out. This leaves him even more of a giant on the forum.

 

[hendrix]

I nominate this post by bengal-stripe

"Width" is a bit of a misnomer, as most people presume the term refers to the sole measurement (left to right). It is actually the circumference of the last, measured at the ball and other points of the last. The old term "fitting" would be probably more appropriate. In the old days a slim last was fitted-up with additional leather pieces to increase volume; this would also have increased the width of the sole with each additional 'fitting' attached.
The standard rule for the widest point of the sole is the ball measurement divided by 3 plus 10%. Let's do it metric (much easier than dividing inches) a circumference of 240mm : 3 + 10% + 88mm. The increase in circumference from one width to the next is about 5mm, which means the increase (or decrease) in sole width is about 1.5mm from one fitting to the next. Here is a drawing showing a particular last in a given size and different widths. The length remains constant, but the measurement at the widest point changes.

Most shoe factories (maybe all) do not change the sole shape with every width. The soles are dye-cut (large cookie-cutters) and it is common practice to build two shoe width on the same sole shape (the wider last is higher but not wider at the base, so the wider shoe has more volume but not in every dimension.) EG builds D and E on the same sole shape (this was once confirmed to me by an EG employee.) So E is higher than D, has more volume but is, strictly speaking, not wider than D. I presume with American shoes, although I had that never confirmed, widths C and D are based on the same insole; than a wider one will cover E and EE.
Here is a drawing from a text book (Golding, 1935) comparing a typical English with a typical American last.

The American one is wider in the base and shallower, the English one narrower and higher, giving both of them (more or less) the same circumference. I believe that distinction is still the case: American shoes are shallower (some of the Alden loafers can be extremely tight across the instep). So the EG shoe in D (same sole shape, but shallower last) will be closer to the American ideal, than the English E width; the American E width will be wider in the base than the standard English E, but they are quite close to each other in circumference.
I say that with reasonable, but not absolute, certainty as I have not access to the different individual last and so cannot get confirmation by runnig a tape measure over them. But I do not think, that I'm too far off.

 

[LA Guy]

There have been a few good nominations from MC, but I'm looking for more. With the depth of this part of the forum, you should have tons of nominations that are not F. Corbera nominations.

 

[ShayaEXQT]

Not sure if this has been mentioned and I don't have a link

What about that series of posts where Sir F. gets outed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!??????????

 

[fritzl]



I nominate this post by bengal-stripe

it's good but everyone who is interested in shoes should know this already...

 

[fritzl]



http://www.styleforum.net/t/164384/the-waywt-discussion-thread/58650_50#post_5089299
SWD 2; MC 0
StanleyvanBuren nominated by Parker. You guys are getting your asses handed to you.
Show a little bit of that old man strength I keep hearing about.

what's the criteria to win with this?

 

[LA Guy]



what's the criteria to win with this?

It should be interesting for a broad base of readers, and especially, me. Things that have pictures, are, to me, more compelling than just a wall of text. But there are no set criteria. Just, "How compelling is this to the Styleforum reader." Something that appeals to both a lurker and a hardcore user is best.

 

[fritzl]



It should be interesting for a broad base of readers, and especially, me. Things that have pictures, are, to me, more compelling than just a wall of text. But there are no set criteria. Just, "How compelling is this to the Styleforum reader." Something that appeals to both a lurker and a hardcore user is best.

ah ok. fwiw, this was not compelling to me... nvm.

 

[LA Guy]



ah ok. fwiw, this was not compelling to me... nvm.

I understand. Not everything is going to be compelling for everyone. That said, there are certain characteristics that will make a post good reading to a large audience.

Let's take some more concrete examples of what makes good first page posts. A factory tour, with lots of pictures, is going to be compelling for everyone (except, I suppose, the people who have to work in that factory every day). The shoe post about width and sizing is actually useful to a lot of people. Sure, if you already know a lot about shoes, you already know this stuff, but to see it well presented is interesting. Things like F. Corbera's MC vs. SW&D threads would be compelling to pretty much everyone, for obvious reasons. You could have nearly no interest in clothes, or be a fanatic, and still form an opinion about which outfit you like more.

Walls of text with no accompanying pictures are like academic papers. Unless you are actually saying something mindblowing and revelatory, it's probably not going to get featured.