 | | Re: 2000 Dealer catalogue Removal Request Backfire?
|
|
(...) (leaping out of bed to follow-up on this) Wait a second. The pictures that went in *were* legitimate consumer catalog photos -- from the sheet catalog/brochure someone got in a copy of a Technic set at a store in the UK, and from one other. (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: 2000 Dealer catalogue Removal Request Backfire?
|
|
(...) I think you would be wasting your time there, Todd. I'm sure that TLC employees would rather spend their time by trying to make more money and by further juniorizing those sets and themes that are still decent rather than spending hours or (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: 2000 Dealer catalogue Removal Request Backfire?
|
|
(...) So that's why no-one responded to my WTB request for 6500 :) -- Jonathan Wilson wilsonj@xoommail.com (URL) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: 2000 Dealer catalogue Removal Request Backfire?
|
|
(...) Maybe what we should do is this: I could print a list of all the sets and set numbers we know about, and send that to someone at LEGO, and ask them to send it back with any set numbers crossed out that they felt weren't appropriate to appear (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: 2000 Dealer catalogue Removal Request Backfire?
|
|
Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:FMEzxF.Au8@lugnet.com... (...) the (...) intended (...) leaks (...) lines (...) I'm with the second one completely, although it is fun to watch the rumours and "spy works" around..:-) Actually (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: 2000 Dealer catalogue Removal Request Backfire?
|
|
(...) Normally, I would agree with that. That's definitely my philosophy too. :) But in this case, let me just say that I have as good a reason to believe what I've heard as any I could ever ask for. I would almost stake my life on this one. I'd (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: 2000 Dealer catalogue Removal Request Backfire?
|
|
(...) Flawed reasoning. NOONE is EVER right ALL the time. Until we hear from TLC themselves, assume anything you want, but don't be SURE of that assumption. Is it a good idea? Depends on how you/TLC think people will take the scans. 1 - angry that (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: 2000 Dealer catalogue Removal Request Backfire?
|
|
(...) Well, let's get something straight here first: 1. TLC's policy about vendor/retailer catalogs is only half of the issue. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that something known as a "retailer catalog" (which consumers almost *never* see) (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: About this 2000 dealers catalog
|
|
(...) Like I said, I don't know for sure yet. The reason they're very different issues is because one's a copyright infringement on top of a potential publicity rights violation and other is simply a potential publicity rights violation, which it (...) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.database, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: About this 2000 dealers catalog
|
|
(...) Excuse me? So it's alright to release a textual description of something that is supposed to be 'confidential', but not OK to post a graphic of it???? If you are trying to protect TLC's rights by keeping this information from the public, then (...) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.database, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: About this 2000 dealers catalog
|
|
(...) That's a tough one...I don't know yet. Certainly not the pictures until the real consumer catalog comes out (or the sets), but the set numbers and names are a different issue. It's probably OK to list those now, but I'll have to check. --Todd (...) (25 years ago, 6-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: Thumbnail images (was: Re: FreeNetnames comes up trumps!)
|
|
(...) straight (...) I did trains, Technic, AZ and Space, but not all in one hit. Grahame did pirates, castle and town. The only large gap in our jount collection (albeit 1000's of miles apart!) is in early Town sets. Huw (25 years ago, 4-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.publish, lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: Thumbnail images (was: Re: FreeNetnames comes up trumps!)
|
|
(...) Oops, actually what I meant was that in a given week, it's actually updated several times per day. Not every day, but at least once a week on average, and usually a few sets at once. Or did you mean the old pre-DB HTML pages? --Todd (25 years ago, 4-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: Thumbnail images (was: Re: FreeNetnames comes up trumps!)
|
|
(...) On the average, it's actually updated several times per day, statistically... but it depends on which area... (...) Did you send pictures for that? They might be sitting in my inbox -- I'm backlogged. Or they might be in one of the incoming (...) (25 years ago, 4-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.publish, lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: Thumbnail images (was: Re: FreeNetnames comes up trumps!)
|
|
(...) Are you going to update the Pause Database in the near future - I know it's time consuming - especially the service packs in the 5xxx range, they have entires but the uploaded pictures of them which I know have been submitted haven't made (...) (25 years ago, 4-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.publish, lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Thumbnail images (was: Re: FreeNetnames comes up trumps!)
|
|
(...) Me neither -- it's just a placeholder...but it's getting kind of stale, as you point out. :-) (...) Wow, I didn't know that thumbnails were such a desired feature! When someone goes through all the trouble of implementing something like that (...) (25 years ago, 3-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.publish, lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: FreeNetnames comes up trumps!
|
|
(...) but (...) Thanks for the offer. I'll let Grahame take you up on that if he wants to - he's the brains behind the data - I concentrate on the interface and techie bits :-) (...) set (...) Thanks, I will almost certainly do that. Huw (25 years ago, 3-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.publish, lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: FreeNetnames comes up trumps!
|
|
(...) Huw and Grahame are both very welcome to become admins of the Lugnet/Pause sets database if they think they'd enjoy that. Four people currently have admin priv's to the DB (me, Suzanne, Joshua Delahunty, and Selçuk Göre) but we can always use (...) (25 years ago, 3-Dec-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.publish, lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: Unified UK Lego community idea
|
|
(...) for specifying a database name as it allows for any number of named databases, just as "n=<num>" allows for any number of numbered news articles, "p=<name>" allows for any number of named pages, and "m=<id>" allows for any number of member (...) (25 years ago, 30-Nov-99, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.org.us, lugnet.admin.database)
|
| |
| | Re: Set additions / updates
|
|
Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:FL6I9K.120@lugnet.com... (...) copyright (...) In that case please change 8858 (2nd one) to 1994, which was its European/rest of world release year. Hopefully then Kevin will change the (...) (25 years ago, 29-Nov-99, to lugnet.admin.database)
|
