 | | Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
|
|
(...) I wasn't the least offended. In fact, I thought it was a misspelling of something (which I didn't try to decode) when I read the post. (...) I agree with you. There's no difference between admins cancelling and admins threatening action if the (...) (21 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Internationalization of the part library?
|
|
(...) Apparently my impression wasn't quite correct here. (...) Yes. But that would require the programs to be able to work directly on whatever translation format we decide to use. And it would inflate the parts library updates with approximately (...) (21 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Bye, bye LUGNET
|
|
(...) I guess I'd probably change the phrasing Larry used here-- Posting profanity IS a violation of the TOU, no if's about it. This speaks it better: (...) No two ways about it, you're already in violation. Question is whether or not you want to (...) (21 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: rtlToronto19: Balance of Power and other upcoming events
|
|
(...) One option for the weight restriction is to use something like the weighting currently in use for jockeys... but on a case by case basis. Specifically, put two bots on the beam, then weight the end of the lighter beam until the two start off (...) (21 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Internationalization of the part library?
|
|
(...) Devil's advocate for a sec, were those NAME changes or CATEGORY changes? (...) That was my thinking too, but I have no stats to back it up. (...) To Jacob's point about keeping changes in sync, which I agree is a valid concern and would need (...) (21 years ago, 1-Mar-05, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
