Supreme make great quality clothes - you might not like the hype around them but their box logo hoodies will last years - they are not cheaply made - that's the trick here tho - fast fashion - zara, h&m etc - is low cost but unlikely repairable - Anything Rei Kawakubo (CGD) - Raf Simons - Acne Studios - Thom Browne can all last a lifetime if maintained and repaired correctly -
I really like Comme des Garcons (especially shirts, even if lately I'm wearing more Paul Smith and Etro) but it's very expensive (and like with many other high fashion brands only mainline items should be bought in most cases). Acne is great and almost reasonably priced in context.
two of my CDG SHIRT Shirts from 2014 - two CDG Play Shirts (not polo) from 2016 - still wear them regularly - black play one I had professionally redyed last year for $15 - looks brand new -
This is the company that asks teens to spend their last dollar on a brick with a Supreme sticker on it, right? Or am I mixing that up with another brand manipulating children for cash?
this is a lazy comment - I believe it was in conjunction with another new york artist who's studio is in the same building - Tom Sachs - he's an installation artist - and the brick was $30 - not accounting for taste huh- never the less - your point is extremely poorly made -
looking at your history of comments- you might consider acquainting yourself with the guidelines - otherwise i'd suggest HN maybe isn't the right community for you -
I think that you're digging into my history is telling about how triggered you are about me having an opinion on a brand that puts very basic design on top of overpriced clothing that they don't actually make themselves. Nothing in these guidelines refrains opinions. Telling me my comment is lazy, however, does.
lived across the st from the Supreme store on Lafayette for years - we started digitalocean in the same building as their store - know the supreme founders well - and the "origin story" - good guys - only thing I garnered from looking at your comment history is that you don't understand what the word "objectively" means yet use it ad nauseam - and - you're unfamiliar with the site guidelines - i'm new here so maybe I read them more recently than you? good thing I was here to remind you before you get in trouble for intellectual dishonestly - don't worry - everyone makes mistakes friend! :=)
Cool story. I lived in neighbourhoods where teens have been stabbed trying to get Supreme clothing. So you’ll have to excuse me while I disregard the coolness of living across the street from them. That anecdotal tale isn't the point, and shouldn't even matter. Nor does my use of the word “objective.” It actually has nothing to do with what we’re talking about here. The term “personality cult” comes to mind, though.
There is no intellectual dishonesty here (I literally linked an article, so not sure how you landed on that) and I am pretty familiar with the guidelines. Calling a comment lazy is an example of someone who hasn’t really read the guidelines in a way that applies to themselves. You just don’t want to hear other’s opinions. Pretty simple line to follow. You’d think someone who has read the guidelines so well would know that you’re not actually supposed to be making accusatory remarks to other members, no matter how angry you get about them not liking your clothing brand. Possibly the weirdest hill to die on, given the state of the world.
I've been in this community for a number of years. Can't say I've ever felt the need to stalk someone's history, and this is the first I've experienced it directed towards me, after thousands of interactions in this community. That's 12 years of interactions. Very strange behaviour indeed.
The fact that someone could have a conversation publicly available, and reference the guidelines they are applying in partisan is baffling. I almost suspect satire. I would give yourself a second of self-reflection. You are the first and only violator of the guidelines:
You: “this is a lazy comment - I believe it was in conjunction with another new york artist who's studio is in the same building - Tom Sachs - he's an installation artist - and the brick was $30 - not accounting for taste huh- never the less - your point is extremely poorly made -“
The guidelines: Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community
You: "looking at your history of comments- you might consider acquainting yourself with the guidelines”
The guidelines: Eschew flamebait. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents.
You: “good thing I was here to remind you before you get in trouble for intellectual dishonestly”
The guidelines: Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
