• Hi, I am the owner and main administrator of Styleforum. If you find the forum useful and fun, please help support it by buying through the posted links on the forum. Our main, very popular sales thread, where the latest and best sales are listed, are posted HERE

    Purchases made through some of our links earns a commission for the forum and allows us to do the work of maintaining and improving it. Finally, thanks for being a part of this community. We realize that there are many choices today on the internet, and we have all of you to thank for making Styleforum the foremost destination for discussions of menswear.
  • This site contains affiliate links for which Styleforum may be compensated.
  • We would like to welcome House of Huntington as an official Affiliate Vendor. Shop past season Drake's, Nigel Cabourn, Private White V.C. and other menswear luxury brands at exceptional prices below retail. Please visit the Houise of Huntington thread and welcome them to the forum.

  • STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

    Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

    Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

    Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

Site Topics - Part II

lefty

Stylish Dinosaur
Joined
Oct 27, 2006
Messages
10,764
Reaction score
4,567
I think what's bugging me most is that the category of Men's Style now looks small compared to General and Lifestyle. (The thick red lines are starting to get in the way.) Rolling B&S into Men's Style would give the category a hell of a lot more weight and balance.

lefty
 

mm84321

Distinguished Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2009
Messages
2,762
Reaction score
7

Bartolo

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
707
Reaction score
25
Originally Posted by j
The B&S archive will probably go away on the upgrade launch but for the moment it is just standing there. It does draw traffic and provides some resources in the way of measurements and price history on items sold in the past. And a few of the pictures probably still work.
Both quite valuable! (More so the measurements, as many sellers delete the price when "sold.")
 

cross22

Distinguished Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2009
Messages
6,154
Reaction score
3,982
Originally Posted by mm84321
You happen to not agree with me, yet you offer no contrary opinion, so you want to have my thread squirreled?

What are you, 5 years old?


1) it doesn't belong to CE
2) Gibonius already responded to your arguments with facts but you don't want to learn
3) you did not start the thread to discuss the issue, you did it to perpetuate your belief, any discussion would be a waste of my time
 

johnH123

Distinguished Member
Joined
May 2, 2010
Messages
1,586
Reaction score
27
It would be great if someone would actually clean up SW&D. Its the same group of people over and over making it unpleasant for everyone else. I got 'timed out' for 'trolling' and yet the same posters that contribute nothing to this forum are allowed to run rampant.

It's a sad joke.
 

oneeightyseven

Almost Special
Joined
Apr 13, 2008
Messages
9,080
Reaction score
252
quick question: can we make it a B&S rule to state how much the price drops are for? I'm afraid some people just repost in certain threads just saying "drop" or "price drop" yet don't really drop their prices. I haven't made any claims because I am not 100% positive of the pre-"drop" price so I'm in no position to call anyone out.
 

NorCal

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2007
Messages
9,979
Reaction score
4,670
Originally Posted by cross22
1) it doesn't belong to CE
2) Gibonius already responded to your arguments with facts but you don't want to learn
3) you did not start the thread to discuss the issue, you did it to perpetuate your belief, any discussion would be a waste of my time


Gotta say you're wrong on this. It is a political issue, because it has implications far beyond simply dieting or eating. And the science is good, maybe not perfect, but what is?
 

cross22

Distinguished Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2009
Messages
6,154
Reaction score
3,982
Originally Posted by NorCal
Gotta say you're wrong on this. It is a political issue, because it has implications far beyond simply dieting or eating. And the science is good, maybe not perfect, but what is?
OJFC. Most foods consumed to excess will cause health issues. How about a Pigouvian tax on food?
 

Piobaire

Not left of center?
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
81,723
Reaction score
63,071
Originally Posted by cross22
OJFC. Most foods consumed to excess will cause health issues. How about a Pigouvian tax on food?

Studies show that maintaining one's self at just over starvation levels will increase life expectancy by up to one third. Life is the ultimate good, as without life, one cannot have subjective happiness. Therefore, we should back legislation enforcing near starvation level diets based on subjective utility.
 

HgaleK

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
4,337
Reaction score
87
Originally Posted by Piobaire
Studies show that maintaining one's self at just over starvation levels will increase life expectancy by up to one third. Life is the ultimate good, as without life, one cannot have subjective happiness. Therefore, we should back legislation enforcing near starvation level diets based on subjective utility.
There's a theory being kicked around right now by smart sciencey dudes that you can eat much closer to standard maintenance diets and achieve a similar effect by reducing carbs to zero. I don't think that they've hit anything conclusive yet, though. MM is being extreme in his take on fructose (55g of anything toxic will do more than give you diabetes), but it's worth examining and is under-appreciated on an intellectual level as being potentially detrimental to your health, or at least being able to reduce the level of health that one can achieve if its consumption is reduced. Edit: and before you kick ****** about the health professinal thing Piob, I'm not referring to you. I'm talking about the SF population at large. If nothing else the thread brings to light biological mechanisms relevant to everyone's life in America.
 

Piobaire

Not left of center?
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
81,723
Reaction score
63,071
Originally Posted by HgaleK
There's a theory being kicked around right now by smart sciencey dudes that you can eat much closer to standard maintenance diets and achieve a similar effect by reducing carbs to zero. I don't think that they've hit anything conclusive yet, though.

MM is being extreme in his take on fructose (55g of anything toxic will do more than give you diabetes), but it's worth examining and is under-appreciated on an intellectual level as being potentially detrimental to your health, or at least being able to reduce the level of health that one can achieve if its consumption is reduced.


It's not worth examining within the paradigm that sugar should be a controlled substance. If we want to keep talking about "toxic," I'd like to introduce all you non-healthcare folks to the concept of "LD50."
 

cross22

Distinguished Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2009
Messages
6,154
Reaction score
3,982
Originally Posted by Piobaire
Studies show that maintaining one's self at just over starvation levels will increase life expectancy by up to one third. Life is the ultimate good, as without life, one cannot have subjective happiness. Therefore, we should back legislation enforcing near starvation level diets based on subjective utility.
laugh.gif
Right! I forgot individuals do not understand the source of happiness.
 

HgaleK

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
4,337
Reaction score
87
Originally Posted by Piobaire
It's not worth examining within the paradigm that sugar should be a controlled substance. If we want to keep talking about "toxic," I'd like to introduce all you non-healthcare folks to the concept of "LD50."

I feel like this probably aught to be taught a little more vigorously in high school.
 

mm84321

Distinguished Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2009
Messages
2,762
Reaction score
7
Originally Posted by NorCal
Gotta say you're wrong on this. It is a political issue, because it has implications far beyond simply dieting or eating. And the science is good, maybe not perfect, but what is?
Originally Posted by Piobaire
Studies show that maintaining one's self at just over starvation levels will increase life expectancy by up to one third. Life is the ultimate good, as without life, one cannot have subjective happiness. Therefore, we should back legislation enforcing near starvation level diets based on subjective utility.
Originally Posted by HgaleK
There's a theory being kicked around right now by smart sciencey dudes that you can eat much closer to standard maintenance diets and achieve a similar effect by reducing carbs to zero. I don't think that they've hit anything conclusive yet, though. MM is being extreme in his take on fructose (55g of anything toxic will do more than give you diabetes), but it's worth examining and is under-appreciated on an intellectual level as being potentially detrimental to your health, or at least being able to reduce the level of health that one can achieve if its consumption is reduced. Edit: and before you kick ****** about the health professinal thing Piob, I'm not referring to you. I'm talking about the SF population at large. If nothing else the thread brings to light biological mechanisms relevant to everyone's life in America.
Originally Posted by Piobaire
It's not worth examining within the paradigm that sugar should be a controlled substance. If we want to keep talking about "toxic," I'd like to introduce all you non-healthcare folks to the concept of "LD50."
Originally Posted by cross22
laugh.gif
Right! I forgot individuals do not understand the source of happiness.

Why don't you care to share these thoughts in my thread? I'd be happy to discuss them. I understand that most of you don't 100% agree with me--which is absolutely fine--and Piobaire doesn't like the way I argue my points--which I try to do in a calm, collected, and respectful manner--but why not debate me on the actual issue, rather than just ignore or criticize my efforts of bringing this alternative hypothesis up for discussion? I think, from the heated reaction I've received, it's of enough importance to merit an in depth conversation on.
 

Featured Sponsor

How important is full vs half canvas to you for heavier sport jackets?

  • Definitely full canvas only

    Votes: 55 35.5%
  • Half canvas is fine

    Votes: 60 38.7%
  • Really don't care

    Votes: 17 11.0%
  • Depends on fabric

    Votes: 27 17.4%
  • Depends on price

    Votes: 28 18.1%

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
505,164
Messages
10,579,128
Members
223,886
Latest member
dawsonnathalie
Top