Subject:
|
Re: Cats and pigeons...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 10 Dec 1999 17:37:33 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
431 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Eric Joslin writes:
> > In lugnet.general, Todd Lehman writes:
> > > In lugnet.general, Eric Joslin writes:
> > Ah, but in effect, isn't that what Huw was doing? He placed the pictures
> > on his website, and said, "Hey, there are some pistures here. Take a
> > look."
>
> He did that, yes. But I think he also posted a list of sets and set numbers,
> didn't he? Those are quite different things, I think.
Having missed the original post, I was unaware that he posted a list of set
names and numbers. I stand duly corrected. See what happens when you cancel
posts? You sow confusion! :D
> > [...]
> > Well, my feeling run more towards "This is the internet- it's designed to
> > disseminte information". Yes, we exist in a time when the dissemination of
> > that information can fall into a huge grey area. And while the Internet is
> > also good for building communities (and LUGNET is by far the best example
> > of that I've seen), to me the main feature of it is the information, and
> > even more specifically, the immediacy of new information. Huw, a person
> > in the UK who I never would otherwise have heard of, got his hands on
> > information I wanted (in this case, specifically, pics of the new
> > Adventurers sets). He put them on the Internet, and now I know what's
> > coming. Would I curl up and die without that info? No. But I do like
> > having it.
>
> Oh, I think we all like having it. :-) As I said on Monday, as a die-hard
> Space fan and LEGO enthusiast, I also (personally) enjoyed very much seeing
> the information -- not in seeing the scans *exist*, mind you -- that made me
> upset -- but in *experiencing* the scans (two very different things, if that
> makes any sense).
No, it mkes perfect sense. I guess my feelings on the subject have been
twisted by having spent so long reading about Star Wars toys, and reading sites
like www.aint-it-cool-news.com and www.darkhorizons.com. Lego never really
received the same attentions- at least, not back in 1993 when I started reading
a.t.l- and I never really thought much about it. And in those other
communities, pulling info out of places you shouldn't be able to get it from is
a coup.
I dunno. I'm certainly not a hacker, but I do beleive in the old "information
by it's very nature wants to be free" line. Like I tried to say before (and I
feel like I wasn't really clear- not because of your reaction, I just feel like
I was being obtuse) I value these kind of up-to-the minute news updates on
various topics. I guess it's just the way I'm wired.
> I might find a $50 bill along the side of the road and be simultaneously
> overjoyed and bummed out.
<snip>
> I don't know if you call that a conscience or what. But it's some kind of
> moral right/wrong thing going on there.
Oh, no, that's definitely a conscience. I'm a little less conscienscious- a
$50 by itself would be buying me dinner, but a wallet full of cash with ID in
it would have me calling the person directly to return it.
> > My intention is only to point out that there have been circumstances very,
> > very similar in the past, and nothing has been said, so I think we *all*
> > came down a little hard on Huw for doing something that was, in the past,
> > pretty much SOP.
>
> That could be... I guess since we all (I should say, those of us who came
> down harshly on him) had (and still have) high respect for Huw and were
> probably more shocked simply because of this. More shocked than we would
> have been, for example, if the same scans had appeared on rebelscumbags.foo
> or jedimindtrick.net or wherever. I don't think anyone usually bothers to
> come down that hard on someone unless they actually have enough respect for
> the person that they would actually expect a difference to be made.
Yes, and that is something you mentioned before- that no one says anything in
those "communities" (I use the term very loosely there) because they'd simply
be laughed at. I think a larger part of the difference, though, is that those
"communities" are not trying to establish a relationship with a single other
company the way Lego fans are. Yes, there are going to be many things from
Hasbro, but there are also going to be things from LucasArts and Decipher and
Galoob and Lego... but in our case, it all comes back to one company. Cheese
them off too much, and they're liable to get very cranky and do some pretty
terrible things (like shut down Brickshelf and LUGNET).
But think about it this way: Let's say Huw had taken those scans (we'll ignore
the set listings he posted on LUGNET for a moment) and set up a GeoCities site
anonymously to host them. he does it up real good so that it looks like it has
nothing to do with himself. Then he comes to LUGNET and says "hey, a friend of
mine noticed this site and pointed it out to me, it has scans from the 1999
retailers catalogue, check it out" and provided a URL. Functionally, he's
doing the same thing (actually, he's being a bit shadier with the anonymous
website bit) and yet somehow I doubt anyone would have said anything about how
it was wrong, we would have all just looked at the sets and commented on them
and moved on.
> > True, not new terms, but new attention to them, certainly.
>
> Definitely.
And certainly not without good reason. Trust me, I will give up any amount of
advanced super-secret bleeding edge knowledge if it means having an open
channel to TLC like Lego Direct. I think it might have been a bit easier to
understand if we had known that was coming, however (and I think we all know it
wasn't a total shocker to the LUGNET admins ;D ).
Speaking of which, if Mr. Justus is reading this, what is TLC's take on the
whole dealer catalogue thing? I'd honestly like to know. I have to admit that
I wasin the camp that felt that no comment from TLC meant the status quo was ok
with them, and now that I know that they REALLY ARE OUT THERE, not just TLC
employees reading on a coffee break, but real live "we're hear to read and
watch and discuss" employees, silence seems and even stronger indicator of the
current status being good. Of course, the *current* status is that the pics
are not up... but a word from LD might help guide us in the future.
eric
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Cats and pigeons...
|
| (...) For the record (or for anyone just tuning in now), I didn't exactly cancel Huw's post. Huw cancelled it on his own volition. At least, he tried to, but his newsreader reported a technical problem, so he asked me to cancel it for him, with (...) (25 years ago, 10-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Cats and pigeons...
|
| (...) Yeah, probably (duh :-). (...) I would think so. (...) He did that, yes. But I think he also posted a list of sets and set numbers, didn't he? Those are quite different things, I think. Anyway, like I've said a thousand times already, my beef (...) (25 years ago, 10-Dec-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
10 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
