Custom shirt studio tour

[Nick M]

About five minutes, give or take. I already had a template handy. But yes, it's university holiday time, and I definitely have too much time on my hands... I'm going outside. To shop.

 

[VMan]

About five minutes, give or take. I already had a template handy. But yes, it's university holiday time, and I definitely have too much time on my hands... I'm going outside. To shop. Â

You lucky guy. My shopping habit has been temporarily curbed due to a minor auto accident (all the money I made over winter break is going to that). Combined with the fact that I'm moving back in to the dorms on saturday and won't be working much is bad news for my closet.

 

[Steve B.]

Nick-
Great graphic- very humorous...

Marc has "pointed", Alexander counterpointed. Ad hominem bowl ends in a tie. And I mean ends...

Kirkland- as much as everyone (including yours truly) loves gossip, please refrain.

Lets all play nice.

 

[VMan]

Nick_
Great graphic- very humorous...

Marc has "pointed", Alexander counterpointed. Ad hominem bowl ends in a tie. And I mean ends...

Kirkland- as much as everyone (including yours truly) loves gossip, please refrain.

Lets all play nice.

The strong arm of the law has spoken.

 

[Bespeaked]

I'm somewhat glad to see it end. Anonymous forums tend to be filled with anonymous attacks that hardly seem fair.

All six custom shirts I have purchased from Mr. Kabbaz are of excellent quality and he - as well as his family - were an absolute joy to deal with. no idea what all the fuss is about, I assume it was some spat between business partners but from the customer service standpoint Mr. Kabbaz certainly acquitted himself well.

Can we discuss fashion and clothing without the need for the nonsense?

Nick - utterly fabulous, you win tonight's humor award hands down.

PS> Is there a forum for fashion drama queens around?

 

[Alexander Kabbaz]

Marc has "pointed", Alexander counterpointed. Ad hominem bowl ends in a tie. And I mean ends...

Dear Steve: I sincerely disagree with your assessment. In keeping with the spirit of the forums, I offered an educational tour of our custom shirt workrooms to those of the members who might have an interest. I reiterated the fact that no purchases would be possible only in order to put at ease those who either can not - or choose not to - afford my prices. There was absolutely no reason whatsoever for Marc to offer his insulting remark. It was at that point - or not at all - that intervention by the moderator was indicated. The moderator's role should have been to stop the attacker, not the defender. I have read here and in Andy's how beneficial it would be if more makers would join the discussion, offer the members their expertise, and answer questions about their methods. Why should they??? Questioning methods or quality is perfectly legitimate. However, offering craftspeople an ongoing series of anonymously generated, personally directed insults is certainly no way to get them to participate. At some point one simply has to say, "enough". I would like to thank the 234 members who have had the interest and taken the time to read the two articles I wrote regarding custom shirtmaking. For those with an honest interest in the crafting of shirts I remain available to answer questions one-on-one at my previously offered e-mail address. Alexander Kabbaz

 

[T4phage]

Originally posted by Alexander Kabbaz:

There was absolutely no reason whatsoever for Marc to offer his insulting remark. It was at that point - or not at all - that intervention by the moderator was indicated. The moderator's role should have been to stop the attacker, not the defender.

I agree absolutely..

I have read here and in Andy's how beneficial it would be if more makers would join the discussion, offer the members their expertise, and answer questions about their methods. Why should they??? Questioning methods or quality is perfectly legitimate. However, offering craftspeople an ongoing series of anonymously generated, personally directed insults is certainly no way to get them to participate. At some point one simply has to say, "enough".

I sincerely hope that we have not lost Mr. Kabbaz due to these various innuendos/insults/attacks. He has taken the time and effort to answer questions and even post a lengthy essay for our edification on his methodology. Having a person who is a manufacturer of "high end" items which we like to discuss offering his insights is most useful. I certainly have learned a great deal from his posts.

 

[Bespeaked]

Well that does seem terribly unfortunate. On Andy's board I was rather enjoying a fellow who was discussing similar things when he was attacked by someone who admitted to never having tried his products. He has not made an educational post since that time, a shame since he was informative and fairly humorous in his style.

Someone please help to educate me as I may be missing something. If you make the forum environs hostile toward the craftsmen who make the type of clothing we wish to discuss, then do we not wind up with a roomful of individuals with only opinions as to what they like as opposed to actually learning about the clothing.

I suppose if the axiom about the customer knowing more than the manufacturer is true then we are better off without manufacturers, but I regret seeing them leave.

Perhaps if we are discussing gentlemen's clothing then gentlemanly behavior should be the rule?

 

[Steve B.]

Alexander:

This Forum encourages anyone who wants to discuss men's style to post, and frequently. You and so many others who are members and manufacturers and sellers are most welcome here. In my opinion, however, your original posting of this thread had both educational and commercial purposes, and could therefore have been posted in the Buying/Selling Forum. Perhaps ths was what Marc was objecting to with his post.  However, Marc's post was a personal attack. Your retort was as well, and quite clever, although you published his name without permission.

The degree of personal attack is hard to gauge, and I don't want to get to the point where I have to chide every member who posts ad hominem and edit or delete that post. The board is getting too big, I'm an unpaid volunteer moderating a free forum. There's not enough time to monitor that.

I guess the fairest thing for me to do is delete all the offending posts (which took much more time than it was worth) and come up with a policy regarding this. To be announced shortly, I've already gotten a great suggestion from another member.

 

[ken]

Isn't this kind of like a politician joining a political forum? You know you're going to get beraded with compliments AND attacks, and everyone will be questioning you're motives. One just has to deal with problems as they're presented. I don't agree with creating policy in the Style Forum (and I was glad that the policy of limiting marketing products on here to one post has been obsolete since the creation of the buying/selling threads).

 

[jcusey]

I don't agree with creating policy in the Style Forum (and I was glad that the policy of limiting marketing products on here to one post has been obsolete since the creation of the buying/selling threads).

Whether Steve chooses to publish it or not, he already has a policy. If I posted pornography, it would be gone. If I posted racist attacks on someone else, they would be gone to. These are obviously outlying examples, but the point is that the administrators of this board have a right to manage the board in such a way to promote the board's purpose, which I take to be intelligent discussion of men's style and fashion and the enjoyment thereof. Given that this is so, they have to have a policy about what to do with posts that they judge to be inimical to that purpose. It's much better for everybody here if this policy is clear and published for all to see.

If you don't have a policy about this, you end up with the GQ board.

 

[Alias]

If you don't have a policy about this, you end up with the GQ board.

*shrieks*

 

[ken]

Whether Steve chooses to publish it or not, he already has a policy. If I posted pornography, it would be gone. If I posted racist attacks on someone else, they would be gone to. These are obviously outlying examples, but the point is that the administrators of this board have a right to manage the board in such a way to promote the board's purpose, which I take to be intelligent discussion of men's style and fashion and the enjoyment thereof. Given that this is so, they have to have a policy about what to do with posts that they judge to be inimical to that purpose. It's much better for everybody here if this policy is clear and published for all to see. If you don't have a policy about this, you end up with the GQ board.

I don't know about pornography, but there were some borderline racist attacks made on here months ago in an argument over the unrest in the Middle East. The posts stayed available for all to see (even though feelings were definitely hurt), which I think is commendable to the runners of the forum because we don't solely focus on clothing here. There are at least three forum topics that have nothing to do w/fashion, and of my few posts I think most of them reside there. If posts were deleted every time things got a little political or uneasy for some members, we wouldn't have a very productive forum. The GQ message board is different because one doesn't need a membership to post. Should a member of the Style Forum continuously act improper, he could be banned. I'll also say that, although Steve's huge contribution to this forum and style knowledge in general is obvious and appreciated by us all, somebody else pays for the web space this thing uses. As far as I know from reading here, Steve and J. don't have a constantly-communicating relationship. So let's pretend J. is God and Steve is King. Maybe they talk once in a while and make some new rules, but ultimately the king needs input from his people on how to better run the community. Unless he's one of those ruthless totalitarian kings who don't take no guff from no one. But come on, look at that avatar. Who couldn't trust a face like that?

 

[Steve B.]

Ken:

Very funny post, and very good analogy re J. and I.

The Middle East thing was very difficult to decide and moderate. The difference between that debate and the current one is that both sides here have asked me to censor the other...

Which means I need to come up with a policy that's openly stated and as fair as I can make it for everyone.

 

[jcusey]

The GQ message board is different because one doesn't need a membership to post. Should a member of the Style Forum continuously act improper, he could be banned.

I have known other boards do perfectly well (and even superlatively) without registration. With or without registration, for a board to be productive and useful (at least if its primary topic is sufficiently general in interest to attract a large numbers of visitors) is a knowledgeable and respectful user base and administration that is willing to take action against the cretins. Now, there can be significant discussion about just what the definition of a cretin is, but if a board administrator doesn't put a stop to the posting of Appreciation, for example, the board is going to be taken over by Appreciation posters.

And the registration process here and most other places is rudimentary. Say I'm a chronic Appreciation poster (and I'm using the posting of Appreciation as an example here because I think that we all can agree that it is completely beyond the pale on this board) and Steve bans me. I can create another user in two minutes and be back to it. Banning cretinous users might be in Steve's bag of tricks, but it can't be the only thing. I think that it is appropriate for Steve to be very open about what he's doing and why when he has to act, but he has to be able to act.

So let's pretend J. is God and Steve is King. Maybe they talk once in a while and make some new rules, but ultimately the king needs input from his people on how to better run the community. Unless he's one of those ruthless totalitarian kings who don't take no guff from no one. But come on, look at that avatar. Who couldn't trust a face like that?

It's not that I don't trust Steve: I do. I'm quite sure that he's a benevolent despot. It's not that I think that Steve should dispense with advice from the users: I think that such discussion is essential for the creation and maintenance of a healthy board. It's just that we can't know what Steve's policy is or argue about it or hash it out unless he tells us what it is.