Subject:
|
Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.nntp
|
Date:
|
Fri, 16 Mar 2001 20:32:12 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2025 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.nntp, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Call the question.
>
> I think the points have been made. The majority of users who have spoken up
> have said they don't like the idea, but your mind appears to be made up.
Adding another voice, not that it will change things...
> Further discussion isn't likely to elicit new understanding.
>
> Make a post saying "that's it, enough discussion, I'm not changing my mind
> on this, or at least not in the next few days or weeks, and this is the way
> it's gonna be"... sign it in your official capacity as LUGNET administrator
> (or perhaps, post it with a different email address??? one that you've
> badged as being your admin persona) so we know you're not just talking as
> another user of LUGNET, and let's move on.
>
> Time will tell whether this was a Terminally Dumb Idea(tm) that quashes TLC
> involvement just as it was starting to bear fruit, or the thing that
> restores the Sanctity and Purity of the Fan Experience(tm) from the big bad
> marketeers, or (most probably) something in between but shaded one way or
> the other.
Todd,
I think Larry is laying the rhetoric fairly thick here, but if you scrape
it off, I have to agree with him.
I'm still of two minds wether or not it "matters" that LEGO people are
restricted in their posting or not - I can understand the argument that they
are diluting fan-to-fan discussion and I can also understand how the people
who want to read about train stuff in .trains (regardless of who posts it)
and have their Bionicle questions answered in .bionicle are upset by this move.
But what it boils down to (for me) is this:
Because LEGO has not be previously restricted, and because the restriction
wasn't discussed or annouced or hinted at ahead of time, there is a strong
impression (regardless of intent) that LEGO has suddenly become unwelcome
here. As a fan of LEGO's main product, and as a member of Lugnet, I think
that's unfortunate, and will end up causing more harm than good as far as
company-fan relations are concerned. Whether it will cause more harm than
confusion about "official LEGO posts" or than LEGO marketing is obviously up
for debate.
I'm still undecided as to whether I think it's a bad move or a good move
(although I'm leaning towards "unnecessary move", I confess), but right now,
it *looks* like a bad move, inspired by unclear motivation.
If I was working for LEGO, regardless of my AFOLness, I think I would be
fairly offended, if for no other reason than *I wasn't told* that this would
happen.
As it is, just being a plain old Lugnet member, Lugnet is less fun today
than it was yesterday.
Sorry, but I'm calling it like I see it.
James
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
| (...) Given the suddenness of it, I think I might be too and, actually, I wrote Brad Justus a personal apology for not having given him and his people a heads-up. (...) I agree with you. Hang in there, things will look up soon. --Todd (23 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
| (...) "Voice of reason" or just a voice agreeing with you? ( I don't usually associate rhetoric like "run rampant" (and "slime trail", not that Eric said that) as the voice of reason, but hey, that's just me.) Call the question. I think the points (...) (23 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
232 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
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
