Subject:
|
Re: Mega high-res Picture of 10026
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Jun 2002 00:58:15 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
468 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.starwars, James Brown writes:
> In lugnet.starwars, William R. Ward writes:
> > "mfuss903" <mfuss903@aol.com> writes:
> > > In lugnet.starwars, Suzanne D. Rich writes:
> > > > I just got permission to use some pictures of 10026. It includes a very high
> > > > res pic that may not tell you much more of anything, but for a limited time,
> > > > it'll be the pic in the LUGNET Set Database:
> > > >
> > > > http://guide.lugnet.com/set/10026
> > > >
> > > > Later, I'll swap in a normal-res version, because this is like 1MB
> > >
> > > Why are people rating this set already? I thought you are only supposed to
> > > rate sets that you have.
> >
> > Sorry, maybe it's my fault, I was the first to rate it. I thought it
> > was OK to rate any set - the inventory is independent.
>
> I think it is. I've rated a few sets I don't own (but not many). As far as
> I know, there is no standard protocol to rating sets; it's a non-scientific
> system, so people use whatever criteria they want to rate them. Including
> at least one person going through and rating several entire themes "0".
> (More time than I've got on my hands, that's for sure.)
>
> James
....don't forget the atleast 1 50% dampener vote. That way at least every
set in the LUGNET database is at least guaranteed not to get a perfect 100%
rating.
Benjamin Medinets
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Mega high-res Picture of 10026
|
| (...) I think it is. I've rated a few sets I don't own (but not many). As far as I know, there is no standard protocol to rating sets; it's a non-scientific system, so people use whatever criteria they want to rate them. Including at least one (...) (22 years ago, 21-Jun-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
18 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
