Subject:
|
Re: Allocation of member #'s
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sat, 3 Jul 1999 08:23:49 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
482 times
|
| |
|
|
On Fri, 2 Jul 1999 02:10:37 GMT, Derek Schin uttered the following
profundities...
> You'd just
> have 7 people fighting over number 1.
>
> Anyway, if your database (or whatever) can support it, I'm all for the set
> number idea. And someone can still be number 1 if they actually want
> it...but who wouldn't rather have 928 (for that matter, two people can have
> the Galaxy Explorer with this system (497 works, too)).
There can be only one....number one. Todd!
--
_____________________________________________________________
richard.dee@nospam.virgin.net remove nospam.(lugnet excepted)
Web Site: http://freespace.virgin.net/richard.dee/lego.html
ICQ 13177071 AOL Instant Messenger: RJD88888
_____________________________________________________________
For the best Lego news, visit: http://www.lugnet.com/news/
Need instructions for a model? http://www.kl.net/scans/
_____________________________________________________________
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Allocation of member #'s
|
| Mike Walsh wrote in message ... (...) I love this idea. And you can combine it with the old-timer privelidge--if multiple people want the same number, it goes to the oldest R(or A)TLer. And if someone pisses you off, you can assign them a Time (...) (25 years ago, 2-Jul-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
112 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
