A question.

[BCAC]

This forum was initiated and run by an American and the majority of moderators and contributors are and have always been Americans. Given the well-known attachment of many Americans to lethal weapons of the kind being discussed here, there must have been a very good reason why the decision was taken to invoke Rule 11 and keep it for all these years. Why exactly, given the membership demographic this rule should have been imposed and kept is a bit of a puzzle I must admit but kept it has been. The only possible reason I can imagine is the type of contributor and the contributions they made which Steve touched upon in his earlier post. Guns, firearms, weapons whatever you want to call them have no place in Scotland beyond the occasional sportsman or gamekeeper and only then under the strict supervision of police. They are certainly no part of the normal life of the majority of Scots and, therefore, have no relevance to a forum dedicated to a Scottish-sourced form of dress in all its variations. If you want the forum to be exclusively for Americans and their specific interests and concerns so be it but I think it will be the lesser for it.
I myself have run up against this particular rule when expressing my condolences about a past massacre of innocent young people with the result that I would never again repeat a similar message but that does not mean that I would seek to overturn the rule just to satisfy my own particular sectional interest.

Nicely put, Phil.

[tundramanq]

My interest in a sub forum etc. Is for thigh holstering under the kilt for us hipless rumpless guys where anything of size on the outer thigh either is visible (my pleats touch my legs standing), in an awkward and sometimes insafe position or makes the pleats act odd. Add my poor leg circulation issues (no tight leg straps) and things are getting real complicated. I have built and had build, 3 trial versions all of which have problems.
This quest has renewed interest here now that I am wearing traditional kilts more than Utilikilts with cargo pockets.

So although kilt related it would be focused on the building, fitment, safety and usability of the holster itself.

[CDNSushi]

This forum was initiated and run by an American and the majority of moderators and contributors are and have always been Americans.

Careful, now, eh! Not to be an intentional pedant, but the majority of moderators are currently not Americans. Only two of seven are, in fact.

http://www.xmarksthescot.com/forum/f...m-staff-66333/

[Zardoz]

Guns, firearms, weapons whatever you want to call them have no place in Scotland beyond the occasional sportsman or gamekeeper and only then under the strict supervision of police.

That's sad.

[Grizzled Ian]

In my opinion, Mr Zardoz' pejorative and unwarranted comment on the culture and legislative framework in another country should be deleted.

[flairball]

I knew someone would say that - I could have put money on it!

The quote was

All I did was offer an alternative which preserves XMarks as it is and gives all members free rein to discuss what they like. Nowhere do I say that members should leave. Please quote to me where I say that anybody should leave. And who are these "some people", who you think would be better off launching their own forum? If you mean me, don't be a coward, have the courage to say so.

Deliberately mis-understanding and mis-quoting to score some cheap points is rude.

My apologies, Chas. I did read into it, and I shouldnt have.

To your other point, I was not directing it at you, it was inserted to illustrate a counter idea (mute point now, because I've reread, and admit to reading into your post), but since you've implied I wouldn't call a duck, a duck, yes, perhaps you should launch your own forum.

To clarify my position; I see no reason for anyone who doesn't want to hear or see anything to do with weapons to open, and enter a sub-forum dedicated to the subject as they relate to kilts. And that includes you.

[PodKiDo]

Guns, firearms, weapons whatever you want to call them have no place in Scotland beyond the occasional sportsman or gamekeeper and only then under the strict supervision of police. They are certainly no part of the normal life of the majority of Scots and, therefore, have no relevance to a forum dedicated to a Scottish-sourced form of dress in all its variations.

You have just marginalized every members contributions to this forum if they do not conform to traditional Scottish dress. This forum isn't confined to that narrow definition.

[Herr Doktor]

Grüß Gott.

Quite a Pandora ’s Box this Rule 11 has opened.

I did not really wish to entre into the debate on this topic. The Politically Correct factions have smelt the blood.

Since I have started this tread , I feel I must be obliged to include here my observations and suggestions.

The posting on the 17th-18th Century Dirk was censored and the author has now deleted the images. Yes, I can understand why he did this, standing in his place and being censored without notice or explanations I would have done so as well. It is insulting. From what I may deduce the tread has fallen victims to the large weapons censorship debate where the easily offended politticaly correct can anonymously call in the moderators to bend things to their own wills.

This brings me to my first suggestions.

That those who make reports upon others will have to be listed with reasons on the censored threads, so they may not any longer hide in their autonimity. It is easy to stand in the saftey of the shadows and point the finger of accusation. Much harder to stare the person in the face and call them out. I feel this will make one think about the consequences before throwing the stone.

I most civilized societies people have the rights to face their accuser.

“The Confrontation Clause has its roots in both English common law, protecting the right of cross-examination, and Roman law, which guaranteed persons accused of a crime the right to look their accusers in the eye. In noting the right's long history, the United States Supreme Court has cited Acts of the Apostles 25:16, which reports the Roman governor Porcius Festus, discussing the proper treatment of his prisoner Paul: "It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man up to die before the accused has met his accusers face-to-face, and has been given a chance to defend himself against the charges." It has also cited Shakespeare's Richard II, Blackstone's treatise, and statutes.”

Suggestion number two is the members ideas to build a specific sub-forum where the topic of weapons, firearms, swords, knifes, etc. can be discussed without the intervention of the fainting club is a good one. If the politically correct do not wish to be offended they can not go there if they wish not to. Touhght it has seemed that some will always go out of their ways to become indignant. That is the natures of the animal.

So in summation, make those finger pointers publicly visable/accountable when they call in the police. Create the sub-forum for those who wish to have the discussion about the topic of kilts related weapons and let the fainting club go on about their businesses elsewhere on the forum. I hope that adult sanity will prevail on this forum.

Das ist alles.

Tschüß!

[Zardoz]

In my opinion, Mr Zardoz' pejorative and unwarranted comment on the culture and legislative framework in another country should be deleted.

Yeah, eliminate opposing viewpoints! As a bad ol' American I'm expected to be culturally sensitive with points of view that I find troubling at best, but nobody needs to be sensitive to my point of view.

But that reaction is a good meta example of why rule 11 is around.

[PodKiDo]

Her Doktor ***