|
|
 | | Re: Todd and Eric's attitude (was Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings)
|
| (...) I haven't made any personal attacks. Sorry. I made an observation based on the evidence at hand, one which I beleived- and still beleive- was true. In retrospect, there was no reason to post it, I simply should have stopped engaging in a (...) (24 years ago, 19-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: A letter to Todd
|
| (...) Todd was not making an assuption. As certain people here have made a rather big point of lately, Todd and I talk offline frequently- about a great variety of topics, including LEGO and Lugnet. Recently, while talking offline, the subject of (...) (24 years ago, 19-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
| | | | | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
| (...) Sounds good, and when complete, will probably make the actual structure mostly irrelevant, which is good because a hierarchical tree can never properly represent the associations between different things, and the associations which are (...) (24 years ago, 19-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
| | | | | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
| (...) I agree that it would be a little presumptuous to dictate to TLC too much about _how_ dealings should occur (as in expecting unreasonble things to happen), but it's not presumptuous at all to dictate (or let's say specify) _where_ official (...) (24 years ago, 19-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.lego.direct)
| | | | | Re: Official vs. unofficial LEGO postings
|
| (...) That's a great way of explaining it. --Todd (24 years ago, 19-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
|
