Americans- a little brash and maybe uncouth?

[Father Bill]

Okay, I'll concede to his research and fame. I still think he's rather cynical.

[BKPowell]

To one and all,

If I offended anyone with my recent posts,
I am sorry.
In the future, I will be careful what I post.

However, I will continue to kilt on.

Best Regards,
BKPowell

[bdkilted]

As an educator, and a bureaucrat, I have experienced Wiio's law frequently. I think he should add a statement that explains that some will be offended, no matter how innocent the statement or action.
That said, why does brash have to be negative?

[TheOfficialBren]

To one and all,

If I offended anyone with my recent posts,
I am sorry.
In the future, I will be careful what I post.

However, I will continue to kilt on.

Best Regards,
BKPowell

Ditto here.

One more thing @BCAC it might be a stylistic difference so I may be mistaken but "entitled" means to be owed or obliged something (as in being entitled to certain privileges). "Titled" is what you name something (as in a book being titled).

Source AP Journalism.

[Steve Ashton]

It is actually quite interesting how our current set of 12 rules came about.

Let me use the rule that has been quoted here as an example, as it is actually one of the oldest of the X Marks rules.

Rule #9 states - This forum is not the place for the discussion of cross-dressing.

Operating between 2001 and 2003 was another forum from which X Marks derived. This forum was called "Tom's Cafe". Many of the members were proponents of the International Men's Fashion Freedom (IMFF) movement. The goal of Tom's was to provide a place where its members could gather and discuss ways men could dress other than the standard blue jeans. This included any form of dress from ball gowns to kilts to lava lava to loin cloths to nudity.
There were many members of Tom's who were kilt wearers and Tom's became a popular meeting place for the discussion of a new garment that had just hit the market, the Utilikilt.

Within a very short period Tom's was 'discovered' by one demographic. Those who prefer to dress in clothing specifically designed for women. This group came to control all the conversations on the forum. They would shout down, out post, and claim their rights in such strong language that Tom's became known as the cross dressers forum.
Soon those who wished to discuss kilts were met with comments like - "If your going to wear skirts then wear real skirts."

When our founder Hank started X Marks he wanted this forum to be specifically about kilts. It was not designed to be a traditional kilt wearers forum nor a modern kilt wearers forum. Just kilts.
It was Hank himself who set the "No Cross-Dressing" rule. He did not want what happened to Tom's Cafe to happen here. He wanted to offer those who wished to discuss kilts a haven from the militant type of take-over that killed Tom's.

Now, if you will take a look at the other 11 forum rules. Each and every one came about as a direct result of a member here who, in the opinion of his fellow members, crossed a line of polite or acceptable behaviour.

Have you noticed that there are no posts offering you cut rate Viagra or lottery winner schemes on X Marks? Rule #1 is the direct result of the almost daily flood of spam that tries to spread the electronic junk mail that we all hate so much.

Rule #4 came about as the result of two long threads. One was titled "The Do's and Don'ts" and one dealing with "The people of Wal-Mart" photos. I think you can imagine how those two threads ended up. Very soon after a member of the public found a candid shot of himself posted here, and read what our members were saying about him this rule came about. As he was not a member he could not even defend himself.

Rules 5 and 11 are the two that most people seem to take exception to and the two which seem to cause the most trouble. Where the trouble comes from is when one person claims their rights and/or beliefs and holds them to be better than the rights and/or beliefs of another.
The three topics covered by rules 5 and 11, Religion, Politics, and "The Right to Bear Arms" have caused more arguments and disagreement than all others put together.
Over the years we have tried many different approaches to try and keep the forum away from arguments over politics, religion and guns but after 5 years we just had to say flat out. Leave them at the door when you come here.

The unique thing about our 12 rules is that I did not sit down one day and think them up. Yes, I and the Moderators are the who put them into the wording that you see today but for the vast majority of the content and the intent behind our rules it was you, the membership who said where the limits of these rules should be set.
Yes, I do own this forum. Someone has to. Forums do not magically appear one day. Someone must pay for the domain and the hosting and take responsibility to keep it on-line.
But I think everyone can see that I have never, and never will say “Steve’s forum, Steve’s rules, obey them or get out.”

Yes, the Forum Moderators have been dealing with a rash of flags this past two weeks. For the most part though the threads and posts that they have been dealing with never appeared on the public portions of the forum. You may not have even known that they had been posted. The Moderators have dealt with them quietly and professionally. And they have kept the forum free from some pretty nasty stuff.

I do have to tell you though that there are very few flags raised on X Marks. Usually one or perhaps two a month. As far as on-line forums go that is nothing.
It is you, the members, who can take the credit for the polite and respectful community that is X Marks. And for that I thank each and every one of you.

[Nathan]

^^^^

Steve,

As someone who wasn't here when these rules evolved, I found the above post to be very informative. I knew you had purchased the site from Hank but I didn't know how exactly the current rules came to exist.

Thanks for the clarification.

Cheers,

Nathan

[TheOfficialBren]

@Steve Ashton, thank you, sir, for continuong to operate such a unique and valuable corner of the internet.

To the Rabble, thank you for your continued insight and advice. If it weren't for the members here I'm sure that many of us would be quite clueless with regard to TCHD.

[Joseph]

It was Hank himself who set the "No Cross-Dressing" rule. He did not want what happened to Tom's Cafe to happen here. He wanted to offer those who wished to discuss kilts a haven from the militant type of take-over that killed Tom's.

So though my post possibly violated the language of rule #9 (are we in congress?) I didn't actually violate the intent of the rule? Since I mentioned the existence of wearing skirts but wasn't actually ABOUT the endorsement of doing so. Thanks for clarifying.

I really appreciate the resource available here to talk and learn about kilts. Some of the members come down kind of hard with their view of how kilts should be worn. It makes a person want to "kilt on" on their own. I don't come here to fight, or justify why I dress the way I do. I already have that to deal with from people who don't wear kilts. I have no desire to spend my time on a kilt forum arguing or justifying my choice to those who DO WEAR kilts.

For the last few days I've been watching and not posting. I've been considering not getting involved in anything else said here. Now that things have settled down a little. I am willing to give X Marks another try as a community.

Thanks again.

[Nathan]

So though my post possibly violated the language of rule #9 (are we in congress?) I didn't actually violate the intent of the rule? Since I mentioned the existence of wearing skirts but wasn't actually ABOUT the endorsement of doing so. Thanks for clarifying.

I really appreciate the resource available here to talk and learn about kilts. Some of the members come down kind of hard with their view of how kilts should be worn. It makes a person want to "kilt on" on their own. I don't come here to fight, or justify why I dress the way I do. I already have that to deal with from people who don't wear kilts. I have no desire to spend my time on a kilt forum arguing or justifying my choice to those who DO WEAR kilts.

For the last few days I've been watching and not posting. I've been considering not getting involved in anything else said here. Now that things have settled down a little. I am willing to give X Marks another try as a community.

Thanks again.

We're a diverse community. For everyone who believes there is a proper way to wear the kilt, there is one or two who believe they should dress however they like. Pick your camp and carry on. If you don't want advice about how the kilt is worn in Scotland, I'd suggest staying away from the Traditionally Made Kilts and How to Wear Them and the Kilt Advice Sub Forum. These are places where folks often ask for and receive tips on how to wear the kilt the way it's worn in Scotland.

Personally, I'm grateful that people come on this forum and share their first hand experience of how the kilt is worn in it's native environment. Otherwise, this place would be a big cluster of the blind leading the blind and everyone patting each other on the back no matter how dorky they made the national dress of Scots look.

But again, that's just my perspective. There is ample room on this forum for yours and mine. We aren't a monolithic group. Alan H and Jock Scot approach the kilt from very different perspectives, but they managed to have a very nice and cordial meeting in Scotland recently. I think that's the point. We can agree without being disagreeable.

N

[Jock Scot]

Nathan.

I don't suppose Alan , or I, spent more than five minutes talking about kilts, tartan, kilt attire. He did show me a sport kilt(I had never knowingly seen one before---I must have I suppose?) and it was obvious that the synthetic material would be perfect for those hurling boulders about. Other than that we spent our time talking about anything but kilts etc., much to the relief of Joan, I suspect!