 | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —John Hansen
|
| | | (...) Todd, you make it sound as if you think that is evil. "Never forget they're after your money." You are after our money too. You aren't evil. Maybe they want us to play with and enjoy owning Lego bricks. Would you prefer they were a non-profit (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | (...) John, I never implied or insinuated that it was evil or that there was anything wrong with it. It's simply a fact that's worth being aware of. Ah, for the good old days online back in 1994 when life as a fan was so simple, and the community (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Eric Joslin
|
| | | | (...) On the surface, yes, it sounds that way. But I doubt he meant it that way. For whatever reason, some people here need to be constantly reminded that not everyone who works for LEGO is a LEGO fan. They aren't all bringing home bricks every (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) Examples have been given. That you choose to ignore them is your choice but doesn't change what reality actually is. Switching identities is a PITA. Try it. So the net effect of this new rule is that when an answer to a question asked in a (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Eric Joslin
|
| | | | | | (...) Wow, you're on a big reality kick today. Interesting. Anyway, without getting all needlessly philosophical, you wouldn't mind pointing out where those examples are, would you? I can't think of any example that's been given that really (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Tim Courtney
|
| | | | | | | (...) Yes, on both counts. -Tim (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Eric Joslin
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Given what I know of Brad, I find it difficult to picture him going home at night and puzzling over the best way to shape up his MOC. I work for an internet sevice provider. I like the internet. Were I in a customer-facing part of the (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Given what I know of Brad, I don't find it difficult at all. Not in the slightest. Maybe you don't know him that well. Or maybe you're a better judge of people, even with less data to go on, than I am. I don't think Brad really wants his (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Eric Joslin
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Gah. Fine. I'll concede the point on all four of them. It makes no difference to my real point- which is that the (possibly temporary, until a workaround is designed/found) inconvenience of four people is nothing compared to the strengthening (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Gee, I'm glad my inconvennience doesn't matter, nor Larry's, nor anyone else who thinks it's going to be a pain to find the official answers to questions (should they ever come under the new world order).... Perhaps I should switch to (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Eric Joslin
|
| | | | | | | | (...) How are you going to be inconvenienced? If, as I suspect, you are going to say that you are going to be inconvenienced because you use an NNTP reader to read Lugnet posts, and somehow this is going to make it hard... stop right there. I have (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Yes, I can follow it. It is an extra step to do so. One also has to realize that there might be a post in another group (since we aren't following a follow-ups header here - remember, the hypothetical question being asked is being asked in the (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Eric Joslin
|
| | | | | | | | (...) D'oh. You're right. Hmm. Replying to a post causes a "references" header to be inserted. There must be a way to use that to find replies to a post... Of course, this all assumes that you wouldn't just sub to the lugnet.lego.* groups. Since the (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I'm not sure any newsreaders (besides Lugnet's web interface) use that fact, but if the newsreader fully indexes the whole news spool, it could easily present the user with all the replies to a given post. (...) I doubt it. Mostly because I (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Eric Joslin
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Well, if you're going to play around under the hood of a newsreader... :D (...) Hmm. Not to rain on anyone's parade, but it's not as though LD has really been all that forthcoming up to this point, anyway. IMHO. Questions asked in their (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) The Bionicle thread is a perfectly good example. That theme group was in sore need of some official answers, in that group. One of the key askers of questions has already posted to this thread in support of the ability to get answers put where (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Eric Joslin
|
| | | | | | (...) Why was the group in need of official answers *in that group*? If the people in the group were really seeking official answers, no doubt they would have been posting in lugnet.lego.direct- after all, I've seen plenty of posts asking quesitons (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —John Hansen
|
| | | | | | (...) by restricting Lego employees posting using their company email address to the .lego.* groups. It assumes it. It accepts it as factual without any argument whatsoever. Todd writes: "LUGNET discussion groups were founded for fans to talk to (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) Yes! 100%! What John wrote above captures the essence of all of this splendidly. A true voice of reason. I couldn't have said it better myself. John gets it. Thank you, John! (And Frank Filz too, who also gets it and has made many excellent (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —John Hansen
|
| | | | | | (...) LOL! And I didn't mention slime or rampant running. :) John Hansen (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Mark Papenfuss
|
| | | | (...) So, Can we all take a look at the study you have done on all lego employees? I have yet to see any examples of how they clutter, dilute or otherwise do anything negative in any way. Jake is a fan, if I am not mistaken he is a member of Lugnet. (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.general)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | (...) Mark, in the future when you misquote me and completely mischaracterize what I said and meant, I would really appreciate it if you would be courteous enough to provide a link to what I actually said. For example: (URL) I said was that it is "a (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.general)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The Relationship - LEGO and its Fans (was: Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings) —Frank Filz
|
| | | | (...) Ok, I can understand that, but the way I generally parse the sentence is "a lot more buzz, which happens to be genuine" rather than your intended parsing of "buzz which is a lot more genuine". Do you see the subtle difference? If someone seems (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| | | | |
