Why was Girl's Jeans locked?

Discuss recent changes, make suggestions, etc.
User avatar
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 3449
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 2:13 pm
Location: My BUTT is Living in the USA, and sitting on the tip of the Sky Needle, Ow Ow Ow!!. Get the POINT?

Re: Why was Girl's Jeans locked?

Post by Since1982 »

Personally...If I wanted a site about women's wear, I'd go start one. Myfreeforum.org takes all subjects and would love to put all their advertising on your site. Why beat a dead horse here?? I think if you took a vote here on whether or not we should discuss women's clothes as part of our "freestyle forum" you'd probably get a variance of maybe 700 to 5...or less. :bom:
I had to remove this signature as it was being used on Twitter. This is my OPINION, you NEEDN'T AGREE.

Story of Life, Perspire, Expire, Funeral Pyre!
I've been skirted part time since 1972 and full time since 2005. http://skirts4men.myfreeforum.org/
User avatar
Distinguished Member
Posts: 108
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 4:00 am

So long, and thanks for all the fish.

Post by RyeOfTheDead »

So long, and thanks for all the fish.
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 956
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 7:47 pm

Re: Why was Girl's Jeans locked?

Post by Kilty »

Loool :mrgreen:

I hope you'll be back sometime soon Rye. I hope you havent been driven off the site the same way Jeff and SkirtDude were :blue:

I'm just packing my kilts into my bag and heading out the door myself here. It's not really about Fashion Freedom here, so I guess I'll be leaving too. I can't bear Skip's smart remarks, I'm close to busting a cap in his ass. :twisted:

Veletron, keep up with the snappy dressing, Juan, I give you props for all your fashion tips, I'm off to see Cessna152Towser and the rest on Xmarks. :wink: Enjoy your limited range of clothing. You can't really expect MIS to be taken seriously if you're going to be so rigid as to what each guy should wear. :evil:

Barista Emeritus
Posts: 587
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 9:31 pm
Location: New England

Re: The Gender of Jeans Debate and How it Relates to MUGs

Post by Bob »

The Girl's Jeans thread was locked, first and foremost, because it was a lightning rod for all sorts of inappropriate content. Look back in the 54 posts involved, and you can see that moderators had to step in many times, over a course of months. Any thread that requires this level of moderator intervention might eventually be locked.

Whether or not Girl's Jeans are a central topic of discussion at SkirtCafe is distinctly secondary. It's true, girl's jeans are not a central topic at SkirtCafe. But we also have a history of allowing just about any topic that doesn't cause trouble or actively violate SkirtCafe's rules. Moderators here are lazy; there's a distinct attitude of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Of course, closing a perfectly legitimate (if somewhat off-topic) topic like Girl's Jeans is not "fair" for the majority of SkirtCafe users who participated in the subject at hand without requiring moderator intervention. But please, let's try to use a little maturity on this point. SkirtCafe is not grade school, and SkirtCafe moderators are not grade school teachers. SkirtCafe is an Internet forum, and should (hopefully) be a rather minor part of most of our lives and emotional landscapes. Sometimes s**t happens. Really guys, the stakes here are so low as to be inconsequential.

For those who want to discuss Girl's Jeans (or any other legitimate topic that eventually gets locked), I suggest that you let the locked topic lay low for a week or two, and then re-start a new thread on the same topic. This is usually an effective way to re-start a topic of discussion that previously went off course.

If certain topics consistently, month after month, continue to require moderator attention --- like politics and religion --- then we MIGHT consider guidelines that restrict them overall. But in this case --- sometimes a locked topic is just a locked topic. Please don't try to read anything more into it.
User avatar
Uncle Al
Posts: 3296
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 10:07 pm
Location: Duncanville, TX USA

Re: Why was Girl's Jeans locked?

Post by Uncle Al »

[Mod Hat On]

So it's easier on the eyes, I'll post this in normal colors.

OK--I'm still new at the Moderation game. This topic/thread has been
on a Roller-Coaster Ride almost from day 1. Rye did report the one
post because of the 'Underwear' issue. As I continued to read the post
and the response it produced, I could see this turning into a Fetish Flame War
which is not what this forum us about. We are adults here but in
general do not consent to this type of flagrant exhibitionism.

The only 'rule' that came to mind, allowing me to officially lock the thread,
was the 'Underwear Rule'. I first redacted the questionable post,
but the responder to the 'questionable post' was encouraging the
exhibitionism. If someone wants to "Show Off Their Package", that's
fine with me, but this type of discussion is not welcome on a family
friendly website.

I tried to use a 'mop 'n' bucket' but too much damage had taken place.
I found the key to the blasted door, closed and locked it.
I would do this on any future 'Topic/Thread' that encouraged
Sexual/Fetish Exhibitionism. This is not welcome here. I know many
of you are parents, and would want to encourage your child in their
choices. This forum is here to encourage men/male skirt/kilt wearing
as an everyday choice for men. I would use this forum to assist my
child in encouraging their skirt/kilt wearing, but NOT when it includes
the S/F Exhibitionism that appeared with the 'Tight-Fitting Jeans'
concept the last two posters were promoting.

Anyway, this is the reasoning I used for locking the Topic/Thread.

Jeans are a useful garment and have their place in the wardrobe.
Women's cut jeans may fit a person better than Men's cut jeans due
to body type/mass/build. That is something we all can agree on and
openly discuss without going into exhibitionism.

Thanks to all who supported my decision. For those who did not
understand my reasoning, I hope this will clarify my struggle as to
lock or not lock the thread and why I chose the basic rule #3 as
the tool to shut it down.

Mod Hat Off

Uncle Al
:mrgreen: 8) :mrgreen:
Kilted Organist/Musician
Grand Musician of the Grand Lodge, I.O.O.F. of Texas 2008-2009, 2015-2016,
2018-2022(and the beat goes on ;) )
When asked 'Why the Kilt?'
I respond-The why is F.T.H.O.I. (For The H--- Of It)
User avatar
Distinguished Member
Posts: 108
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 4:00 am

Re: Why was Girl's Jeans locked?

Post by RyeOfTheDead »

I am posting this, which I intend to be my last post on this forum. I hadn't planned on posting any others at all, but I took a peek on here just to check and see if I'd gotten any responses to some PM conversations because my spam filter catches the notification emails sometimes. I saw that Bob and Uncle Al saw fit to post their responses to this thread, and I think they spelled out their position clearly and with an attempt to see my side of it, I decided that it was worth saying my peace about it. Besides, it is in human nature after all to want to get our last word in.

What I saw was, someone posted an inappropriate comment, that even I, as Al has attested to, reported, and then the thread was shut down. The reason that Al cited *In the thread locking post* for shutting it down was that it wasn't conducive to men's skirt and kilt wearing. It bothered me because it seemed like there was legitimate conversation happening aside from the posts that deserved to be reported, but because some people prefer not to talk about pants, the thread was shut down rather than just have the bad seed posts removed. So, since there is this folder for discussions on changes to the forum, I posted a query to it because I wanted it explained more. Honestly, Al's explanation on his last post is sound, as is Bob's from the one preceding it. However, this was not the reasoning left on the actual thread, which is what I was responding to.

What drove me to leave the forum was the, I feel, overboard negativity that I received for daring to do such a thing as ask for accountability from a moderator. I was personally emailed off-board and slammed for my "constant harping" on women's jeans (before this thread I'd commented on it once before in my entire tenure here,) I was told to take my conversation elsewhere, and that I was trying to turn this site into discussions of wearing women's clothes, when in truth what I was saying was, "why are these considered women's clothes when the cuts and styles look good on men too? Shouldn't this type of thing be unisex?" Which, as I pointed out, is the same, valid argument we make about skirts. So, even though the topic of jeans is technically off-topic for the site, it is relevant to the topic at hand. Yet, rather than actually listen to the argument I was making or even comment on it at all, people just focused on the fact that the word "Women's" was being used. I even got lumped in with the very fetishist that I reported.

Then the straw that broke the camel's back. I received a private message from Carl. In that private message, first I was scolded for making a slightly negative comment about another member. I admit, I didn't phrase that sentence well, though I don't think the sentiment behind it was incorrect. Had that been all he'd said to me, I'd have reacted very differently.

However, what troubled me was the next part. In the second part of his PM to me, Carl accused me of having an ulterior motive for why I wanted to talk about the cut of jeans, and this message was received *after* I had posted the thread that explained, in detail, exactly what I felt made the topic relevant. I do not respond well to being called a liar, and that's what ulterior motive means, that I had a dishonest reason for why I was posting what I did. He then went on to suggest that any further discussion of jeans on this forum would result in scrutiny of all of my post and and a guarantee that I would be placed on moderated status.

Frankly, I don't think anything I said in regards to the intended gender of jeans came anywhere near being close to deserving of such threats, nor the suggestion of an ulterior motive. As Bob said in his message in this thread, this is a small internet forum and not a significant part of my life. Time for me right now is also at a premium between working my new job, doing comedy still, and working on my own writing. So, frankly, I decided, hey, I don't really want to spend the little free time I have for the internet posting on this forum anymore. Why spend my valuable time on a forum where it has been made clear that I am not trusted and that my commentary deserves to be scrutinized? In other words, somewhere that my point of view is considered unwelcome.

So that's that, that's my two cents. Take it as you will.