 | | Proposal: remove lugnet.dear-lego, or clarify its purpose
|
|
I know there is a distinction between the dear-lego and lego.direct groups, but that distinction is a fine one, and it's probably something that a lot of people are confused by. The dear-lego group would have made a lot of sense when TLC wasn't (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: New Group Proposal - LUGNET.LEGO.QA
|
|
(...) I agree Eric. Recently I put a post about the lack of Blue 1 x 6 and 1 x 8 bricks available from Bulk sales at S@H, and some AFOL took the opportunity to promote his Brickbay page. I just hope that LEGO realizes I cannot order from this (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: New Group Proposal - LUGNET.LEGO.QA
|
|
(...) Well it may have been intended that way at the begining but it definitely isn't that right now. I think if Todd implements the restrictions he mentioned here: (URL) there may not be a need for the group. Right now though .lego.direct seems to (...) (24 years ago, 17-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: New Group Proposal - LUGNET.LEGO.QA
|
|
(...) Is that not the point of .lego.direct? Jude (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: New Group Proposal - LUGNET.LEGO.QA
|
|
(...) I agree with Lorbaat's observation that this looks more like Quality Assurance than Questions & Answers. However, given the ratio of questions to answers we typically find in lugnet.lego.direct, I think we can safely call it (...) (24 years ago, 16-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
