To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.generalOpen lugnet.general in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 General / 52466
Subject: 
Re: Questions about fan involvement with TLC
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.general
Date: 
Tue, 11 Apr 2006 15:47:44 GMT
Viewed: 
2268 times
  
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.


Subject: 
Re: Questions about fan involvement with TLC
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.general
Date: 
Wed, 12 Apr 2006 14:44:28 GMT
Viewed: 
2379 times
  
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


Subject: 
Re: Questions about fan involvement with TLC
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.general
Date: 
Wed, 12 Apr 2006 20:35:29 GMT
Highlighted: 
(details)
Viewed: 
2291 times
  
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.


©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR