 | | Re: Sales for 1980's castle and space models
|
|
Hi, Larry Pieniazek. I always found your name in Lugnet. Last time I had posted this title/subject on Lugnet, Todd has remind me. If I did not make mistake. From this Monday onward, I have stopped to do it. Even if notice for my private sales of (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Sales for 1980's castle and space models
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Eng Wee Lean writes: Disclaimer: I ain't the admin here, just some galoob that hangs out here more than he should. What I say ain't definitive, that's for Todd. But I bet I'm mostly right in what I say below, as I am usually (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.general, lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: So did you wonder about me?
|
|
"Jake McKee" <jacob.mckee@america.lego.com> wrote in message news:G3oBzE.5yt@lugnet.com... (...) Glad to hear it! (...) actually (...) address. Understandable. (...) Note - you may want to develop a signature with your title at TLC in it, similar to (...) (24 years ago, 7-Nov-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Building manual on sale.
|
|
(...) Todd, Are you going to finalize the change in TOS limiting all market activity to appropriate groups, or finalize that you won't be making the change? I hate to see people keep tripping over the TOS. Everyone else, I strongly suggest you read (...) (24 years ago, 6-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: Let’s be inclusive, and not exclusive. (was Re: My point.)
|
|
(...) I think you're right -- removing it may be best, and I wouldn't miss it if it were gone. It doesn't get used often, and it would do just as well to give an email link there. As to its purpose/intention, it just happened to be an easy thing to (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Let’s be inclusive, and not exclusive. (was Re: My point.)
|
|
(...) I had hoped for a straight yes or no on each point, but never mind. Scott A (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Let’s be inclusive, and not exclusive. (was Re: My point.)
|
|
(...) I think it's a pretty strong implication that when you say "privately" that the contents won't normally be revealed... (...) I'm not sure I agree, actually... Again, it's a pretty strong implication. I think (despite some comments by others (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Let’s be inclusive, and not exclusive. (was Re: My point.)
|
|
(...) What do you think? (...) You could infer that. (...) That would be a stretch. --Todd (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
