Well. I can assure everyone that I, too, maintain the utmost respect for all our members. However, since I'm the one that was being accused of impertinence, here is the historical reference to which I was referring. You can all take from it what you will:

Here is a quote from kilt historian Bob Martin in his book "All About Your Kilt":

"The turn of the century saw the kilt growing once again. The novel form of 'pleating to the sett' combined with a narrow knife pleating (which had recently become acceptable), produced a kilt with 6, then 7 then 8 or more yards of tartan. Though knife pleating had it's advent ca. 1853 in the military (the Gordon Highlanders), acceptance was so slow that in 1880 it was still being considered an 'incorrect' form of pleating. In 1901, 'Pleating to Sett' was so new that it had no name to describe it, other than a novel idea, the pleats showing the same pattern as that of the apron."

No doubt Mr. Martin was referring to the next document when he wrote the passage above, quoted from "The Kilt and How to Wear It" (1901) by Stuart Erskine:

"This pleat (to the sett) is comparatively rarely practiced; but I am pleased to observe that it is becoming more popular; for though it may not have age and precedence to recommend it...it is undoubtedly more becoming than the other."

I do have to apologize for my error...this was written in 1901 rather than 1902 as I previously posted. Mea culpa.