The Craftsman versus the Industrial Complex

[RockyR]

OK...what does that signify? That I'm wrong? Or that some people are out of their comfort zone? Might it be that some are having to think a little deeper about some of these issues? I know I am.

And what should I do about it? Not express my opinion? Seems to me that way "the terrorists win."

To the Casual reader on a somewhat modest income, stating that $100 (retail) shoes are poor quality and that only shoes in the $1000 + category are real quality can come across as insulting (especially if you thought your $150 shoes WERE good quality) and somewhat 'eliteist' (even if that wasn't the intention).

Once someone has an opinion that someone else's beliefs / views are eliteist, it's tough to come back from that and read their future posts with anything other than that 'slant', even if that wasn't the person's intentions to start with. You can (as can we all) GLADLY express our opinions. We just have to be cognisent of how that opinon is perceived.

I don't think that I am being disparaging to anyone. I am trying not to be impatient with people who don't read posts like they themselves would want theirs read.

SNIP...

And I am tolerant of all the rest--that seems to me to be unusual right there. I'd wear a 16 ounce PV kilt...in a heartbeat.

"Kilt police" indeed!

This last bit is my editing, but is an example of my comments above. Stating that you're 'tolerant' of all the rest, can be seen as 'eliteist' even if that wasn't your intention. If other members here who wear casual kilts said that they 'tolerated' traditional kilt wearers, it promotes an 'us vs. them' mentality, which is not generally very good on a community trying to foster friendships.

Just my $.02.

[CMcG]

To the Casual reader on a somewhat modest income, stating that $100 (retail) shoes are poor quality and that only shoes in the $1000 + category are real quality can come across as insulting (especially if you thought your $150 shoes WERE good quality) and somewhat 'eliteist' (even if that wasn't the intention).
<snip>

I'm not insulted by the elitism, but read that sort of statement as patently false. I've had Ðoc Martens shoes and Blundstone boots that cost around $150 and have lasted ten years or more. Seems like good quality to me and, at the very least, not disposable.

Similarly, I have read reports about Rocky's inexpensive casual kilts being quite durable. There were even some pictures of one surviving the Warrior Dash and still looking good (after washing of course).

Affordable can be a synonym for cheap, but cheap doesn't necessarily mean poor quality. Sometimes it just means good value.