Subject:
|
Re: New Building (brown)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 19 Sep 2001 05:23:54 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
JOHNNEAL@USWESTavoidspam.NET
|
Viewed:
|
128 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
>
> > > But why is the post to trains.org? Worse, why aren't at least the FUT
> > > pointing away?
> >
> > As I think I mentioned, these are buildings that will appear on the Twin
> > Cities LEGO Train Club layout. They were built for the purpose of
> > displaying on a train layout; I personally consider the .build and
> > .build.arch crossposts only formalities.
> >
> > Again, I am an LTD and consider all structures to be merely backdrops for
> > displaying trains-- for me, it's all about the trains:-)
>
> That's all well and good but the *post* is primarily about buildings. Review
> the trains.org charter. Review the building and building.arch charters.
lugnet.trains.org? National and local train clubs/organizations for
LEGO® enthusiasts: group formation, founding, planning, announcements,
etc.; inter-group coordination and planning; general ideas, thoughts,
inspirations, insights, experiences, etc.
> If everything that was tangentially related to train organisations was
> posted there it would be fearful clutter. I could argue that I ought to post
> information (or auction listings) I heard about eBay there because some
> train orgs sometimes go there to get parts. That is taking your reasoning to
> a ludicrous extreme but it's a difference in degree, not kind.
Yes, your example is extremely ludicrous. How about this example, which is
more analogous. What if I posted a picture of one of my club's modules? Would
you consider trains.org an appropriate place? What if one of those pics
included buildings? What if one of those pics was *just* of one of those
buildings? *There* is your difference in degree, not kind.
> > (Redirected back to .trains.org:-)
>
> Not for long. I set FUT admin.general since clearly you're having trouble
> understanding the charters of the various groups.
You clearly have too much spare time; go split hairs somewhere else.
> Suz will set me straight
> if I am misunderstanding the various charters, I am sure.
Maybe not-- no one has *that* much spare time;-)
-John
>
>
> ++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: New Building (brown)
|
| (...) If the discussion was around how the module had bearing on the activities of other clubs, yes, otherwise no. (...) See above (...) No. Unless you somehow could tie it into the activities or operations of clubs. It's not enough to just say (...) (23 years ago, 19-Sep-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
2 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
