 | | | | | | |
| |
|
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
| | | | | | |
