In article ,
"David Looser" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote

Your quibbles are logically valid but factually incorrect, except for
the proposition that "being fashionable" doesn't equal "being
fashionable" because of an arbitrarily exclusion.


Vague waffle such as that does not advance your argument one iota. You will
have to explain where the "factual inaccuracies" are and where this
"arbitrarily exclusion" is to be found

I'd look in your own words that you just snipped. Your logical
speculations are trumped by facts. Claiming hipster fashion doesn't
count because it's really a cult is a dodge by definition.

http://www.timeout.com/london/around..._London_essent
ials.html

"When they¹re not selling their guitars to buy turntables, they¹re
selling their turntables to buy guitars * EaLo¹s hipsters are frontline
soldiers in the culture war. Look out for their American Apparel camo at
all the area¹s free gigs, basement aftershows, secret raves and
pose-friendly cafés."


Yet more vague waffle. what is "EaLo¹s hipsters are frontline soldiers in
the culture war" supposed to mean?

The meaning is not important. What is important is that there is a
hipster scene (and hipster fashion) and it includes turntables.

Your argument was that turntables won't be fashionable. I pointed out a
fashion scene that includes them. QED.

Stephen