Reality Check

[kennethrmc]

Hey Ron,

First, I appreciate everyone's input on this forum--whether positive or negative--regarding any and all kilts and kilt makers. The openness and honesty on X Marks is one reason I spend so much time on it. When considering a major purchase (for me, a handmade kilt is a huge major purchase) it is invaluable to have open & honest opinions. When X Markers disagree on any topic, that's extremely valuable

Second, I'm biased on this topic, because (partly due to your posts) my best kilt--in my clan tartan-- was made by Kathy. My wife and I were very impressed visiting with her, the kilt is amazing and I am likewise pleased.

Finally, by admiring the kilts worn by my friends around town I also appreciate the skill of Matt Newsome and other talented US kilt makers. I have learned a great amount from Matt's posts on this forum and on his blog, so I am thankful we have so many talented crafts people keeping the kilt traditions alive!

[wildrover]

My advice is, ignore the "mean girls", and if they come up to whisper something in yer ear, elbow 'em in the ribs .

Everything I could say has already been said...so...thanks for bringing to my attention a kiltmaker I might otherwise not have known about!

-S

[Dall_Piobaire]

Yes, but was it implied or infered from the posts.

High accolades, mention of a highly esteemed school, and apprenticeship under a very demanding supervisor might lead one to infer that Ron was implying she was the "be all to end all".

I have spoken with Kathy at length, when I can get her on the phone, and she is wonderfully supportive and helpful. she doesn't talk trash, or play politics, and has no time for that stuff, but she will speak her mind when it comes to her trade. She takes great pride, and feels quite strongly about her trade, and that the work she does reflects not only upon her but her training!

More likely than not, the reason she hasn't signed up, and I asked her this, was because she simply has no time to sit at a keyboard, she is busy making kilts. I can not, and will not speak for her, but I can certainly speak well of her, and to say she is worth her weight in gold! That is not to say that the other craftspeople here aren't skilled. They are, and they take pride in their work and that will always be evidenced by their work. It will always speak for itself!

[Highland Logan]

Ron,

I’m sorry to hear that someone who is supposed to be a well-respected member of the board has sent you a PM, which has upset you so.

I think the first thing which comes to my mind during this incident, is whether or not you decided to deal with them with the same respect they showed you… by using the PM system; “P” standing for private, rather than present it here for all to see with only one point of view.. yours.

I’m sure as a councillor you understand the idea of the effects of catching someone unaware by taking what was assumed to be a private conversation public.

Also of note is lack of the actual PM, and in its place is your condensed and paraphrased version. I’m sure as a councillor you see how this looks like a person attempting to gather followers before the accused get his or her say.

To all of those who chose to pick up torches and pitchforks and run Ron’s PM friend out of town… stop and think about your actions and words. You are all willing to burn someone whose identity is unknown, on evidence, which has only come from one source. That doesn’t sound very fair, now does it?

So in fairness to both Ron, and the mystery person, I suggest to the Mods that this thread be closed before too many bad feelings are created.

Frank

[KFCarter]

Ron,

I’m sorry to hear that someone who is supposed to be a well-respected member of the board has sent you a PM, which has upset you so.

I think the first thing which comes to my mind during this incident, is whether or not you decided to deal with them with the same respect they showed you… by using the PM system; “P” standing for private, rather than present it here for all to see with only one point of view.. yours.

I’m sure as a councillor you understand the idea of the effects of catching someone unaware by taking what was assumed to be a private conversation public.

Also of note is lack of the actual PM, and in its place is your condensed and paraphrased version. I’m sure as a councillor you see how this looks like a person attempting to gather followers before the accused get his or her say.

To all of those who chose to pick up torches and pitchforks and run Ron’s PM friend out of town… stop and think about your actions and words. You are all willing to burn someone whose identity is unknown, on evidence, which has only come from one source. That doesn’t sound very fair, now does it?

So in fairness to both Ron, and the mystery person, I suggest to the Mods that this thread be closed before too many bad feelings are created.

Frank

Acknowledging that there were some comments aimed at the poster of the PM, I felt that the great majority of comments were positive ones about an affirmative desire to hear (and see) information about Kathy Lare. I have to say, rereading the posts, that I don't conjure an image of torches and pitchforks until you paint it.

There has also been some helpful conversation about where the limits ought to be regarding reviews that can often come close to sounding like sales pitches. It's a touchy line and needs discussion on occasion. Are we meant to only discuss kilts and products by the forum's advertisers? Of course not, but where the line should be drawn is not obvious to me and, I think, to many others on the forum.

As to the privacy of the original communication, surely you're not suggesting that Ron should have posted the full text and identify the sender of the PM. And of course, the question of whether Ron has responded privately to the original PM is between him and the original sender.

Ron may have been reaching for some support ("gathering followers"? really?) and airing his point of view, but I also think he had a genuine question about whether he was in the wrong or not and I would hate to think that he, or any of us, would be hesitant to step forward with a question like that and bring it to the members.

regards

Ken

[Highland Logan]

As to the privacy of the original communication, surely you're not suggesting that Ron should have posted the full text and identify the sender of the PM. And of course, the question of whether Ron has responded privately to the original PM is between him and the original sender.

I'm not suggesting that Ron should have published the text of the PM, and with Ron's background, my hint was that it should have stayed between both him and the other person. Not aired in a manner which could lead to the other unknown person being vilified without a defence.

Ron could have asked his question in a whole manner of ways. He chose a manner which may force the PM member to come forward to defend themselves against a large group of people already lined up in support of Ron. I would hope a councillor would know better.

Frank

[ChubRock]

I would hope a councillor would know better.

Frank

That sounds a little too personal for my liking and I think at this point I am bowing out of reading this thread.