Aero Leather Clothing trial update

[Stand By]

It stays at the top of the Outerwear section.

Ah, so it is. I get it.
Thank you!

 

[Girl on a Motorcycle]

+1

I haven’t read any of this thread since I last posted on it several hundred years and pages ago, and only really come to the Fedora Lounge to look at the classifieds these days anyway. But I looked up the thread at the last few pages just now and I thought it had reached a new low.

They should have listened to Paddy and put it out of its misery when he tried to lock it.

Several times I've been tempted to defend Paddy. Here we go.
It was quite clear from Paddy's post that he thought the trial was ongoing, and wisely thought it rash to discuss a case while it was still live. I believe the bartenders clarified that Sloan's jury thread was post-trial, hence his unlocking and deletion when all was explained. It's very unfair to make other presumptions of Paddy's post and the fact he deleted it rather suggests he doesn't want it referred to now. Let's respect that, please.

Also, it's a bit over the top to call this thread poison: I believe there have been some very useful insights here - not least the detectivework by posters such as Superfluous that demonstrated a substantial rewriting of company history that would otherwise be allowed to continue to mislead people.

And finally, it seems ironic that two posts about politesse have been so aggressive, no?

 

[Stand By]

I give up.

 

[Capesofwrath]

Several times I've been tempted to defend Paddy. Here we go.
It was quite clear from Paddy's post that he thought the trial was ongoing, and wisely thought it rash to discuss a case while it was still live. I believe the bartenders clarified that Sloan's jury thread was post-trial, hence his unlocking and deletion when all was explained. It's very unfair to make other presumptions of Paddy's post and the fact he deleted it rather suggests he doesn't want it referred to now. Let's respect that, please.

Also, it's a bit over the top to call this thread poison: I believe there have been some very useful insights here - not least the detectivework by posters such as Superfluous that demonstrated a substantial rewriting of company history that would otherwise be allowed to continue to mislead people.

And finally, it seems ironic that two posts about politesse have been so aggressive, no?

No, he didn’t. He knew that the trial was over, and he made it quite clear that he thought the level of comment on this thread was not in keeping with the standards of politeness and fairness which the F L was known for. It wasn’t him who opened the thread again.

I see nothing aggressive about the posts you mention BTW. However I don’t intend to get drawn into this thread again...

 

[Fanch]

One aspect of the FL that is worthwhile is that I can selectively read and comment on the threads that interest me but ignore the ones that don't. Eventually most threads seem to have a life their own and drift into obscurity, and I suspect eventually the same will apply to this one too. Maybe the best advice to anyone offended by this thread is simply don't read it. Whether or not to close a thread is the function of the moderators, not any of us. For my part, I am glad to see Sloan's Trial Narrative now a sticky.

 

[Otter]

I give up.

Come over to the Dark Side; we have cookies !

 

[IXL]

Come over to the Dark Side; we have cookies !

What kind?

 

[Fanch]

What happened to the Calders was simply dreadful to even read about, much less experience. Unless we inject some measure of levity into this thread, it's all almost too painful to bear, especially for those who count the Calders as friends. [huh]

 

[Stand By]

One aspect of the FL that is worthwhile is that I can selectively read and comment on the threads that interest me but ignore the ones that don't. Eventually most threads seem to have a life their own and drift into obscurity, and I suspect the same will apply to this one too. Maybe the best advice to anyone offended by this thread is simply don't read it. Whether or not to close a thread is the function of the moderators. For my part, I am glad to see Sloan's Trial Narrative now I sticky.

My claim that this thread should be closed down was made because, if nobody else has noticed, the referees have left the pitch! (or so it seems to me).
I don't understand it myself.

And the notion of "If you don't like it, don't read it or stay away" - is not applicable to TFL. ALL THREADS should be open and inviting and civil and nobody should feel the need to shy away from anything.
That's like saying "Well, if you don't want to see Miley Cyrus swinging naked on a wrecking ball, then you shouldn't tune in and watch kid's TV on a Saturday morning."
If a person wants appreciation, they can buy appreciation and they know what they're expecting to see.
If I channel surf and come across music videos, I don't expect to be offended by what airs in the morning at breakfast time and I know impressionable children are watching. I expect standards and shouldn't feel the need to screen something innocuous like VH-1, MTV, MUCH or MMM.
Similarly, the standards and rules of TFL encompass all threads in all areas at all times and a member should never self-screen for fear of being offended.

 

[tonypaj]

Levity? In this thread. Oh well.

I do not count anyone who has posted here as my friend, as I know none of them. Hmm., that brought no levity either. Someone make a joke of a bad situation for all involved...

 

[IXL]

Levity? In this thread. Oh well.

I do not count anyone who has posted here as my friend, as I know none of them. Hmm., that brought no levity either. Someone make a joke of a bad situation for all involved...

Well, it isn't really a joke, but it probably fits right in with what I've just learned to be a typical 'Miley Cyrus Saturday morning' of television cartoons, so here goes: "There once was a girl from Nantucket......"

 

[Monitor]

My claim that this thread should be closed down was made because, if nobody else has noticed, the referees have left the pitch! (or so it seems to me).
I don't understand it myself.

And the notion of "If you don't like it, don't read it or stay away" - is not applicable to TFL. ALL THREADS should be open and inviting and civil and nobody should feel the need to shy away from anything.
That's like saying "Well, if you don't want to see Miley Cyrus swinging naked on a wrecking ball, then you shouldn't tune in and watch kid's TV on a Saturday morning."
If a person wants appreciation, they can buy appreciation and they know what they're expecting to see.
If I channel surf and come across music videos, I don't expect to be offended by what airs in the morning at breakfast time and I know impressionable children are watching. I expect standards and shouldn't feel the need to screen something innocuous like VH-1, MTV, MUCH or MMM.
Similarly, the standards and rules of TFL encompass all threads in all areas at all times and a member should never self-screen for fear of being offended.

Signed! Beautifully said, Stand By. I cringe whenever I hear the "If you don't like it..." phrase, as it's one of the dumbest things people tend to say. Well, you've said everything that needed be said, nothing else to add other than seconded a hundred times.

 

[Dr H]

+1

 

[Otter]

What kind?

Dark chocolate chip of course !

 

[kronos77]

My claim that this thread should be closed down was made because, if nobody else has noticed, the referees have left the pitch! (or so it seems to me).
I don't understand it myself.

And the notion of "If you don't like it, don't read it or stay away" - is not applicable to TFL. ALL THREADS should be open and inviting and civil and nobody should feel the need to shy away from anything.
That's like saying "Well, if you don't want to see Miley Cyrus swinging naked on a wrecking ball, then you shouldn't tune in and watch kid's TV on a Saturday morning."
If a person wants appreciation, they can buy appreciation and they know what they're expecting to see.
If I channel surf and come across music videos, I don't expect to be offended by what airs in the morning at breakfast time and I know impressionable children are watching. I expect standards and shouldn't feel the need to screen something innocuous like VH-1, MTV, MUCH or MMM.
Similarly, the standards and rules of TFL encompass all threads in all areas at all times and a member should never self-screen for fear of being offended.

I am not sure what is so offensive about this thread or what is against the rules. The appreciation analogy is just laughable. The thread and the comments are not off topic. The subject is one that any decent human being who is a jacket buyer should be concerned with. In this case in particular," just ignore it if you don't like it", is appropriate.

 

[Stand By]

Anyone who says that "If you don't like this thread, you shouldn't read it" tells me everything that I need to know; that it is has deviated from the spirit of the rules and should be called off-side and reined in. The fact that I read it tells me so.
Alas, the referees and linesmen aren't here (I believe) so there's no policing that is evident (to me) and I am just trying to respectfully and politely appeal for some resumption of decorum.

So. (Good name for an LP, that). The story appears to me to be over:
Your heretic is gone.
You have his scalp nailed to whatever door you want.
His reputation is in ruins.
Aero has had a PR field day and is about to have a grand sale and will do well and people here will get good jackets - and cheaply - to post.

It begs the question: What else do you want?

 

[IXL]

Indeed.
Downhill.
......... and we can return to the gentlemanly spirit of esprit de corp (squadron spirit, if you will)…..

So, after using this term, the author felt it necessary to educate the readership as to its meaning?
This, I believe, gives a bit of insight as to the author's opinion of his own level of knowledge relative to his opinion of the readership's knowledge. Or did I miss something?

 

[Smithy]

Anyone who says that "If you don't like this thread, you shouldn't read it" tells me everything that I need to know; that it is has deviated from the spirit of the rules and should be called off-side and reined in. The fact that I read it tells me so.
Alas, the referees and linesmen aren't here (I believe) so there's no policing that is evident (to me) and I am just trying to respectfully and politely appeal for some resumption of decorum.

So. (Good name for an LP, that). The story appears to me to be over:
Your heretic is gone.
You have his scalp nailed to whatever door you want.
His reputation is in ruins.
Aero has had a PR field day and is about to have a grand sale and will do well and people here will get good jackets - and cheaply - to post.

It begs the question: What else do you want?

+1

TBH I'm happy that WL got what was coming for him. What has come out in the trial was appalling. I had always kept an open mind about this as to what was going on, as I've never been partisan in some of the jacket maker scraps that have lit up here. I was actually planning a jacket through AL but cancelled the thing when WL was arrested and as I have mentioned before I am pleased I did.

But in some ways I haven't liked some of the sentiment in this comments thread. I'm all for someone getting their comeuppance but I haven't liked some of the glee about some of the extended family members misfortune.

I think Standby has a point though, this forum was always about celebrating a way of behaviour and gentlemenship which has largely disappeared from the modern world. Punch the lights out on a cad or a ***** but don't stomp on his head when he's on the ground.

And the comments by a certain member about Paddy being a "self righteous wind bag" are both pathetic and erroneous. Anybody who has been here longer than a couple of years knows that Paddy is as far removed from that ridiculous comment as possible.

At the end of the day though, I really hope this is the end of all this malarkey, it's created a lot of ill-will in this neck of the woods and I just hope to talk about beautiful outerwear - my new upcoming A-2 from Aero included

 

[Stand By]

So, after using this term, the author felt it necessary to educate the readership as to its meaning?
This, I believe, gives a bit of insight as to the author's opinion of his own level of knowledge relative to his opinion of the readership's knowledge. Or did I miss something?

I was well aware that I was using an obsolete term from yesteryear and that it may confuse some younger people and I was merely trying to add some clarity to my appeal.

 

[IXL]

Young people today don't remain confused very long. They do a three-second Google search from their phones and "voila" (to suggest an appearance as if by magic, if you will)....instantly knowledgeable younger people.