 | | | | | | |
| |
|
After an interesting chat about "Fan involvement with TLC" the other night, a
few concerns/questions came up, and I can't seem to shake them.
Historically a large portion of AfoL/ALE's have wanted a closer relationship
with TLC and over the last few years we have been witness to that happening.
Now more than ever, it seems as if the company is involving the fan base. I
don't have the luxury of knowing how many ppl are under a NDA (non-disclosure
agreement) currently, but the numbers must be high. (1)
Off the top of my head, the original test project for the factory, and the
subsequent phase, and projects such as this train committee, the cycling
ambassadors, certified artists, and the nxt, clan just to mention a few.
So we know, a lot of our "high profile" community members from various themes
and interests (from trains to robotics and sculpture through micro) and are more
than likely also those members that often posted, having very in depth or
insightful posts about products and development etc are now under NDAs.
I have 5 questions I'm looking for ppl (both those under NDA or and those that
are not) to consider responding to.
Q1. Are the NDA keeping our most prolific quiet? (Aside from the obvious, I
understand they can't discuss certain things, but are there people that would
have been posting otherwise that are now remaining silent, in fear that even
guessing or hypothesising might end up being factual, and then be some violation
of their agreement?)
Q2. Is this hindering or benefiting our communication as a community?
Q3. a) Is the help/advice/feedback those under an NDA are providing to Lego
really being taken in account, or it just be considerd dandling carrot by the
company? (2)
b) If so (based on Q3a), is this a reasonable price to pay to have so many
of our high profile members unable to discuss things openly?
Q4. Are members spending many of their community hours behind the scenes that
they don't have time as much free time to dedicate to the public forums that
they once had?
Q5. If the individual departments within TLC alone can not corelate information
with each other in a timely manner, are they capable of doing so with the
various fan/company groups they are spearheading?
Personally, I don't really know. I really want to believe that the fans having
some input must make some improvements, but I wonder if the price we are paying
is outweighing what is gained. I guess since no one can clearly let us know
what is being gained, its difficult to judge. I have the feeling that other
members here might have opinions and much better insight on this than I do.
Curious,
Janey "Red Brick"
1. After 5 minutes (exhaustive) research I came up with a verifiable list of 81
fans names that currently are under an NDA. Since I could only find out about
half of the nxt group, that number should be at least 131, so I assume the
actual number is significantly.
2. Is this a case of "Be careful what you wish for?" or are great strides
being made behind the scenes between fan and company? (Aside from the brief
mentions of the original NXT group saying their feedback affected the actual
outcome of the product) details from direct relationship between fan and company
and results of this alliance have been scarce. This is not to say it hasn't
happened, it must have, I just have yet to see any announcement saying anything
to the contrary, (although quite possible that I have missed it). For example,
was Batman a result of fan involvement? Was that cute little one by one smooth
slope?? Are the changes to the Factory? Etc.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
| |
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
After an interesting chat about “Fan involvement with TLC” the other night, a
few concerns/questions came up, and I can’t seem to shake them.
Historically a large portion of AfoL/ALE’s have wanted a closer relationship
with TLC and over the last few years we have been witness to that happening.
Now more than ever, it seems as if the company is involving the fan base. I
don’t have the luxury of knowing how many ppl are under a NDA (non-disclosure
agreement) currently, but the numbers must be high. (1)
Off the top of my head, the original test project for the factory, and the
subsequent phase, and projects such as this train committee, the cycling
ambassadors, certified artists, and the nxt, clan just to mention a few.
So we know, a lot of our “high profile” community members from various themes
and interests (from trains to robotics and sculpture through micro) and are
more than likely also those members that often posted, having very in depth or
insightful posts about products and development etc are now under NDAs.
I have 5 questions I’m looking for ppl (both those under NDA or and those that
are not) to consider responding to.
Q1. Are the NDA keeping our most prolific quiet? (Aside from the obvious, I
understand they can’t discuss certain things, but are there people that would
have been posting otherwise that are now remaining silent, in fear that even
guessing or hypothesising might end up being factual, and then be some
violation of their agreement?)
Q2. Is this hindering or benefiting our communication as a community?
Q3. a) Is the help/advice/feedback those under an NDA are providing to Lego
really being taken in account, or it just be considerd dandling carrot by the
company? (2)
b) If so (based on Q3a), is this a reasonable price to pay to have so many
of our high profile members unable to discuss things openly?
Q4. Are members spending many of their community hours behind the scenes that
they don’t have time as much free time to dedicate to the public forums that
they once had?
Q5. If the individual departments within TLC alone can not corelate
information with each other in a timely manner, are they capable of doing so
with the various fan/company groups they are spearheading?
Personally, I don’t really know. I really want to believe that the fans
having some input must make some improvements, but I wonder if the price we
are paying is outweighing what is gained. I guess since no one can clearly
let us know what is being gained, its difficult to judge. I have the feeling
that other members here might have opinions and much better insight on this
than I do.
Curious,
Janey “Red Brick”
1. After 5 minutes (exhaustive) research I came up with a verifiable list of
81 fans names that currently are under an NDA. Since I could only find out
about half of the nxt group, that number should be at least 131, so I assume
the actual number is significantly.
2. Is this a case of “Be careful what you wish for?” or are great strides
being made behind the scenes between fan and company? (Aside from the brief
mentions of the original NXT group saying their feedback affected the actual
outcome of the product) details from direct relationship between fan and
company and results of this alliance have been scarce. This is not to say it
hasn’t happened, it must have, I just have yet to see any announcement saying
anything to the contrary, (although quite possible that I have missed it).
For example, was Batman a result of fan involvement? Was that cute little one
by one smooth slope?? Are the changes to the Factory? Etc.
|
Interesting questions. The NDA/Ambassador phenomenon does seem to have created
an in-group and an out-group among AFOLs, and a certain amount of distrust both
between and within them. I feel bad about it, but I can’t help but discount the
opinions of folks under NDA, at least a little. And I have personally been
accused of trying to make myself look better in an attempt to become an
Ambassador. So, the effect on the community has not been 100% positive.
On the other hand, if you read this
post by Paul Janssen, it
sounds like the Ambassadors actually have influence with TLC. And recently, they
have been doing more to become a two-way conduit of information, rather than
just a privileged focus group (see
Kelly McKiernan and
Eric Kingsley). More examples of
concrete, AFOL-friendly results from the NDAFOL-TLC partnership would certainly
go a long way towards reassuring those of us on the outside - I think the
9v train issue will be an important test case.
Marc Nelson Jr.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
> I have 5 questions I'm looking for ppl (both those under NDA or and those that
> are not) to consider responding to.
I'm under NDA, and have been thinking about this very thing. I have a blog entry
about half-written about the subject, but - alas - I'm so busy it's been delayed
a bit...
> Q1. Are the NDA keeping our most prolific quiet?
Yes.
> Q2. Is this hindering or benefiting our communication as a community?
Benefiting, with caveats, see below.
> Q3. a) Is the help/advice/feedback those under an NDA are providing to Lego
> really being taken in account, or it just be considerd dandling carrot by the
> company?
Absolutely it's being used and taken into consideration, I've seen it happen.
That doesn't mean whatever "we" advisors say is always implemented, of course,
but I have seen my own feedback result in very concrete improvements in things
like LEGO Factory.
> b) If so (based on Q3a), is this a reasonable price to pay to have so many
> of our high profile members unable to discuss things openly?
If you're talking about the things that can't be discussed because of NDA, then
I would say it's a very reasonable trade. Being part of the Ambassador program,
especially, has shown how we as fans can play a role in making products and
services from TLG come out better, anywhere from answering a quick question to
being more deeply involved with long-term projects. (Sorry that's so vague...
which in itself answers part of your question.)
For myself... I can spend some of my time participating with NDA activities, or
I can make a crappy MOC. Guess which one has more bang for the buck? The AFOL
community will not be any less rich because of my lack of Brickshelf pictures,
frankly. But I'm the exception in that regard, I think.
> Q4. Are members spending many of their community hours behind the scenes that
> they don't have time as much free time to dedicate to the public forums that
> they once had?
Ding ding ding. Give the lady a Kewpie doll. That's the sixty-four thousand
brick question. This is the one place where I think the people who are fortunate
enough to be involved with TLG in some way can change behavior. It's really just
become apparent (to me, anyway - I may just be dense) that the amount of effort
poured into "black ops" projects is definitely detracting from the greater
"public" community. I for one am trying to consciously change that, and that's
what I'm blogging about.
> Q5. If the individual departments within TLC alone can not corelate information
> with each other in a timely manner, are they capable of doing so with the
> various fan/company groups they are spearheading?
That's another question that's just recently come up, and it's much harder to
answer. I'll leave that to somebody from TLG to comment upon.
>
> Personally, I don't really know. I really want to believe that the fans having
> some input must make some improvements, but I wonder if the price we are paying
> is outweighing what is gained.
I really do think it's an overall benefit, with the caveat that what we can
change (balance private with public effort) is an important element. For myself,
over the last week, I've been involved with: upgrading BZPower software
(whatapain); discussions with Ambassadors and other NDA groups about lotsa
stuff, including intercommunications; tweaks to Brickfest.com for '06 event;
working with an AFOL group on a new web site (very cool, you'll love it);
sorting several buckets worth of bricks; building two moonbase modules; revising
a BrickJournal article; all dwarfed by another big AFOL effort that I hope to
have public shortly. And I know for a fact that I'm not even close to being the
most busy. That's all mostly behind-the-scenes stuff, and the benefits don't
become apparent for a long time. For example, some of the stuff going on with
other NDAFOL[1] projects won't become public for YEARS. So I understand the
frustration in the community of these groups of people who fell off the planet,
only to show up in Wired magazine[2].
In all, several very good questions, Janey... I hope my answers help ease the
tension just a skootch.
- Kelly, NDAFOL
[1] Marc Nelson Jr. coined, I like. ;)
[2] Actually, the entire NXT announcement and Wired magazine article was what I
consider an extremely cool and effective project reveal. If only they were all
so effective.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
> Q1. Are the NDA keeping our most prolific quiet? (Aside from the obvious, I
> understand they can't discuss certain things, but are there people that would
> have been posting otherwise that are now remaining silent, in fear that even
> guessing or hypothesising might end up being factual, and then be some violation
> of their agreement?)
That's a good question. It's been a long time since I was 'prolific', but I am
in the MDP. In general, NDA's cover confidential information actually disclosed
(on purpose or accidently), not other informaiton. The problem comes in keeping
straight which information is general knowledge vs. privileged vs. guessed-at.
> Q2. Is this hindering or benefiting our communication as a community?
I'm guessing it's helping, in general. But it's an important thing for group
leaders to think about before jumping onto the NDA bandwagon -- if all the
leaders are under NDA, who's going to be out herding the rabble-rousers?
> Q4. Are members spending many of their community hours behind the scenes that
> they don't have time as much free time to dedicate to the public forums that
> they once had?
This is the killer for me. I don't have tons of 'lego time' right now, and what
I do have is taken up with the MDP stuff (in a good way :).
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
> Personally, I don't really know. I really want to believe that the fans having
> some input must make some improvements, but I wonder if the price we are paying
> is outweighing what is gained. I guess since no one can clearly let us know
> what is being gained, its difficult to judge. I have the feeling that other
> members here might have opinions and much better insight on this than I do.
>
> Curious,
>
> Janey "Red Brick"
>
>
>
> 1. After 5 minutes (exhaustive) research I came up with a verifiable list of 81
> fans names that currently are under an NDA. Since I could only find out about
> half of the nxt group, that number should be at least 131, so I assume the
> actual number is significantly.
>
> 2. Is this a case of "Be careful what you wish for?" or are great strides
> being made behind the scenes between fan and company? (Aside from the brief
> mentions of the original NXT group saying their feedback affected the actual
> outcome of the product) details from direct relationship between fan and company
> and results of this alliance have been scarce. This is not to say it hasn't
> happened, it must have, I just have yet to see any announcement saying anything
> to the contrary, (although quite possible that I have missed it). For example,
> was Batman a result of fan involvement? Was that cute little one by one smooth
> slope?? Are the changes to the Factory? Etc.
Well not all the "AFOL big mouths" are in the program! ;-p
As someone who's done his fair share of "positive critiquing" of TLG, I
unfortunately have been busy mapping out the proverbial "Lego Genome" (all Lego
sets/elements ever produced going back to 1949) for the Lego CD, and therefore
haven't had time. I was toying with the idea of sending in an application for
being an Ambassador.... but I didn't have the spare time, and certainly don't
like keeping my lips sealed (I would probably explode from all the pent up Lego
"hot air" anyway!).
But yes, you do have a valid point about too many AFOL's being tight lipped!
Lets just hope these folks provide us with "the fruits of their labor", and make
it worth the silence! :-)
Gary Istok
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
> I have 5 questions I'm looking for ppl (both those under NDA or and those that
> are not) to consider responding to.
Janey, interesting questions, and I will not respond to them individually, but
just give my overall "feeling" about things.
I am not currently under NDA to TLC, but I have been in the past. As far as the
interaction that happened while I was working on the project, I have mixed
feelings - there were some great ideas passed around, but I see very few of the
AFOL ideas *related to bricks* have been used directly to this point. That's not
necessarily bad, taking into account the project itself and the fact that it was
one of the first such collaborative projects. I think the main result to come
directly out of it was that both TLC and the AFOLs involved realised such
projects could, in future, be of benefit, which has probably influenced TLC's
decision to explore subsequent projects.
I must say, I don't think my involvement at the time caused any reduction of my
involvement in the rest of the community, but I do definitely have the feeling
from others since, that it has caused them to be more careful about what they
say publically.
So I guess my feelings are still a little mixed about it all - I have seen the
possibilities of such projects, but to a certain extent I feel the demonstrated
results have not yet lived up to my expectations. Maybe my expectations were too
high, or maybe it's just gonna take more time, I dunno. I certainly hope we
don't get to the point where there's so many members of the AFOL community under
various NDAs that it becomes a pissing match - I'd hate lugnet.general to become
"How many projects are you working on today?" "Oh currently 19, but they've
asked me onto 2 more just yesterday, what about you?".
ROSCO
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
> Q1. Are the NDA keeping our most prolific quiet?
I don't think so. Everything that is covered under my NDA is the sort of stuff
that the community just doesn't know about. And a lot of stuff we are made
aware of shortly before a community announcement. The only threads I can't
really be apart of are the "Wouldn't it be great if..." and I wouldn't
participate in those anyway.
> Q2. Is this hindering or benefiting our communication as a community?
I don't think it has any affect on communication. Altho, in a way it helps, as
people have better access to official LEGO information. A random member of CC
can contact me or Ben, rather than rooting out Steve Witt's info, to get
information.
> Q3. a) Is the help/advice/feedback those under an NDA are providing to Lego
> really being taken in account, or it just be considerd dandling carrot by the
> company? (2)
> b) If so (based on Q3a), is this a reasonable price to pay to have so many
> of our high profile members unable to discuss things openly?
I think they are being take into account, although, honestly it has uneven
effect. Some advice is sought for while and used, while some advice isn't
sought for and it seems TLG doesn't know what to do with it.
I think the big project for the Ambassadors is for TLG to realize their
usefulness. Ambassadors can be more than just product feedback, and I think
people within TLG are realizing that. Another part is that different people
within TLG have different ideas about Ambassadors - some are more interested in
working with us than others.
> Q4. Are members spending many of their community hours behind the scenes that
> they don't have time as much free time to dedicate to the public forums that
> they once had?
That might be the case. There is a lot of Ambassador email to go through on a
daily basis. However, at the same point, being an Ambassador sometimes
motivates me to do more for my community than I would have had I not been as
involved.
> Q5. If the individual departments within TLC alone can not corelate information
> with each other in a timely manner, are they capable of doing so with the
> various fan/company groups they are spearheading?
I don't know. But since this question is a "is this possible?", I think yes.
Part of it is that different parts of TLG don't need to communicate as much as
some of those parts need to communicate with the AFOLs. For example, the SW
marketing team has more to do with FBTB than they do with, lets say, Park
Management or SAH. Internal community problems might not be the best way to
judge external communication.
In other words, my best friend (outside the family) knew that I was going to get
married before I got around to calling my mom (inside the family)!
> Personally, I don't really know. I really want to believe that the fans having
> some input must make some improvements, but I wonder if the price we are paying
> is outweighing what is gained. I guess since no one can clearly let us know
> what is being gained, its difficult to judge. I have the feeling that other
> members here might have opinions and much better insight on this than I do.
Can you give me an idea of what you think the cost is? From my point of view, I
don't see much different in the community as a result of Ambassadors and NDAs
than before. Especially as NDAs have been going on a far bit longer than
Ambassadors.
> For example,
> was Batman a result of fan involvement? Was that cute little one by one smooth
> slope?? Are the changes to the Factory? Etc.
No, no, yes. I think. Altho the Factory changes were a bit obvious, so hearing
what AFOLs had to say, they basically were like "duh!"
As regards Batman. We found out about Batman about a month or so before a few
of us were picked to go to Enfield. At Enfield we saw the Batman line
(including sets that haven't come out yet), and gave them our feedback on what
we thought, liked, didn't like, etc. They also polled our heads about ideas for
future Batman sets. I dunno what I can say about that particularly, but they
did listen intently and even took notes. But what are ideas that will be used,
and what are ideas that they'd come up with anyways? That's the hard part -
seperating what can be seen to have obvious Ambassador input, even if they did
ask!
-Lenny
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
For example,
> was Batman a result of fan involvement?
I can pretty much say this is a definate "no." I knew about this line since
about last April, and I think very few people knew about it. They were very
paranoid about the news of this getting out and I know they patrolled the
internet for "leaks" which never really happened (and ready to crack MY head, I
was told, if it did). A couple people told me that this was a licence that they
had been after for years and didn't get in previous attemts, so I think it was
more the success of the Star Wars line over fan input that lead to thins line.
-Greg
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
| |
After an interesting chat about “Fan involvement with TLC” the other night, a
few concerns/questions came up, and I can’t seem to shake them.
|
Hi Janey,
Having been one of the non-NDA crowd up until quite recently, I can certainly
understand your concerns. I had concerns about how the Ambassador program
worked, and what the Ambassadors did, so I applied, and was fortunate enough to
be selected.
Although I am not yet on any of the ‘secret projects’ which are underway, I know
about them (or at least, I know about some of them). But I am still feeling my
way as an Ambassador. I think it would be easy to get tied up in the ‘under NDA
and working too hard doing a lot of work behind the scenes’ mindset.
I can’t speak for all the Ambassadors, but since I was selected as Ambassador, I
have been working on building links between Australian Lego Fans (who have been
a fairly neglected lot to date) and the company at both an international and
local level. Already, I have secured some support for Brickvention 06, and have
been talking to Lego Australia and their PR company. Later today, I will be
interviewed by SMH online as part of the PR effort for Lego Australia’s Creator
show.
I am making building these links a priority, and investing emotional capital in
doing my best to make sure they work. Obviously, this work also takes time. And
that time has to come from somewhere. My post count on LUGNET was already way
down on what it used to be, but looking back, I see my posting level on JLUG
have also fallen.
I feel though, that I was appointed as Ambassador because of what I’ve done in
the community and for the hobby as a whole, so I must represent and promote the
community and the hobby as much as I can.
I think that fans can be a real asset to the company, and that company
interaction can be a real asset to the community.
Your concerns are certainly valid. I will endeavour to keep my overt community
participation at a level which allows me to properly support and promote the
community, both to the company, and to the community at large. In fact, if I
recall correctly, one of the first instructions from Lego to the Ambassadors was
‘keep doing what you’ve been doing’ - ie participating in the community.
Kind regards
Richie Dulin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
...a lot of good stuff worth considering
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Thomas Main wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
...a lot of good stuff worth considering
|
That is a very interesting little image you have there. Why did you make it?
What is the message you are trying to send?
On a broader note, I have heard a lot about mistrust between Ambassadors and
non-Ambassadors, but I don’t exactly understand why. Within the Castle and
Space communities there is some envy about who has an NDA and who doesn’t, but I
don’t see any mistrust at all. On the opposite point of view, I feel that there
is a lot of trust that we will accurately communicate the communities concerns
to TLG and fight to get what the community wants.
So, the question is, if you mistrust the Ambassadors or the Ambassador
community: Why? What is it that you think Ambassadors aren’t doing or aren’t
doing enough of? What would you like to see done differently?
-Lenny
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Thomas Main wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
...a lot of good stuff worth considering
|
That is a very interesting little image you have there. Why did you make it?
What is the message you are trying to send?
|
In my role as art critic I would say that the message here is that the NDA makes
the Ambassadors silent leading to upset in the community. Either that or it’s a
subtle statement on the war in Iraq and the state of African democracy.
| |
On a broader note, I have heard a lot about mistrust between Ambassadors and
non-Ambassadors, but I don’t exactly understand why. Within the Castle and
Space communities there is some envy about who has an NDA and who doesn’t,
but I don’t see any mistrust at all. On the opposite point of view, I feel
that there is a lot of trust that we will accurately communicate the
communities concerns to TLG and fight to get what the community wants.
|
You could probably summarise this in a new variant of the Ambassadors logo.
Perhaps with a cackling Ambassador and two green (with envy) figs. That would be
cool.
| |
So, the question is, if you mistrust the Ambassadors or the Ambassador
community: Why? What is it that you think Ambassadors aren’t doing or aren’t
doing enough of? What would you like to see done differently?
-Lenny
|
I would like to see some more humour from the Ambassadors. Humour is a good
thing and I like it very much. I’d like to see the logo replaced by an
Ambassador with a big smile and two laughing figs.
Tim
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Timothy Gould wrote:
| |
I would like to see some more humour from the Ambassadors. Humour is a good
thing and I like it very much. I’d like to see the logo replaced by an
Ambassador with a big smile and two laughing figs.
|
I dont have good enough drawring skillz to do anything as technical as what he
made.
But I am funny all the time Tim! And you better know it!!
WORD!
As for the other Ambassadors... well, some of them can’t be funny because well,
they just can’t. Its a genetic malformity that has crippled them from youth.
And by “other Ambassadors”, I basically mean Mark Sandlin and Dan Rubin. Those
guys just try so hard to be funny and just never pull it off. Its sad really.
More deserving of your pity than your paranoid envious mistrust.
-Lenny
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Timothy Gould wrote:
| |
I would like to see some more humour from the Ambassadors. Humour is a good
thing and I like it very much. I’d like to see the logo replaced by an
Ambassador with a big smile and two laughing figs.
|
I dont have good enough drawring skillz to do anything as technical as what
he made.
But I am funny all the time Tim! And you better know it!!
WORD!
As for the other Ambassadors... well, some of them can’t be funny because
well, they just can’t. Its a genetic malformity that has crippled them from
youth. And by “other Ambassadors”, I basically mean Mark Sandlin and Dan
Rubin. Those guys just try so hard to be funny and just never pull it off.
Its sad really. More deserving of your pity than your paranoid envious
mistrust.
-Lenny
|
Its true. One thing that I’ve noticed just in general community trends is that
people are active in the communities they love. Some are Train, some are
classic-space,classic-castle, classic-clickits!!! Ok, I made up the last one,
but you get the picture. The community is strengthening all of its outer
muscles, which will inevitably strengthen the whole.
Its difficult though, and I know that you all understand, to keep a secret once
it has been given. hell, I’m terrified to walk out of my apartment because what
I might say at a drive through. “yes, please supersize it (I’m American, I
can’t help it) and how about a little CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” So I know
where some of these guys are comin from if they’re nervous to talk about what
they’ve learned.
Now, does this mean everyone is doing the right things all the time...um,
probably not...I shouldn’t have just eaten this whole pizza (guuuhhhh). So its
good to question from time to time whether things are working, but there are
lots of things happening all over the place in the community. Is what’s
worrying everyone that its not all in the same place?
As far as whether or not the advice of these NDA ridden groups is being taken
seriously and will be turned into adult friendly products? Yes, I see it
happenning all the time now, but it was a slow start. Not every idea the AFOLs
have given will be used, but its suprising how much affect we all have and if
the goal was to improve many of the LEGO products, then well done my friends.
There’s a lot less suck coming out of the company right now and I think we adult
fans to thank for it.
Steve Witt
LEGO Community Relations Coordinator
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Thomas Main wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
...a lot of good stuff worth considering
|
That is a very interesting little image you have there. Why did you make it?
What is the message you are trying to send?
On a broader note, I have heard a lot about mistrust between Ambassadors and
non-Ambassadors, but I don’t exactly understand why. Within the Castle and
Space communities there is some envy about who has an NDA and who doesn’t,
but I don’t see any mistrust at all. On the opposite point of view, I feel
that there is a lot of trust that we will accurately communicate the
communities concerns to TLG and fight to get what the community wants.
So, the question is, if you mistrust the Ambassadors or the Ambassador
community: Why? What is it that you think Ambassadors aren’t doing or aren’t
doing enough of? What would you like to see done differently?
-Lenny
|
I have to agree with Lenny on this one, I don’t see a reason why there would be
any mistrust?
Is it the thought that we may be saying one thing and know that to not be the
truth? Although we do have some extra information that we cannot pubicly
release, we would not intentionally tell the communities something that we know
not to be true. That being said, if things change and we have said something in
the past that is no longer valid, we will endeavour to make that information
public as soon as we are allowed.
Just recently with the 9 volt train issues, we saw that people were asking
important questions on the different forums, and with in a few days, we were
able to get a statement from Lego explaning what the ongoing plan was for 9 volt
trains. Now it might not be what people wanted to hear, but it is the truth.
This brings up an intresting point, because of ambassadors (and others under
NDA) we are able to get the communities concerns and questions address by LEGO
and (hopefully, if the question does not violate any NDA’s) answered as quickly
as possible.
Everyone under NDA (well maybe with Exception to Steve Hassenplug (1) ;) ) ,
share the concerns of the general AFOL community, we want metal tracks as much
at the rest of you, and we are voicing our opinions within our NDA related
groups and publicly, talking, and trying to see what we can do to allow metal
track to continue to be produced.
Personally, I understand that LEGO is a business, and as a business, must do
what is best to ensure the company stays profitable.
At the same time I think that creating a play train line that is slated for a
younger age range, to continue a childs interest from an earlier age (Thomas,
and the DUPLO trains). Is a great idea! I see Thomas, and the DUPLO trains in
the retail stores, and they seem to sell well. I think a play train line, with
more track then any 9 volt set ever carried and battery powered train, sold at a
lower cost with MORE track and brick per dollar will sell well! These sales of
Play Train and Duplo trains, will hopefully make retailers look at what other
train related items LEGO has. if the 9 volt line is no longer there to support a
young persons growing intrest in trains, then TLC will be losing out in the long
run.
As a Hobby Train enthusiast, The loss of 9 volt trains will cause us problems,
if not now then in the future. when Motors stop working, but until then, I will
keep on using 9 volt trains, and at the same time see if it is possible to
integrate the hobby train line into our layouts. Perhaps by using the RCX and
rechargable battries, of by some magical future technology like nuclear
battaries or something :)
In the long run I am considering the worst, but trying to work with in the
community and with the ambassadors. to try to keep one of my favorite aspects of
the LEGO hobby a reality..
Jeff (who has been known to go off on tangets) VW
(1) Sorry Steve, it has been a while since I poked fun at you... :)
(2) Wow I think this is one of the longest posts I have written... :|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Jeff Van Winden wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Thomas Main wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
...a lot of good stuff worth considering
|
|
|
(snip)
| |
| |
That is a very interesting little image you have there. Why did you make
it? What is the message you are trying to send?
On a broader note, I have heard a lot about mistrust between Ambassadors and
non-Ambassadors, but I don’t exactly understand why. Within the Castle and
Space communities there is some envy about who has an NDA and who doesn’t,
but I don’t see any mistrust at all. On the opposite point of view, I feel
that there is a lot of trust that we will accurately communicate the
communities concerns to TLG and fight to get what the community wants.
So, the question is, if you mistrust the Ambassadors or the Ambassador
community: Why? What is it that you think Ambassadors aren’t doing or
aren’t doing enough of? What would you like to see done differently?
-Lenny
|
I have to agree with Lenny on this one, I don’t see a reason why there would
be any mistrust?
|
HI Jeff, are you coming to the rtl dinner on Thurs?
I didn’t see ANY reference to mistrust, or lies in this entire thread. Those
seem to be words Lenny used.
Neither Janey or anyone else ever accused any NDA’er of lying.
To paraphrase what has been said, is that the spirit of the original intent of
the “ambassador” program seems to be ... “lacking.”
Tell me Jeff, since I first congratulated you for becoming an ambassador, how
many times have you “spread the word?” I can’t recall any time. On the other
hand , I ~HAVE~ seen you post a few questionnaires asking us questions and
looking for feedback.
I say that is best summarized by Toms logo. Mainly silence from the
ambassadors, and unhappy AFOLS who want the “scoop”
(snip)
| |
Jeff (who has been known to go off on tangets) VW
|
Chris
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Chris Magno wrote:
| |
I didn’t see ANY reference to mistrust, or lies in this entire thread. Those
seem to be words Lenny used.
|
“and a certain amount of distrust both between and within them.” From
here
| |
Neither Janey or anyone else ever accused any NDA’er of lying.
|
Then where does the lack of trust come from? Or to use your words, what is the
problem?
| |
To paraphrase what has been said, is that the spirit of the original intent
of the “ambassador” program seems to be ... “lacking.”
|
What was the original intent, and how is it lacking?
| |
I ~HAVE~ seen you post a few questionnaires asking us questions
and looking for feedback.
|
From the Ambassador point of view: we got an email from Steve saying SAH would
like some community feedback, and asked if we could post those questions on
various newsgroups. Which is what we did. Why were we asked that? My guess is
they wanted help coming up with ideas for new sets, sets that would appeal to
AFOLs. I don’t see why that is a problem.
How was the information used? Honestly, I have no idea.
What is it you were expecting? What do you want to be different?
-Lenny
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Chris Magno wrote:
| |
I didn’t see ANY reference to mistrust, or lies in this entire thread.
Those seem to be words Lenny used.
|
“and a certain amount of distrust both between and within them.” From
here
|
Well then, I sit corrected on the “mis/dis” trust phrase. If you want to argue
semantics, then might I suggest moving this to .debate.
In the mean time, both YOU and Jeff, came out guns blazing, trying your
darnedest to make sure you set “us” all straight. To quote some dead guy...
“me thinks thou doth protest too much”
| |
| |
Neither Janey or anyone else ever accused any NDA’er of lying.
|
Then where does the lack of trust come from? Or to use your words, what is
the problem?
|
have no problem, than again I’m am a pessimistic jaded bitter man(1)
|
With the sentence you are quoting me on, I think you proved to me and yourself
that maybe you need to ask others about the “lack of trust.“(2)
| |
| |
To paraphrase what has been said, is that the spirit of the original intent
of the “ambassador” program seems to be ... “lacking.”
|
What was the original intent, and how is it lacking?
|
I can not speak to the “official” intent of the program. I can only speak for
myself here, but, I feel the lack of communication from ambassadors and others
under NDA is what is perceived to be at issue.
The lacking comes from the (perceived) ONE WAY communications. Whats not to
get. When has an ambassador said or revealed ANYTHING that Jake, or now Steve
can’t say? They both type good english. (3)
So what are the ambassadors for? Are the ambassador merely just puppets sent
out to gather needed data? I dont know.
So, going back, I was originally under the impression that the ambassador
program was a way for TLC to release “tidbits”, and “gosh-gee” cool news. What
I think has happened is that overly nervous lawyers have shackled the AFOLS’ and
those that are not in fear of the lawyers, are in fear of their peers.(4)
So that leaves Jeff et all with being allowed to ask survey questions.
| |
| |
I ~HAVE~ seen you post a few questionnaires asking us questions
and looking for feedback.
|
From the Ambassador point of view: we got an email from Steve saying SAH
would like some community feedback, and asked if we could post those
questions on various newsgroups. Which is what we did. Why were we asked
that? My guess is they wanted help coming up with ideas for new sets, sets
that would appeal to AFOLs. I don’t see why that is a problem.
|
That is not the problem, but Lenny, communication is a TWO WAY thing. And I dont
mean you ask a questions and I give you an answers.
| |
How was the information used? Honestly, I have no idea.
What is it you were expecting? What do you want to be different?
-Lenny
|
Again, I expect nothing. I am jaded. What I THINK others want to be different
is to be able to HEAR more tidbits, and “gosh gee” stuff.
Let me try a different approach.
Lenny, how come I am not seeing weekly or even MONTHLY top SPOTLIGHT’s posts
from ambassadors on the main page?
How come I am NOT seeing the follow up replys along the lines of
(WARNING - made up to help express a point)
“DID ya see what jeff said? Bley is being removed from the line up”
or
“WOW Kelly, GREAT NEWS, its nice to see that lego is THINKING about putting
metal back on the tracks”
or how about
“wow Richie, who knew that lego was contemplating a new THEME park in Sydney
thanks for this tidbit”
(end WARNING)
That would be how I foresaw how the ambassador program worked.
Chris
1. Not only is the glass half empty, I want to know who STOLE my water!
2. http://news.lugnet.com/general/?n=52437
3. unlike me
4. There is a good chance that if you broke the NDA you would NOT get sued till
the cows come home, BUT, you can sure as heck bet that TLC would think TWICE
about including AFOLS again, AND thats a peer pressure even MORE threatening
that lawyers.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Chris Magno wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Jeff Van Winden wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Thomas Main wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
...a lot of good stuff worth considering
|
|
|
(snip)
| |
| |
That is a very interesting little image you have there. Why did you make
it? What is the message you are trying to send?
On a broader note, I have heard a lot about mistrust between Ambassadors
and non-Ambassadors, but I don’t exactly understand why. Within the Castle
and Space communities there is some envy about who has an NDA and who
doesn’t, but I don’t see any mistrust at all. On the opposite point of
view, I feel that there is a lot of trust that we will accurately
communicate the communities concerns to TLG and fight to get what the
community wants.
So, the question is, if you mistrust the Ambassadors or the Ambassador
community: Why? What is it that you think Ambassadors aren’t doing or
aren’t doing enough of? What would you like to see done differently?
-Lenny
|
I have to agree with Lenny on this one, I don’t see a reason why there would
be any mistrust?
|
HI Jeff, are you coming to the rtl dinner on Thurs?
|
I do plan on being there, and at that time I can explain why I have not been at
any rtl Events for the past month :(
| |
I didn’t see ANY reference to mistrust, or lies in this entire thread. Those
seem to be words Lenny used.
|
| |
Neither Janey or anyone else ever accused any NDA’er of lying.
To paraphrase what has been said, is that the spirit of the original intent
of the “ambassador” program seems to be ... “lacking.”
Tell me Jeff, since I first congratulated you for becoming an ambassador, how
many times have you “spread the word?” I can’t recall any time. On the
other hand , I ~HAVE~ seen you post a few questionnaires asking us questions
and looking for feedback.
|
In all honesty Chris, and everyone else reading this, until just recently, we
were not given information about new ‘golly gee’ kind of things to make public.
We are only now being let into some of the up and comming things, that are in
the pipeline. We hope for more of this type of infor to come in the future, and
we are very eager to be the ones that get to be able to release that info to you
all.
Last cycle was sort of slow being in the end of the year, where product
development happens at a slower pace. I can remember a few times during the last
cycle that we were told about something new, on the same day as it was release
publicly, or leaked via a dealear catalog. Or we found the Leak and had to ask
if it was real or not.
I have to cut this short as I need to head home, but we can talk some more
tomorrow.
| |
I say that is best summarized by Toms logo. Mainly silence from the
ambassadors, and unhappy AFOLS who want the “scoop”
(snip)
| |
Jeff (who has been known to go off on tangets) VW
|
Chris
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
On a broader note, I have heard a lot about mistrust between Ambassadors and
non-Ambassadors, but I don’t exactly understand why. Within the Castle and
Space communities there is some envy about who has an NDA and who doesn’t,
but I don’t see any mistrust at all. On the opposite point of view, I feel
that there is a lot of trust that we will accurately communicate the
communities concerns to TLG and fight to get what the community wants.
So, the question is, if you mistrust the Ambassadors or the Ambassador
community: Why? What is it that you think Ambassadors aren’t doing or aren’t
doing enough of? What would you like to see done differently?
-Lenny
|
I can only speak for myself, but I think lack of communication has alot to do
with it. Of course, this is by no means the fault of the Ambassadors themselves.
Simply put, those of you who fall under the umbrella of a NDA are privy to a
level of interaction with LEGO that the more casual fan is not. An unfortunate
reality is that such a relationship is bound to stir up some fans, causing
feelings of envy or jealousy to surface.
Moreover, this lack of communication between Ambasssadors and non-Ambassadors
leads to a certain level of suspicion among the latter group. Being in the dark,
the non-Ambassador may question whether the Ambassadors are truly representing
them, and the AFOL community as a whole. Unfortunately for Ambassadors, there
doesn’t seem to be a way to confirm that they are representing more than their
own personal interests when interacting with LEGO. I’ve seen various polls
conducted by Ambassadors on theme-specific sites like Classic-Castle, but rarely
do we know what becomes of such a survey. The problem of course is, that there
is no way to confirm or deny that LEGO is making much use of this information.
Being in the dark can get quite frustrating when LEGO is implementing a major
change. I think the crux of the problem is information is only moving in one
direction. This is something that only LEGO can change, and considering how
gaurded they are (as are all large companies), this relationship can be quite
taxing on fans.
Finally, alot of non-Ambassadors are simply jealous. There is no other way to
describe it. They wish they had your position. Still, from what I’ve seen, most
of the Ambassadors are very involved with the AFOL community, and would make far
better representatives than most of us non-Ambassadors (there are exceptions of
course). I think alost every fan would give a lung or kidney for the chance to
actively meet with representatives at LEGO to give them their suggestions. The
fact that many Ambassadors have served multiple terms (and will likely continue
to do so) certainly doesn’t help things with the more bitter non-Ambassador.
The reality is, LEGO would be hard-pressed to find better people to serve as
Ambassadors, and people who are returning for a second, third or even fourth
time have undoubtedly proven themselves to be worthwhile to both the community
and to the Ambassador program. I would love to see more interaction between the
Ambassador and non-Ambassador community, but this of course, is in LEGO’s
corner.
Later.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Hello!
In lugnet.general, Joel Midgley wrote:
| |
I can only speak for myself, but I think lack of communication has alot to do
with it. ...
Moreover, this lack of communication between Ambasssadors and non-Ambassadors
leads to a certain level of suspicion among the latter group.
|
Actually I don’t see that problem at all. Why would there be a lack of
communication? Sure, there are some AFOLs who get per ambassadorship some
insight in some activities within the LEGO group. Whenever they (the
ambassadors) are allowed to do so they tell the AFOL community about these
activities. That’s communication.
Most things, so we hear, the ambassadors get insight into are not publicised.
These things wouldn’t be publicised anyway, if there were ambassadors or if
there were none. So what’s the difference?
Maybe we, the non-NDA-ed AFOL community, simply expect to much of this whole
ambassador programme. It was never meant to make the LEGO company transparent to
us. Yet that seems to be the expectation of some AFOLs.
I’m sure the LEGO company gains some profit out of this ambassador programme,
otherwise they wouldn’t have installed it in the first place, and otherwise they
wouldn’t have renewed it a second and third time. Whether or not this programme
will yield some real benefit for the AFOLs/for all LEGO customers only time will
tell. So far we sometimes get some information through an ambassador that we
might have gotten through any LEGO representative (Brad, Jake, Steve, Jan) in
case there weren’t ambassadors.
| |
Being in the
dark, the non-Ambassador may question whether the Ambassadors are truly
representing them, and the AFOL community as a whole. Unfortunately for
Ambassadors, there doesn’t seem to be a way to confirm that they are
representing more than their own personal interests when interacting with
LEGO.
|
Ambassadors are not elected representatives of the AFOL community in the
parliamentary-democratic sense of the word. Everybody was free to apply but TLC
chose the candidates. That means the AFOL community has no right to demand
anything from both TLC and the ambassadors. However, as far as I am able to
judge it the ambassadors try for being representatives of the AFOL community,
though without denying themselves. And I think they do it right.
| |
Finally, alot of non-Ambassadors are simply jealous. There is no other way to
describe it. They wish they had your position. ...
I think alost every fan would give a lung or kidney
for the chance to actively meet with representatives at LEGO to give them
their suggestions.
|
You are probably right concerning the jealousy. This jealousy would likely get
lessened when the jealous ones were to read, understand and answer 1500
ambassador mails per round :-)
I’m not sure about the leg-and-kidney-thing, though. Even LEGO-representatives
are human. They even are mortal. They don’t live somewhere outa space, not on
Olympus Mons. They ain’t even famous in the yellow-press-world outside the AFOL
community. Everybody can always reach one of the LEGO representatives through
e-mail, letter or forum post, can even meet them in person on Brickfests,
1000steine-Lands or other meetings.
| |
The reality is, LEGO would be hard-pressed to find better people to serve as
Ambassadors, and people who are returning for a second, third or even fourth
time have undoubtedly proven themselves to be worthwhile to both the
community and to the Ambassador program.
|
Yep.
Bye
Jojo
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Johannes Koehler wrote:
| |
Actually I don’t see that problem at all. Why would there be a lack of
communication? Sure, there are some AFOLs who get per ambassadorship some
insight in some activities within the LEGO group. Whenever they (the
ambassadors) are allowed to do so they tell the AFOL community about these
activities. That’s communication.
|
I agree. I think the difficulty is that many fans are simply expecting too much
from the ambassador program. And again, I’ll restate my earlier point; I
believe that any mistrust is fueled largely by jealousy. Simply put; some (I
won’t say many as that is probably an exaggeration) fans feel slighted simply
because they are not privy to the same information that our ambassadors are.
| |
Most things, so we hear, the ambassadors get insight into are not publicised.
These things wouldn’t be publicised anyway, if there were ambassadors or if
there were none. So what’s the difference?
|
Again, I don’t dispute this. Frankly, I prefer getting first-hand information
from enthusiasts, rather than LEGO employees. The difference is that some
people expect more than our ambassadors are able to give. They (incorrectly)
treat non-disclosure as an act of betrayal.
| |
Maybe we, the non-NDA-ed AFOL community, simply expect to much of this whole
ambassador programme. It was never meant to make the LEGO company transparent
to us. Yet that seems to be the expectation of some AFOLs.
|
I think this is what I was trying to get at in my previous post. Many fans
expected the Ambassador program to create open two-way communication between
LEGO and its fans. Of course, such an expectation is silly.
| |
Ambassadors are not elected representatives of the AFOL community in the
parliamentary-democratic sense of the word. Everybody was free to apply but
TLC chose the candidates. That means the AFOL community has no right to
demand anything from both TLC and the ambassadors. However, as far as I am
able to judge it the ambassadors try for being representatives of the AFOL
community, though without denying themselves. And I think they do it right.
|
A fair point.
I don’t think that the ambassadors owe us (the avg. joe fan) anything. Nor do I
think I am confusing our LEGO ambassadors with political ambassadors. As far as
I understand things, the ambassador program was simply a way of sampling some of
the more-active members of the AFOL community for their thoughts and opinions.
They do not represent us, nor do they owe us anything. I do, however, believe
that many fans have come to see our ambassadors as something different. That
these fans have elevated their expectations of the program, and consequently
mistrust the LEGO ambassadors.
My earlier post was not to suggest that any mis/distrust of the LEGO ambassadors
was justified. For me at least, giving reasons is not the same as justifying
them. In this particular situation, any misgivings about our ambassadors (as a
group) do not seem particularly justifiable. That doesn’t mean that one can’t
attempt to rationalize them
| |
I’m not sure about the leg-and-kidney-thing, though.
|
An embellishment to be sure (of course, you only need one).
Later.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Thomas Main wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
...a lot of good stuff worth considering
|
That is an interesting image. I have seen similar else where. I feel it best
describes how the populace feels towards the silence from the ambassadors.
Either we think alike, or some one is copying the other.
http://www.jlug.net/phpBB2/albumpage.php?picid=59
Chris
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Chris Magno wrote:
> http://www.jlug.net/phpBB2/album_page.php?pic_id=59
The link works better in plaintext mode as _ is an FTX format char...
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Chris Magno wrote:
>
> > http://www.jlug.net/phpBB2/album_page.php?pic_id=59
>
> The link works better in plaintext mode as _ is an FTX format char...
I tried for 7 minutes to "fix it."
I dont normally use the web interface. I gave up figuring smart people can cut
and paste.
Chris
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Chris Magno wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Thomas Main wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
...a lot of good stuff worth considering
|
That is an interesting image. I have seen similar else where. I feel it best
describes how the populace feels towards the silence from the ambassadors.
Either we think alike, or some one is copying the other.
http://www.jlug.net/phpBB2/albumpage.php?picid=59
Chris
|
Chris,
Hahaha - looks like it wasn’t such an original idea after all. When did you
make that image? But it does reinforce the idea that there is a problem if at
least two people came up with that idea.
--
Thomas Main
thomasmain@charter.net
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Thomas Main wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Chris Magno wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Thomas Main wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
...a lot of good stuff worth considering
|
That is an interesting image. I have seen similar else where. I feel it
best describes how the populace feels towards the silence from the
ambassadors.
Either we think alike, or some one is copying the other.
http://www.jlug.net/phpBB2/albumpage.php?picid=59
Chris
|
Chris,
Hahaha - looks like it wasn’t such an original idea after all. When did you
make that image? But it does reinforce the idea that there is a problem if
at least two people came up with that idea.
--
Thomas Main
thomasmain@charter.net
|
Thomas,
I did mine in a fit of boredom(1) on April 5th. Took me all of 5 minutes with MS
Paint.
Chris
1. Calum was on the phone going on and on about his favorite email client...
PINE. he even did a cute pic.(2)
2. that image of the mail from “me” is a FAKE. Someone ELSE has too much time on
his hands.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
First, I am currently under 2 NDA's (Ambassador and MDP).
>
> Q1. Are the NDA keeping our most prolific quiet? (Aside from the obvious, I
> understand they can't discuss certain things, but are there people that would
> have been posting otherwise that are now remaining silent, in fear that even
> guessing or hypothesising might end up being factual, and then be some violation
> of their agreement?)
Personally, I had become much less prolific here on LUGNET long before signing a
single NDA. Most of my efforts and attention had turned to my local club where
I am a member of the EC and Webmaster. I never saw my involvement with my club
suffer at all due to my NDA. Of course it helps that my club is very good about
not asking me awkward questions.
As a whole I would say that those under NDA tend to err on the side of caution
which means we don't talk about as much as we could/should. Being on my 3rd
cycle as an Ambassador I have become much more comfortable with what I can and
cannot share. The NDA doesn't mean I can't participate or talk about the things
I like to do. It also doesn't mean I can't comment on things that I know are
public knowledge. It is also nice to know you can be critical of LEGO and they
won't kick you out of the program you are involved in. Occasionally I think
that gets in the way for folks, especially those new to being under NDA.
>
> Q2. Is this hindering or benefiting our communication as a community?
Hard to say, it probably depends on the NDA. For me the MDP NDA isn't hindering
anything, it is a relatively short NDA with a clear end date. That makes it
easy to go about your business knowing you will be able to talk freely very
soon.
On the other hand the Ambassador NDA can be much more restrictive. Some things
that the Ambassadors have learned under NDA won't be public for years, that is
tough. Other things we learn are not as much of a problem. I will say that
from first hand experiance the Ambassadors have been given information at times
and we have ask (some might say fought) for the right to announce it to the
community. Usually we don't get that priviledge but as you have all seen, in
the last few weeks we have been successful in fighting for our right to give
certain information to the community (even if it might be bad news).
Overall I think this is good and will get better as LEGO grows more confident in
the programs under NDA. I also think it is good to have an Ambassador group
with a core of multi-cycle members mixed with first timers. This keeps new
blood in the group but keeps folks that are confident in there role in place.
>
> Q3. a) Is the help/advice/feedback those under an NDA are providing to Lego
> really being taken in account, or it just be considerd dandling carrot by the
> company? (2)
Great question. I guess I have to say both but lean more towards the "Dangling
Carrot" with things starting to move towards our feedback being considered
valuable. It is a process and LEGO is a big company where a new process can
take time to mature and take hold.
> b) If so (based on Q3a), is this a reasonable price to pay to have so many
> of our high profile members unable to discuss things openly?
To an extent yes, only because I have seen some pretty cool stuff which I can't
talk about... With that said, I think those of us under NDA need to make an
effort to keep our public profile high. I personally have taken an interest in
doing what I can to save 9v trains. This could only be done because LEGO
authorized us to make something public. My efforts in this regard don't break
any NDA and helps put me back on the public AFOL map, at least temporarily.
Now will we get information like we did on 9v trains often? I doubt it, there
just are that many products so in tune with the Adult community. If they ever
canceled Mindstorms it would cause a similar effect but little else I can think
of would. That is because you don't need Star Wars sets to make Star Wars
models but you need an RCX/NXT to build a robot and you need 9v Track and Motors
to be able to do large scale model railroading.
Imagine if no AFOL's were under NDA and LEGO Announced tomorrow that 9v trains
were discontinued. It would be the color issue all over again just maybe even
more damaging to the adult community. Now we have a chance, even if it is a
slim one, to effect a decision within LEGO. That would not have happened if
AFOL's didn't have inside information.
>
> Q4. Are members spending many of their community hours behind the scenes that
> they don't have time as much free time to dedicate to the public forums that
> they once had?
Unfortunately yes. This is somewhat my fault, I bit off a little more than I
could chew. Fortunatly the NXT program will have the first part of its NDA
lifted soon so that will start freeing me a little from my responsibilities.
This whole 9v trains deal was also unexpected and is now taking a considerable
amount of my time. I just hope I am around in a year to see if it bears any
fruit at all.
Honestly, my biggest problem isn't interacting with the community. It is
actually building with LEGO and coming up with new MOC's and ideas. Eventually
this will have to change or I will pull myself out of my NDA groups. I still
need to build to enjoy the hobby.
>
> Q5. If the individual departments within TLC alone can not corelate information
> with each other in a timely manner, are they capable of doing so with the
> various fan/company groups they are spearheading?
My personal hope is that fan groups may actually help internal LEGO
communications over time. One thing I have definitely learned is that the
information you get from one group in LEGO does not always corralate with what
another group says. In those instances fans can actually help get everyone on
the same page.
>
> Curious,
>
> Janey "Red Brick"
Great questions, I hope my answers were helpful.
-Eric
LEGO Ambassador
http://save.9vtrains.com/
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
Let me start with the disclaimer that I am on the NXT MDP, though I'm probably the least active member due to personal commitments right now. I barely know how to spell NXT.
> Q1. Are the NDA keeping our most prolific quiet? (Aside from the obvious, I
> understand they can't discuss certain things, but are there people that would
> have been posting otherwise that are now remaining silent, in fear that even
> guessing or hypothesising might end up being factual, and then be some violation
> of their agreement?)
> Q2. Is this hindering or benefiting our communication as a community?
No, I don't think so. Most of the NDA are future product based, eg, NXT,
Batman, etc. If you think that a major part of community relations and
communications is speculation on new products, then I guess, yes, it probably
does. That said, hundreds of people continued to post along about the future of
Mindstorms while a few were part of the MUP group.
I personally don't think speculation on new products is that big a part of the
community. Certainly it is fun to guess what the new Harry Potter line will
look like, but there's plenty of that going on regardless of NDAs. But new
ideas, MOCs, and events are not under NDA and continue to flourish, if not here,
elsewhere. That's what I call community activities, and that's nothing to do
with future products.
Example: There are a few rtlToronto people with NXTs. (Not enough, but a few)
That doesn't stop an event like rtl20, or planning for rtl21, or any of the
usual banter on the NG about whatever issue of the week. Events and chat are
what I call community. Speculation on what NXT's capability is or what colour
the battery plugs are on it are not.
> Q3. a) Is the help/advice/feedback those under an NDA are providing to Lego
> really being taken in account, or it just be considerd dandling carrot by the
> company? (2)
> b) If so (based on Q3a), is this a reasonable price to pay to have so many
> of our high profile members unable to discuss things openly?
That's a really thorny question. I think overall, we're seeing formally traditional marketing oriented companies learn how to "use" enthusiasts and "social networking" to build grassroots campaigns. Companies are learning or have learned to coopt fan buzz.
Is it an insidious plague ruining the viability of the community? I don't know
about that. I know that many positive and productive things are happening with
Mindstorms because of users being asked to be part of the MDP. And I think the
set of people chosen (Hassenplug, Barnes, Hempel et al) were the the right
people to contribute. I'm glad they were the ones, though of course, everyone
would have liked to have the golden ticket in his chocolate wrapper, including
myself.
I believe Jake McKee's idea of AFOL involvement as a two way street or
partnership was a good perspective. It certainly is the right attitude. I hope
that the Lego relationship is:
a) You give us help in testing/promoting/whatevering a new product
eg Mindstorms NXT
b) We give you an opportunity to help contribute
eg Factory beta testers making comments
c) We give you an opportunity to be part of something you can't be a part of on
your own.
eg Millyard Project etc.
Now is that feedback actually being listened to? I think there's a tendancy for
enthusiasts of any kind to look at a large organization like a buddy or another
person. If I want to go for Italian versus sushi next Sunday, I can easily ask
my friend if he'd switch our plans around. That's easy. Or in my own group, if
no one can make it for Friday dinner, we can move it to Thursday, that's cool.
But changing a huge organization around with business priorities is another
story. First, AFOLs can't even agree what they want. Do they want new track
geometry? Do they want DCC? Everyone speaks if they're the expert. Second,
they can't seem to believe their views are usually not inline with the business
goals of the company--kids don't need DCC for example, nor do they need
prototypical flanged wheels. Third, they feel their impact is a lot larger than
they really are. And finally, a lot of what they suggest may not actually be
feasible, given cost/time/market constraints.
So, it's not news to me that some suggestions can't be implemented. And in many
situations, your feedback may not be acted upon. I can live with that.
As for b) I don't think anything's really lost. It's not like we're preventing
the next Nobel prize winning thesis on relativity or cold fusion from being
published.
> Q4. Are members spending many of their community hours behind the scenes that
> they don't have time as much free time to dedicate to the public forums that
> they once had?
Now THAT one, yes, I would agree, is the case. But I think, at least in the NXT
case, it will be much for the better.
> Q5. If the individual departments within TLC alone can not corelate information
> with each other in a timely manner, are they capable of doing so with the
> various fan/company groups they are spearheading?
Does it matter? As long as AFOLs can be paired off with the corresponding group
that needs help, I think it shouldn't really be a problem.
> some input must make some improvements, but I wonder if the price we are paying
> is outweighing what is gained. I guess since no one can clearly let us know
> what is being gained, its difficult to judge. I have the feeling that other
> members here might have opinions and much better insight on this than I do.
Well, I ask you: Tell me what's the price that's being paid?
> 2. Is this a case of "Be careful what you wish for?" or are great strides
> being made behind the scenes between fan and company? (Aside from the brief
> mentions of the original NXT group saying their feedback affected the actual
> outcome of the product) details from direct relationship between fan and company
> and results of this alliance have been scarce. This is not to say it hasn't
> happened, it must have, I just have yet to see any announcement saying anything
> to the contrary, (although quite possible that I have missed it). For example,
> was Batman a result of fan involvement? Was that cute little one by one smooth
> slope?? Are the changes to the Factory? Etc.
Does it matter? If great strides aren't being made, is there a giant cosmic
balance that means we're losing somewhere else? If those contributions are
happening, but aren't being acknowledged, does it mean they're not important or
helpful?
Calum
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Calum Tsang wrote:
>
> Let me start with the disclaimer that I am on the NXT MDP, though I'm probably the least active member due to personal commitments right now.
Well, I'm sorry, but I have to ask - if you have so many other commitments, why
did you apply? I'm sure there's many others who would have loved to participate,
and have more time to contribute.
Note: Certain members of the community will probably berate me for concentrating
on just one point in your post, saying it confirms a flaw in my personality or
something. So be it.
ROSCO
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Ross Crawford wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Calum Tsang wrote:
> >
> > Let me start with the disclaimer that I am on the NXT MDP, though I'm probably
> > the least active member due to personal commitments right now.
>
> Well, I'm sorry, but I have to ask - if you have so many other commitments, why
> did you apply? I'm sure there's many others who would have loved to participate,
> and have more time to contribute.
>
> Note: Certain members of the community will probably berate me for concentrating
> on just one point in your post, saying it confirms a flaw in my personality or
> something. So be it.
Berate you? Not me, at any rate, although I can't speak for anyone else. But I
DO find it interesting how you hone in on just one point so often.
I do think in this case it's an interesting point, though. To widen it out a
bit, it certainly does show that LEGO do not always evaluate candidates for
things quite the way we expect they would.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Ross Crawford wrote:
> > In lugnet.general, Calum Tsang wrote:
> > >
> > > Let me start with the disclaimer that I am on the NXT MDP, though I'm probably
> > > the least active member due to personal commitments right now.
> >
> > Well, I'm sorry, but I have to ask - if you have so many other commitments, why
> > did you apply? I'm sure there's many others who would have loved to participate,
> > and have more time to contribute.
>
> I do think in this case it's an interesting point, though. To widen it out a
> bit, it certainly does show that LEGO do not always evaluate candidates for
> things quite the way we expect they would.
Well unfortunately there was no "What are your current personal commitments"
question on the application, so LEGO had no way to evaluate that information.
Surely it makes more sense, and is much easier for the applicant to evaluate it,
and make the decision to apply (or not) accordingly?
ROSCO
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Ross Crawford wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > I do think in this case it's an interesting point, though. To widen it out a
> > bit, it certainly does show that LEGO do not always evaluate candidates for
> > things quite the way we expect they would.
> Well unfortunately there was no "What are your current personal commitments"
> question on the application, so LEGO had no way to evaluate that information.
> Surely it makes more sense, and is much easier for the applicant to evaluate it,
> and make the decision to apply (or not) accordingly?
I could easily be misremembering the application, it was a while ago, but I do
seem to recall some questions about the time that would be spent doing various
things.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Ross Crawford wrote:
> > In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> > > I do think in this case it's an interesting point, though. To widen it out a
> > > bit, it certainly does show that LEGO do not always evaluate candidates for
> > > things quite the way we expect they would.
>
> > Well unfortunately there was no "What are your current personal commitments"
> > question on the application, so LEGO had no way to evaluate that information.
> > Surely it makes more sense, and is much easier for the applicant to evaluate it,
> > and make the decision to apply (or not) accordingly?
>
> I could easily be misremembering the application, it was a while ago, but I do
> seem to recall some questions about the time that would be spent doing various
> things.
Hmmm, I don't. But hey, memory can play tricks sometimes.
ROSCO
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
I’m under some NDA action and it hasn’t affected my posting/building at all.
The time commitments were always very minimal. My devotion is to the building--
the relationship with TLG was secondary.
While I was an ambassador I was a bit more mindful not to make a fool of myself
and the other ambassadors. I didn’t want a stupid post on my part to reflect
poorly on them. But otherwise, I posted as usual.
These NDAs are not really that big a deal. I was honored to be a part, and I
was very curious about how decisions were made. But ultimately, I still build
and buy the same I used to. I just made some extra friends on the way.
I don’t know whom you may be refering to in particular regarding prolific
posters going silent. But if I’m one, I have a few reasons for lurking now:
1. I’m busy at work and can’t keep up with threads
2. The bashing and negative attitudes have become tedious
3. I’ve been on lugnet for about 6 or 7 years. It seems like the same
conversations keep getting recycled.
Felix
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
> After an interesting chat about "Fan involvement with TLC" the other night, a
> few concerns/questions came up, and I can't seem to shake them.
>
> Historically a large portion of AfoL/ALE's have wanted a closer relationship
> with TLC and over the last few years we have been witness to that happening.
> Now more than ever, it seems as if the company is involving the fan base. I
> don't have the luxury of knowing how many ppl are under a NDA (non-disclosure
> agreement) currently, but the numbers must be high. (1)
>
> Off the top of my head, the original test project for the factory, and the
> subsequent phase, and projects such as this train committee, the cycling
> ambassadors, certified artists, and the nxt, clan just to mention a few.
>
>
>
> So we know, a lot of our "high profile" community members from various themes
> and interests (from trains to robotics and sculpture through micro) and are more
> than likely also those members that often posted, having very in depth or
> insightful posts about products and development etc are now under NDAs.
>
>
>
> I have 5 questions I'm looking for ppl (both those under NDA or and those that
> are not) to consider responding to.
>
> Q1. Are the NDA keeping our most prolific quiet? (Aside from the obvious, I
> understand they can't discuss certain things, but are there people that would
> have been posting otherwise that are now remaining silent, in fear that even
> guessing or hypothesising might end up being factual, and then be some violation
> of their agreement?)
>
> Q2. Is this hindering or benefiting our communication as a community?
>
> Q3. a) Is the help/advice/feedback those under an NDA are providing to Lego
> really being taken in account, or it just be considerd dandling carrot by the
> company? (2)
> b) If so (based on Q3a), is this a reasonable price to pay to have so many
> of our high profile members unable to discuss things openly?
>
> Q4. Are members spending many of their community hours behind the scenes that
> they don't have time as much free time to dedicate to the public forums that
> they once had?
>
> Q5. If the individual departments within TLC alone can not corelate information
> with each other in a timely manner, are they capable of doing so with the
> various fan/company groups they are spearheading?
>
>
>
> Personally, I don't really know. I really want to believe that the fans having
> some input must make some improvements, but I wonder if the price we are paying
> is outweighing what is gained. I guess since no one can clearly let us know
> what is being gained, its difficult to judge. I have the feeling that other
> members here might have opinions and much better insight on this than I do.
>
> Curious,
>
> Janey "Red Brick"
>
>
>
> 1. After 5 minutes (exhaustive) research I came up with a verifiable list of 81
> fans names that currently are under an NDA. Since I could only find out about
> half of the nxt group, that number should be at least 131, so I assume the
> actual number is significantly.
>
> 2. Is this a case of "Be careful what you wish for?" or are great strides
> being made behind the scenes between fan and company? (Aside from the brief
> mentions of the original NXT group saying their feedback affected the actual
> outcome of the product) details from direct relationship between fan and company
> and results of this alliance have been scarce. This is not to say it hasn't
> happened, it must have, I just have yet to see any announcement saying anything
> to the contrary, (although quite possible that I have missed it). For example,
> was Batman a result of fan involvement? Was that cute little one by one smooth
> slope?? Are the changes to the Factory? Etc.
I think this is an interesting and valid set of questions.
I think the answer to Q1 has two pieces. Yes, the NDA acts to silence people
from making observations and suggestions because those comments may conflict
with known facts. And yes, it keeps people who might otherwise post more often
quiet because their available time is now shared between things they can and
cannot talk about. So, in essence, a lot of their Lego time goes under wraps.
Question 2 brings up the sad fact that I find myself responding to posts but
seldom originating new ones. Again, because my time is spent building in secret.
My answer to 3a is I think Lego are taking AFOLs seriously. They won't do
everything we ask for or suggest, but where decisions may be on the fence, I
feel confident that our input helps. So, per 3b, if my wants and desires do, in
fact, represent what other AFOLs in my chosen theme of greatest interest go,
then even if I am temporarily out of the loop as far as being able to publically
discuss what I have been doing goes, I believe it will have been well worth it.
Per Q4, I have spent close to 100% of my available time working on stuff which
is covered by the NDA I am working under, out of choice I may add. The temporary
lapse in public communication that has resulted will eventually be replaced by
an equivalent glut of information I hope.
I don't fully understand the sentiment behind question 5. My personal take on
what little I have gleaned about the inner workings of the design and
development groups within the company would lead me to believe there may be more
communication between groups and more awareness of the value of consulting with
the customer/fan base than some people may imagine. Simply recalling Jake's
descriptions of spreading the AFOL involvement message should aid that
underestanding.
As to the overall "look and feel" of TLG's current policy of accepting our
input, I think the positives far outweigh the negatives. My hope that there are
some of us involved in finding a way to keep AFOLs being invited to show their
stuff at train shows and others being involved in discussing set design from the
perspective of increasing potential AFOL interest in it is great!
JB
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
> After an interesting chat about "Fan involvement with TLC" the other night, a
> few concerns/questions came up, and I can't seem to shake them.
Hi,
this is a very interesting discussion! Concerning the Ambassadors I have heard
that they had 1500 emails in only one season. If you have to read (and partly
answer) 1500 e-mails, this will keep you busy enough to stay out of other
forums. I do not think the NDA is causing any silence.
I am right now in a group which is under NDA and so far I have not won the
impression I learned anything which has to stay secret.
My trust in the LEGO company has not grown due to the cowork. I am more than
ever convinced the 9V train line will die quite soon. LEGO is just doing a much
better PR work this time compared with the blay desaster. They tell us they work
on this and it depends on us to buy enough stuff to keep 9V alive. So wenn they
shut the system down we have to feel guilty instead of blaming TLC...
So with this foreword written down, lets go into the questions:
> Q1. Are the NDA keeping our most prolific quiet? (Aside from the obvious, I
> understand they can't discuss certain things, but are there people that would
> have been posting otherwise that are now remaining silent, in fear that even
> guessing or hypothesising might end up being factual, and then be some violation
> of their agreement?)
Do not think so.
> Q2. Is this hindering or benefiting our communication as a community?
It costs time. This time is lacking in other fields of the hobby.
> Q3. a) Is the help/advice/feedback those under an NDA are providing to Lego
> really being taken in account, or it just be considerd dandling carrot by the
> company? (2)
> b) If so (based on Q3a), is this a reasonable price to pay to have so many
> of our high profile members unable to discuss things openly?
Can not give any answer to this. I just do not know.
> Q4. Are members spending many of their community hours behind the scenes that
> they don't have time as much free time to dedicate to the public forums that
> they once had?
I think this is true.
> Q5. If the individual departments within TLC alone can not corelate information
> with each other in a timely manner, are they capable of doing so with the
> various fan/company groups they are spearheading?
They are telling all the time they are working on this very topic. So far they
have no idea how to handle the input, but they try to formalize it.
I think the reduced level of old noice makers may deal with lots of topics as
given in other answers.
- Discussions seem to repeat after a while again and again.
- Lugnet does not feel like the friendliest place on earth any more (at least
not at all times).
- I feel a general loss of interest in LEGO: blay and the end of 9V (which I
take for guaranteed) have shown me how unimportant we are. Lots of broken
promises from LEGO employees over the past 3 years have proven, that LEGO is not
differing from other "bad" companies like Mercedes (now having quality trouble
as LEGO); Microsoft, GE or Siemens. Old values do not count anything when you
can sell them for a few pennies.
Sorry for sounding that negative, but this is my personal view, which is based
on too many bad experiences. I know there are some great people at LEGO, but
usually they are not in positions to decide. Or they have to behave rational
under marketing aspects and this includes to tell lies to their customers. I do
not blame them for this. It is their job. I understand it, but do not expect me
to love the LEGO company. I do not.
LEG GODT,
Ben
(Fan of LEGO System and SYSTEM colours 1964...2003 - actually not a fan of TLC
and the company policy.)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Janey,
I think the big piece of information you and other may be looking for is what
the next stage of the Ambassadors will be. Well, I might be skirting a little
NDA here, but actually TLG has been training us as an elite task force to search
out those who criticize TLG and deal with them once and for all. The realistic
guns from the Batman sets are actually mini-versions of our real life LEGO
sniper guns.
Soon, the world will know us not as Ambassadors, but as LEGO Assassinators!!
-Lenny
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Holy cow that was funny enough for me to delurk just long enough to say so.
:D
-w
In lugnet.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
Janey,
I think the big piece of information you and other may be looking for is what
the next stage of the Ambassadors will be. Well, I might be skirting a
little NDA here, but actually TLG has been training us as an elite task force
to search out those who criticize TLG and deal with them once and for all.
The realistic guns from the Batman sets are actually mini-versions of our
real life LEGO sniper guns.
Soon, the world will know us not as Ambassadors, but as LEGO
Assassinators!!
-Lenny
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
an elite task force to search out those who criticize TLG and
deal with them once and for all.
|
I’m sorry, but you are just posing - some of us were actually in on the
development of, um, “enforcement” tools, so we know the real story... surprised?
Well, were did *you* think the Fleebnork originated?
--
Brian Davis
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
Soon, the world will know us not as Ambassadors, but as LEGO
Assassinators!!
-Lenny
|
You’re wicked! :-)
JOHN
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
... actually TLG has been training us as an elite task force...
|
AHA! I knew you guys were elitists.
| |
-Lenny
|
LOL
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
Janey, • snip
Soon, the world will know us not as Ambassadors, but as LEGO
Assassinators!!
-Lenny
|
See, now ~THAT~ is funny.
good job.
spotlighted
Chris
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Leonard Hoffman wrote:
| |
Soon, the world will know us not as Ambassadors, but as LEGO
Assassinators!!
-Lenny
|
I knew something weird was going on..... Lego Ambassador Dan Rubin pistol
whipped a 38-year old man who asked “what’s happening with Duplo?” at Sunday’s
WAMALUG meeting. The man wasn’t technically “assassinated”, but Dan has never
let formal titles stop him from being a complete ass to everyone in the world.
-nk
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
> I don't have the luxury of knowing how many ppl are under a NDA
> (non-disclosure agreement) currently, but the numbers must be high.
I don't know either, but I have reason to believe (*not* due to what LEGO has
told me under an NDA) it could well be more than 400.
> Q1. Are the NDA keeping our most prolific quiet?
The NDA's are taking up more time for some of us - I only have so many hours
in a day, that's true. But being involved in an NDA has also had another effect,
that of encouraging me to dedicate still more time overall to LEGO, and
diversify. I usually only post to ask a technical question, or present my view
on something, and sometimes, if I really think it deserving, I post something
original from me. OK, that and tease people. Under the MUP NDA, I couldn't
reveal what I knew *unless* it was already in the public domain... but since I
knew what to look for, I could do focused web searches so that when something I
wanted to tell the community surfaced, I could - by pointing out the source.
Another thing it got me to do was to look beyond LUGNET - I now post much more
frequently on places like LEGOfan, for instance.
> Q2. Is this hindering or benefiting our communication as a community?
Judging from the question that get asked, I think it is certainly spawning
more community interaction - most for the better, but not all.
> Q3. a) Is the help/advice/feedback those under an NDA are providing
> to Lego really being taken in account, or it just be considerd dandling
> carrot by the company?
I'm *not* in the original MUP group, but the first expanssion, and it seems
that LEGO was willing to listen and act on our advice even that late (& later!)
in the design and release of the product.
> is this a reasonable price to pay to have so many
> of our high profile members unable to discuss things
> openly?
That I don't know. Personally I think it's "worth it", in that I'm not even
paying a price - I'm playing and working at the same time. For the community as
a whole, I *suspect* it's good, but I think the proof is in what shakes out in
the next 5-10 years.
> Q4. Are members spending many of their community hours behind
> the scenes that they don't have time as much free time to
> dedicate to the public forums that they once had?
To an extent yes - I feel pressed for time. But also much of what I would
post on hasn't really come up too much lately.
> I guess since no one can clearly let us know what is being
> gained, its difficult to judge.
There's a key point here (which is what got me to post, actually). What you
really want to do is compare a future in which all the AFoL/LEGO interactions
are occuring (like now), to a hypothetical future where this did not occur. I
don't know any way to do that realisticly. There's no way to run a controled
experiment as to if LEGO or the AFoL community would have been better or worse
under various conditions. The best you can do is try to draw logical conclusions
from reasonable assumptions.
--
Brian Davis
(who is now off to build a robotic machine gun, based on the discoveries of
another AFoL)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
As a follow up... First of all I would like to thank everyone that took time to
respond to my questions, it helped bring a new understanding and brought up some
points I hadn’t considered.
I do want to address two issues that were brought up here, some what, but mostly
in email and msn.. That basically was “What was your motivation in posting? What
do I think the price is?”
The truth is, lots of ppl I know have been discussing these sorts of questions
at lug meetings, chats, other forums and msn messages yet I had not seen many in
depth conversation about it here. That seriously got me to wondering where the
community on a whole was standing on these various questions I keep hearing.
They were not just my questions, I only brought the question here, mainly
because there are some people that can’t or are not comfortable posting here. I
personally don’t have strong stance on any of it, just intense curiosity.
So ~MY~ motivation was to open a conversation in the most respectful manner
possible before more misconceptions happened and resulted in someone with an ax
to grind brings it to Lugnet and starts yet another flame war. That may be
difficult for those that suffer from the lack of empathy gene to understand.
If the programs behind the scenes make a difference, then by all means, it has
my support (as if my support would matter one way or not) and if in the long run
they don’t, no harm no foul, unless of course it IS keeping our prolific off
the boards which was what I meant by the “price” we pay... (and some admitted it
was true, others felt it wasn’t, and some were actively trying to change that).
I feel I need to make one thing clear... I never once intended or thought this
would be that earth shattering of a post, it was just some simple questions that
brought out some simple and complex answers.
In particular, to Calum, no, I don’t think that any of my
questions/answers/resulting conclusions are remotely world changing nor would it
be “preventing the next Nobel prize winning thesis” but... I also don’t recall
LUGNET changing to a “World Event Symposium”. Therefore ~ In my opinion,
company and fan relations are a valid part of discussion here.
Janey “Red Brick”
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
snip
| |
I do want to address two issues that were brought up here, some what, but
mostly in email and msn.. That basically was “What was your motivation in
posting?
|
Well my motivation was that I am under NDA and thought that perspective needed
to be heard (even if my NDA prevents me from saying very much specific).
| |
What do I think the price is?”
|
Ultimately the price will be improved relations with the LEGO company. Although
that may be at the expense of a little conversation in forums like LUGNET. I do
think as folks get more comfortable with their NDAs things will open up. In
particular the Ambassador NDA does not prevent us from participating in the
community or from discussing every topic we have discussed privately (although
most are off-limits). We are encouraged to keep our participation high. On the
other hand some NDA’s like the MUP and others require stricter secrecy in the
project they are involved in. So someone in the MUP is understandably going to
be less visible in discussions involving the RCX because they are working on an
NXT most of the time.
| |
I feel I need to make one thing clear... I never once intended or thought
this would be that earth shattering of a post, it was just some simple
questions that brought out some simple and complex answers.
|
And Thanks for asking, it was a very healthy discussion.
Eric Kingsley
LEGO Ambassador
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Eric Kingsley wrote:
> In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
> <snip>
> > I do want to address two issues that were brought up here, some what, but
> > mostly in email and msn.. That basically was "What was your motivation in
> > posting?
>
> Well my motivation was that I am under NDA and thought that perspective
> needed to be heard (even if my NDA prevents me from saying very much
> specific).
>
> > What do I think the price is?"
>
> Ultimately the price will be improved relations with the LEGO company.
I don't think we can say that improved relations *is* the price we pay for the
NDA and the Ambassador programs. I think it's more accurate to say that it's
the *hope* and *desire* of most people, from AFOL's to the people at TLC, that
the ambassador program and the NDA will improve relations between TLC and the
fans of the brick.
I say this because I have read (most of) the posts here, (and a huge thanks to
Janey for starting the conversation for I didn't know how to start what I wanted
to talk about), and an issue that I think needs to be addressed--
I'm going to bring up an example that we're all familiar with--insider trading.
That's when 'priviledged people' have information about a company that the rest
of the world doesn't, and they act on it--either buying or dumping stock as the
information warrants, therefore gaining financially as a direct result of their
'inside information'.
How this can relate to ambassadors, mups or anyone else under NDA's with TLC?
Well, this is a hypothetical that I thought of when I first heard about the
ambassador program, and was not influenced by speaking with any particualr
ambassador--
Suppose TLC had an active ambassador program when the colour change was
discussed.
Suppose TLC, in their communications with the ambassadors, stated "we are
planning to change the current greys to these new blue-greys. Don't tell the
AFOL's of the world yet, but we want to get your feedback on the colour change"
So the ambassadors, under the NDA, cannot tell the AFOL community, but they
themselves know that the colour change will happen. These ambassadors, being
pretty big fans of the brick (like the rest of us), have a pretty good
inlcination of how the rest of us will take that bit of news.
Now this is all hypothetical--remember that. One or two ambassadors get the
idea (and history has shown that this isn't unheard of or outside the realm of
possibility) that maybe if they purchase a stack of what will become 'old grey'
bricks at the going price at the time, they just might make a profit when the
rest of the community is clamouring for that 'old grey' when the rest of us find
out that TLC is no longer producing 'old grey'.
I don't wish to disparage the ambassador program or any other program that TLC
is working on with AFOL's--rather, I want to encourage and support these
programs.
But Enron and Martha Stewart (and hte subsequent Sarbanes Oxley legislation)
have shown that there are legitimate concerns with regard to 'inside
information'.
As a concrete example, we know now that the ambassadors and other people under
NDA's with TLC knew about the 'perhaps' discontinuation of the 9 volt train
line. I genuinely hope that none of the ambassadors acted on that information
by purchasing 9 volt train items in bulk quantities *with the intention* of
selling those items at a higher price after.
I fully understand that if ambassador X purchased a a bunch of 9 volt items
before the information went public that ambassador X wouldn't buy out all the
stock that TLC has, and therefore there would be lots left over for 'the rest of
us' when the knowledge became public (unless he or she was exceedingly rich),
but again, what I've been told my entirelife--it doesn't matter what the truth
is, the important thing is how people perceive it.
Unfortunately, as this very thread attests, the ambassador program is under
close scrutiny by the community-at-large. If the ambassadors want the trust of
the community, then trust is earned, not given freely. I'll state for the
record that the ambassador program and the Muppets already have my trust,
because that's the kind of guy I am--I've always been 'you're great until you
prove to me you aren't'. However, as some of you know, my outlook on life isn't
really anyone elses.
<snip>
> >
> > I feel I need to make one thing clear... I never once intended or thought
> > this would be that earth shattering of a post, it was just some simple
> > questions that brought out some simple and complex answers.
>
> And Thanks for asking, it was a very healthy discussion.
I agree, and this is the perfect venue for it. Thanks Janey
>
>
> Eric Kingsley
>
> LEGO Ambassador
Dave K
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Dave,
Great post! There are possibilities for Ambassador "insider trading" in Lego,
that is true. But with the huge volume of parts that are generated by TLG, I
don't have much worry about someone hoarding all the parts. Even with all
hoopla about the retirement of the old gray elements, they were available for
over 2 years after the announcement. I don't see that as a realistic problem.
There is another scenario however, that I see as more of a possibility. Say
you're an Ambassador, and you find out that the Yellow Castle set (#375/#6075)
is going to be reintroduced in the late summer (but under a 5 digit number).
But the NDA prevents you from telling anyone. However, you have 3 MISB Yellow
Castles in your collection. You know that with MISB Yellow Castles going for
around $700 in EBAY, you decide to sell yours so that they don't depreciate
after the announcement. Now we have a problem. And it's of the "insider
trading" type. If I won one of these in EBAY, and I knew the seller was an
Ambassador..... and 4 months later I found out that my $700 purchase was now
only worth about $200.... well you can finish this story.
Yes, I could see the possibility for some abuse. I don't know how likely this
would be, but it is possible.
Gary Istok
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Gerhard R. Istok wrote:
>
> There is another scenario however, that I see as more of a possibility. Say
> you're an Ambassador, and you find out that the Yellow Castle set
> (#375/#6075) is going to be reintroduced in the late summer (but under a
> 5 digit number). But the NDA prevents you from telling anyone. However,
> you have 3 MISB Yellow Castles in your collection. You know that with MISB
> Yellow Castles going for around $700 in EBAY, you decide to sell yours so
> that they don't depreciate after the announcement. Now we have a problem.
> And it's of the "insider trading" type. If I won one of these in EBAY, and
> I knew the seller was an Ambassador..... and 4 months later I found out that
> my $700 purchase was now only worth about $200.... well you can finish this
> story.
>
> Yes, I could see the possibility for some abuse. I don't know how likely
> this would be, but it is possible.
I, for one, would welcome Lego re-releasing the Yellow Castle... I'd like to
have a whole classic knight army, with flip-up visors. :) And I would also
welcome Lego to re-release classic sets in classic colors if possible... I'm
still not adjusting too well to blay..
But I honestly don't see this happening... Eventhough Lego re-released the
Guarded Inn #6067, one in MISB is still bring very good money on BL... and the
re-release #10000 MISB is bringing prices 5x-6x what it originally sold for.
Same goes for the Black Falcon's Fortress #6074/#10039. The sets deprciated in
the short run -- for a few years that the new sets where in production -- but
after that they recovered it's collector value. And we know that Lego won't
keep a set in production for longer than a few years... lately, they don't seem
to be able to keep them in stock longer than a few months...
And for as much as I hate the Star Wars re-release of the Snowspeeder
#7130/#4500, I think the original one will retain its value because of the color
change and the original one was better designed, IMO... I know this isn't the
example you had in mind, but it serves a similar point...
I don't know how much 'insider trading' knowledge actually gains you in the long
run. We suspect that 9V line will be no more after a few years, given the
current trends with the Lego company; even with that kind of knowledge it would
be hard to 'corner the market' so to speak...
--Mike
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Michael Huffman wrote:
| |
I, for one, would welcome Lego re-releasing the Yellow Castle... I’d like to
have a whole classic knight army, with flip-up visors. :) And I would also
welcome Lego to re-release classic sets in classic colors if possible... I’m
still not adjusting too well to blay..
But I honestly don’t see this happening... Eventhough Lego re-released the
Guarded Inn #6067, one in MISB is still bring very good money on BL... and the
re-release #10000 MISB is bringing prices 5x-6x what it originally sold for.
Same goes for the Black Falcon’s Fortress #6074/#10039. The sets deprciated
in the short run -- for a few years that the new sets where in production --
but after that they recovered it’s collector value. And we know that Lego
won’t keep a set in production for longer than a few years... lately, they
don’t seem to be able to keep them in stock longer than a few months...
And for as much as I hate the Star Wars re-release of the Snowspeeder
#7130/#4500, I think the original one will retain its value because of the
color change and the original one was better designed, IMO... I know this
isn’t the example you had in mind, but it serves a similar point...
I don’t know how much ‘insider trading’ knowledge actually gains you in the
long run. We suspect that 9V line will be no more after a few years, given
the current trends with the Lego company; even with that kind of knowledge it
would be hard to ‘corner the market’ so to speak...
--Mike
|
Today an opened 6067 complete with box, insert, and instructions sold for $124
on eBay. Guarded Inn’s have not regained their previous value completely but
“collector quality” mib and misb versions are still worth a lot.
Many people may not be aware that Jan Beyer said no new Castle Legends sets were
being planned. Please check this post on Classic-Castle:
http://www.classic-castle.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7341 Originally I was
skeptical of this information but I have not learned anything to the contrary.
I was disappointed and started a Legends poll on CC as well:
http://www.classic-castle.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7342 The possibility of
Ambassadors abusing Legend knowledge is unlikely if classic sets will no longer
be re-released. Ambassadors are here to serve the needs of fans and LEGO
instead of our own pocketbooks.
Ben Ellermann
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Hi Ben,
I believe the original germ of the idea of ~abuse~ was just a HYPOTHETICAL
example.
NO ONE has claimed that abuse has happened.
In lugnet.general, Benjamin Ellermann wrote:
snip
| |
The possibility of
Ambassadors abusing Legend knowledge is unlikely if classic sets will no
longer be re-released. Ambassadors are here to serve the needs of fans and
LEGO instead of our own pocketbooks.
Ben Ellermann
|
:) <--- notice this
(cough)
(cough)
Swamberg(1)
(cough)
humans are funny creatures.
:)
Chris
1. Didn’t he hold a place of authority on some other fee for bricks web site?
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Chris Magno wrote:
| |
Hi Ben,
I believe the original germ of the idea of ~abuse~ was just a HYPOTHETICAL
example.
NO ONE has claimed that abuse has happened.
In lugnet.general, Benjamin Ellermann wrote:
snip
| |
The possibility of Ambassadors abusing Legend knowledge is unlikely if
classic sets will no longer be re-released. Ambassadors are here to serve
the needs of fans and LEGO instead of our own pocketbooks.
|
snip
|
Chris is right, this is a hypothetical dicussion... but I not naive enough to
believe that every Lego ambassador’s motive is purely altruistic in nature...
Probably a more realistic example is, if the LAs knew that next year, Lego will
release 3 sets, ranging from $5-25, each containing an AT-AT Driver or
Snowtrooper, where the on-average $25/minifig would dramatically drop -- I’m
sure a LA would be tempted to unload all they had, as quickly as they could.
It’s stuff like this that would be hard to track...
If I understand correctly, Lego (with Jake’s help) created the program to help
future product releases appeal to/get input from the AFOL community; with the
aim of selling more product & keeping profits up. The AFOL’s aim is to get a
better quality product, with more value for an AFOL’s money. Meanwhile, the Lego
company is doing everything possible to cut down costs... On one hand, I
applaud the work Lego employees & LAs are doing together, but on the other hand,
I know that every decision that the Lego Group makes will come down to money.
And a sad thing is, LAs could end up spending hours on helping develop a new
product line (or make improvements to a line) and the line could be cancelled,
because Bionicle is making higher profits that year... though, that could be
great news for the LA working with Bionicle division...
It’s all about the pocketbook... it’s all about the perks... and unfortunately
for Lego, it’ll be about how much spending money I have at the time & their
current product lines... If Lego’s new product line don’t improve soon, I’ll be
buying most of my Lego from the after-market sites... and that’s why I expect
great things to come form this Lego Ambassador program... unfortunatly, from
some of the indications I get, we might not see the improvements for a few years
to come.
--Mike.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(sniff)
YEARS!!!!
I was around from the “old days”
(wipes single tear from eye) (1)
I have enudured lots, the growing pains, the mocking, the “others.“(2) The rise
and fall and rise again of nations and empires. After a while, you just give
up. You sit by and watch, never expecting it, the hope of the words
(pause)
gone.
Then one day, out of no where, those words.....
the WORDS that I have D R E A M E D all these years to here....
In lugnet.general, Michael Huffman wrote:
snip
snip
(sniff)
Thank you.
(sniff)
Chris
“...Chris is right.” MH
1. In a mannly way.
2. LOST is a weird but cool show
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Chris Magno wrote:
| |
(sniff)
YEARS!!!!
(wipes single tear from eye) (1)
|
Snipped most of Chris’ melodrama
| |
“...Chris is right.” MH
1. In a mannly way.
|
Rolls eyes Yeah, right, whatever!
He truly is darn near impossible. (1)
Janey “Red Brick”
1. Which of course, is one of the reasons I think he rocks.
But shhhhh, please don’t tell him that, his head is big enough,
and he really doesn’t need any encouragement from anyone.
Hey Chris, look, over here, question for the king.....
(distracting him from my footnote)
Do you plan on enlightening the world with another outstanding
“MOC of Artistic Destruction” this coming May at the “hobby show replacement”???
The art world holds its collective breath of intimidation... errr I mean,
anticipation.
FUT to fun
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Chris Magno wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> I believe the original germ of the idea of ~abuse~ was just a HYPOTHETICAL
> example.
Yes, my original post brought up a hypothetical example with the 9 volt
discussion--the potential of NDA/Ambassador abuse in a situation. And
subsequent posts from others outlining how differnet types of abuse may occur
shows that people have had similar concerns.
With this in mind, one of the points for current and future ambassadors is that
you are given priviledged LEGO related information before the rest of the fans.
People have brought up the idea of trust. If the ambassadors want the trust of
the fans, then the ambassadors should work in a trustworthy fashion.
I'm not saying that they're not. I have yet to see any ambassador act in a
selfish 'insider trading' way with regards to the NDA information they've
received. I'm just bringing up the point that it *can* happen, and I'd like to
bring the idea up so that it *does not* happen.
I love this hobby. I love when people come together and work on this hobby. I
love the idea that TLC is working closer with us than they ever have before. I
wholeheartedly endorse the ambassador programs and other programs that are set
up wehere fans of the brick work in conjunction with TLC. And I would hate to
see animosity, distrust and/or the downfall of these programs due to perceived
or real happenings by a few selfish individuals.
> NO ONE has claimed that abuse has happened.
>
>
> In lugnet.general, Benjamin Ellermann wrote:
>
> snip
>
> > The possibility of
> > Ambassadors abusing Legend knowledge is unlikely if classic sets will no
> > longer be re-released. Ambassadors are here to serve the needs of fans and
> > LEGO instead of our own pocketbooks.
> >
> > Ben Ellermann
>
> :) <--- notice this
>
> (cough)
>
> (cough)
>
> Swamberg(1)
>
> (cough)
>
>
> humans are funny creatures.
>
>
> :)
>
>
> Chris
>
> 1. Didn't he hold a place of authority on some other fee for bricks web site?
Chris has such a far better way of stating it :)
Dave K
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, Eric Kingsley wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
snip
|
Oops Eric, I guess sometimes I am not as clear as I should be... I meant, that
people asked me those questions after my first post in this thread, and I just
wanted to respond publicly, I certainly wasnt questioning the motives of any
other persons reasons for posting.
Sorry for the confusion.
Janey “Red Brick”
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
<snip>
> I do want to address two issues that were brought up here, some what, but
> mostly in email and msn.. That basically was "What was your motivation in
> posting? What do I think the price is?"
I took your motivation as asking legitimate questions regarding a legitimate
issue.
> The truth is, lots of ppl I know have been discussing these sorts of
> questions at lug meetings, chats, other forums and msn messages yet I had not
> seen many in depth conversation about it here. That seriously got me to
> wondering where the community on a whole was standing on these various
> questions I keep hearing. They were not just my questions, I only brought the
> question here, mainly because there are some people that can't or are not
> comfortable posting here. I personally don't have strong stance on any of
> it, just intense curiosity.
<snip
>
> [In particular, to Calum, no, I don't think that any of my
> questions/answers/resulting conclusions are remotely world changing nor would
> it be "preventing the next Nobel prize winning thesis" but... I also don't
> recall LUGNET changing to a "World Event Symposium". Therefore ~ In my
> opinion, company and fan relations are a valid part of discussion here.]
>
>
> Janey "Red Brick"
Is it me or are many people 'going underground' where discussions on LUGNET are
concerned? I mean, I've received a few e-mails lately regarding some of my
posts to various threads--either stating that they agree with what I stated or
more often stating that I should go crawl under a rock somewhere because my
opinion isn't right.
I have no problem going 'off-line' for matters that don't require postings to
LUGNET--personal stuff and the like. But if you feel you have a legitimate
point regarding a post or what someone said, then why aren't you posting it to
LUGNET to begin with? Why take it 'off line'?
One of the ironies of this issue and LUGNET is the idea of 'cross contaminating'
of posts from other newsgroups causing people much chagrin. These very same
people take LUGNET posts to other venues--either other newsgroups or to private
e-mails.
I have no problem with 'cross contamination'. If something exciting on Jlug
happens and someone wants to post here about it (and it relates to some aspect
of LEGO), then by all means, post it here so other AFOL's can enjoy that 'LEGO
Goodness' (tm).
If, however, someone posts something that "you don't appreciate" and you have a
point to make, why wouldn't you post it to the original thread? Is your point
not worthy of debate and discussion? You obviously thought it merited somehting
or you woudln't have e-mailed or taken it somewhere else.
Stating that this isn't directed solely at Calum, but to many of us who want our
opinions known but aren't willing to put them in an 'open discussion group'.
Bottom line--if Janey's post starts a healthy communication about the ambassador
program, and the ambassador program really does relate to all things LEGO, then
the questions shouldn't be 'why did she post these questions to LUGNET in the
first place? What's she trying to prove?' but rather the question should be,
'if the ambassador program has been around for, what, over a year now?, then why
haven't these questions been asked earlier right here on LUGNET?'
Why did it take this long for people to start asking these legitimate questions
regarding issues that affect us all?
Once again I state for the record,
Janey--you go girl!!
Dave K
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> I have no problem going 'off-line' for matters that don't require postings
> to
> LUGNET--personal stuff and the like. But if you feel you have a
> legitimate
> point regarding a post or what someone said, then why aren't you posting
> it to
> LUGNET to begin with? Why take it 'off line'?
Could be in some cases, because they are having trouble posting to LUGNET.
Email posting confirmations are broken and have been for some time, but the
problem is not known to everyone, and nor is the solution (use the web link
in the email to confirm via the web page). Other people have other problems
such as changed email addresses, lost passwords etc, which they have had
difficulty getting addressed. Who knows how many people have been affected
by this.
Kevin
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Craftsman Lego Kits & Custom models: http://www.lionsgatemodels.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
BrickLink Lego parts store: http://www.bricklink.com/store.asp?p=Kevinw1
The Guild of Bricksmiths(TM): http://www.bricksmiths.com
Brickshelf Gallery: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?m=kevinw1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Kevin Wilson wrote:
> > I have no problem going 'off-line' for matters that don't require postings
> > to
> > LUGNET--personal stuff and the like. But if you feel you have a
> > legitimate
> > point regarding a post or what someone said, then why aren't you posting
> > it to
> > LUGNET to begin with? Why take it 'off line'?
>
> Could be in some cases, because they are having trouble posting to LUGNET.
> Email posting confirmations are broken and have been for some time, but the
> problem is not known to everyone, and nor is the solution (use the web link
> in the email to confirm via the web page). Other people have other problems
> such as changed email addresses, lost passwords etc, which they have had
> difficulty getting addressed. Who knows how many people have been affected
> by this.
>
> Kevin
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Craftsman Lego Kits & Custom models: http://www.lionsgatemodels.com
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> BrickLink Lego parts store: http://www.bricklink.com/store.asp?p=Kevinw1
> The Guild of Bricksmiths(TM): http://www.bricksmiths.com
> Brickshelf Gallery: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?m=kevinw1
I agree 100% Kevin about the posting problem. I couldn't post for about 6 weeks
until Clark Stephens recommended to me that route. There needs to be a major
announcement on this problem.
I wonder how many others have this same problem.
Maybe Lugnet isn't dying off.... just a lot of folks can no longer post, and
haven't figured out why!!!
Gary Istok
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, David Koudys wrote:
> In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
snipped
> > [In particular, to Calum, no, I don't think that any of my
> > questions/answers/resulting conclusions are remotely world changing nor would
> > it be "preventing the next Nobel prize winning thesis" but... I also don't
> > recall LUGNET changing to a "World Event Symposium". Therefore ~ In my
> > opinion, company and fan relations are a valid part of discussion here.]
>
> Is it me or are many people 'going underground' where discussions on LUGNET are
> concerned?
YES, yes they are! Which is how all of this sort of got started.
> I mean, I've received a few e-mails lately regarding some of my
> posts to various threads--either stating that they agree with what I stated or
> more often stating that I should go crawl under a rock somewhere because my
> opinion isn't right.
In the past I was only getting intermittent feedback on MOCs I have posted, by
ppl that stated they were lurkers. But now... Like you, I am also getting more
and more non-MOC-post responses/feedback/concerns in my email. At first, I hope
part of it was posting issues, but after careful consideration, I see that is
not the reason.
snipped again.
> Once again I state for the record,
>
> Janey--you go girl!!
LOL, Dave... thanks for the support, maybe we can start some mutual admiration
society.
Janey "Red Brick"
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
[so this is now a discussion about discussions on LUGNET, right? Talk about your
meta-discussions... <grin>]
In lugnet.general, David Koudys wrote:
> I took your motivation as asking legitimate questions regarding
> a legitimate issue.
Agreed.
> > The truth is, lots of ppl I know have been discussing these
> > sorts of questions at lug meetings, chats, other forums...
To be honest, I was completely caught off-guard by this thread. I had *not*
heard this (although to be fair most of my on-line LEGO time is spent on
LUGNET), and was surprised that anyone would be upset or even worried. Clearly I
was just blatently *wrong* on this. I tend to agree with the philosophy of
"innocent until proven otherwise" in my interactions - I see no reason to see
bad intentions until they slap me in the face, as usually I find they're
miscommunications instead [1].
> > I also don't recall LUGNET changing to a "World Event Symposium".
One curious sideline here: in my vast research in the world at large (I asked
one other person, in France) about this thread, it was a surprise "over the
pond" as well. Does anyone know if similar issues have poped up on 1000steine,
for instance? Or is this a principly North American issue?
> the questions shouldn't be 'why did she post these questions to
> LUGNET in the first place? What's she trying to prove?'
Absolutely!
> the question should be, 'if the ambassador program has been around
> for, what, over a year now?, then why haven't these questions been
> asked earlier right here on LUGNET?'
Which I guess is a very good question. But some of us haven't been asking
them because, well... first, they aren't problems that all of us see. And
second, we've been, you know, *playing*. With our toys. I mean, that's why I'm
"here" in the first place. Right now I'm trying to plan stuff for HoB in
Chicago, including building a new loader/unloader and GBC train handling system
[4], new GBC modules [5], a Raptor from BSG [7], and revitalize a tic-tac-toe
playing robot. And I'm working with several others to plan Technic events at
BF06 (we're hoping to have a number of events, as well as NXT demos, etc), and
on top of it playing with the NXT under the NDA [6], etc. Oh, and trying to
build my first Moonbase module(s) which need some work [11].
> Janey--you go girl!!
Seconded!
--
Brian Davis [12]
[1] Or as I usually think of it, "never ascribe to malice what can easily be
explained by ignorance". Another little phrase I think about in this vein is
"Organizations never know anything - *individuals* within organizations do" [3].
[2] This space intentionally left blank.
[3] Another one that always gets me in trouble is "I firmly believe in
discrimination on the grounds of ability". I love watching my students I when I
use the "D" word :). But I digress.
[4] Not because the old one doesn't work, but because, well, it's FUN!
[5] See footnote #4 just above. Including, Janey, one that sorts the Bionicle
balls you posted about so long ago. Those are neat [8].
[6] Among those tasks, getting ready to share what I know when the shackles come
off on 1 May [9].
[7] and folks, I'm lousy at building space [11] - somebody please take on this
task and out-do me. One of the guests of honor at HoB may be a cast member from
BSG, "Chief", and it would be a neat tie-in.
[8] Oh, and making an automated robotic machine gun using them, hopefully with
target tracking as well; I confess the idea came from a German AFoL in a case of
cross-the-pond inspiration.
[9] As well as a whole lot of other things that I can't say *yet* <insert sounds
of teeth on bit here>.
[10] Consider this one of those things.
[11] As my 8-year-old son has told me on several occasions.
[12] Who is unofficially trying to abscond with the title of "most footnotes in
a single LUGNET post"... although to make that official, do I have to cross-post
into rtlToronto?
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.general, C. L. GunningCook wrote:
| |
In particular, to Calum, no, I don’t think that any of my
questions/answers/resulting conclusions are remotely world changing nor would
it be “preventing the next Nobel prize winning thesis” but... I also don’t
recall LUGNET changing to a “World Event Symposium”. Therefore ~ In my
opinion, company and fan relations are a valid part of discussion here.
|
I never criticized your post--I think your question is a good one to be asked.
That said, what I did question was:
| |
b) If so (based on Q3a), is this a reasonable price to pay to have so
many of our high profile members unable to discuss things openly?
|
As for b) I don’t think anything’s really lost. It’s not like we’re preventing
the next Nobel prize winning thesis on relativity or cold fusion from being
published.
I’m answering the question “are the NDA’s preventing positive contributions?”
I’m not asking “are Janey’s questions/answers preventing positive
contributions?”
Your questions are important ones, and it’s good to discuss them. This is
certainly the right place for them. That said, my personal opinion, as
originally posted (and incorrectly understood, I guess) is that no, I don’t
think the NDA’s are really causing that much trouble for the community.
Calum
| | | | | | |
