Appleseed

Not gonna pretend I know the whole RiRi catalog, but I suspect this is a design/association choice.

Curious as to how much difference there is in treating the new nylon vs. the old cotton-based Epic fabrics? I've got a few ACR pieces that are Epic (but not 'encapsulated nylon') and they get the same cleaning cycle as any Stotz/Ventile/Supermarine piece.

Well, patching from a burn is a bit different than repairing a jacket suffering from delam., no? If delamination has started on a panel, it's only gonna get worse over use+time. A little patch (even well done by Rainy Pass) isn't addressing the issue of the membranes separating.

Has anyone actually had an ACR jacket repaired for GTX delam.? Only way to do this is to have the entire fabric panel replaced and a new one sewn in, and given the complexity of most ACR patterns/detailing...

Thankfully, there are other ways to use Dyneema - the woven stuff that Outlier has played w/ comes to mind. It's categorically different from a full membrane application, but I would agree that a non-breathable fabric is less-than-ideal in a typical jacket. Seems like something of a step backward, IMO.

Ok, very good to know - they need to get their branding in check. I'd assumed Infinium was more HD based on the Gore info page (didn't realize this also included the FO (ShakeDry?) product(s) too), which, if heavier and less-breathable than the Burly.....means a no-go, unfortunately. Will have to swing by and see what the FW20/21 iteration is like.

Interesting - I guess I need to check them out in person. The only Infinium stuff I've handled was insulated. I would have equated the Burly Double Weave w/ 'lifestyle windstopper package,' which still seems to be in use on the Align MX. Is reg. Infinium going to be thinner / lighter than the Burly?

Agreed. Too bad those Indisce Pants are Infinium....

^ Yeah, but the Sediment color almost makes up for it. Any clue whether the Range is coming back in non-IS ver. for SS? I didn't see anything that was a total match in the imgur dump....

My orig. reaction was about approach (to the culture / 'hobby') and the use of the 'collective-centric' term, which frankly, just wasn't something possible 10~15 years ago. You had people here, 5thD....a few on that UK forum (blanking on the name?). A handful of otaku spread across the globe like a Gibson novel. It was a relief to find community, but nobody was getting into it because of the community. We can argue good/bad/right/authentic, but for better or worse there are obviously a lot more options for accessibility (and group-making, e-congregation, etc.) now, which allows for more of the diversity and differences since described. Personal motivation to sell-off could be related (or not?), hence the question-

How thin do we get to slice this tho - i.e., separating motivation from behavior? This is what I meant by objectivity; should be obvious that individuals' choices are pretty much always going to be individual-centric in this context, for reasons that @TEKsevenZERO and others have mentioned. In the real-world, this topic mostly operates in a vacuum.

Ok, but that doesn't somehow make this technically correct. Just makes you one of the more selfish bee's in the hive! Not even arguing whether this is 'good' or 'bad'. While these things come down to personal choices, you need to step back and look at them more objectively.

Certainly up for discussion - and while we keep throwing these terms around loosely, they're actually pretty well defined in some circles. @erictheninja's last post talks about currying favor for personal gain as individual-centric, but if you're feeding / contributing to the group (to whatever end), it's actually collective-centric, regardless of whether you get personal benefit out of it or not. bingo

This hits a key point for me, and is why I phrased things they way I did. Might have been head-to-toe, but you wouldn't know it because no blatant logos / signaling. The saturation and association (both Supreme and ACR) have absolutely tweaked some of my own behaviors, but not to the point of the OP where one is selling everything off (or losing actual interest - perhaps more importantly e.g., 'clothes' vs. culture and symbolism). That said, isn't 'modifying your behaviours/interests because of what's popular or what other people are doing' the literal definition of collective-centric behavior? Maybe I'm being too pedantic (or not enough?). How stand-alone do you have to be for a negative reaction to actually become individual-centric behavior instead of just plain-old contrarianism? Lots of gray area for sure...

Yeah, I dunno. Do obnoxious concert-goes somehow make Mayer a lesser-guitarist? Do the Bryan Lee's of the world somehow takeaway from ACR's actual output or make it objectively less-interesting? To me, changing behavior and/or interests because of others is the literal opposite of an individual-centric pursuit. If you'd linked ERLSN's SJW Twitter regurgitations to your being out-of-alignment, I could understand a logic behind wanting disassociation. Regardless, this is exactly what I was hoping people would get into after @jeddyhsu's remark; so thanks for going out on a proverbial limb.