Subject:
|
Re: non-Lego elements
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.build
|
Date:
|
Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:07:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
461 times
|
| |
|
|
John Gerlach wrote:
>
> In lugnet.trains, Charles Eric McCarthy writes:
> > SRC wrote:
> > > I wrestle with the
> > > use of string as a non-LEGO element, (the Znap qualifies)
> >
> > Why does the Znap qualify? Please check all that apply:
> > (1) Because it was sold under the Lego name.
> > (2) Because it has holes that Technic pins fit in.
> > (3) Some other reasons (please state).
>
>
> It's made by LEGO, it's designed to work with 'normal' LEGO bricks. I see
> absolutely no problem with using Znap and considering it 'pure LEGO'...
>
> When I first saw Technic sets I didn't like them, because I didn't think they
> were 'real LEGO'. (Argh! I was a fool! I missed out on so many cool sets!)
> Now I use Technic pieces in almost everything I build.
>
> What about using Duplo, or 'Baby' (or whatever they're calling it this
> week)?? The entire "LEGO System" is designed to work together - that's one of
> the things that makes it great.
I'd have to agree with John on this one. I would say that anything sold
under the LEGO trademark, which can somehow be connected to a 2x4 LEGO
brick, including doing so by any sequence of parts is certainly a LEGO
building element, and thus pure. String and stickers and other parts
which interract by more arbitrary connections are a little less clear,
but I would say that any element of such nature which comes in a LEGO
branded construction set or publication counts. If you somehow figure
out a neat way to use a piece of LEGO branded clothing or anything like
that in a creation, I'd also really have to give you the purity award.
For perfect purity, one would only be allowed to cut or modify parts
which the directions in some LEGO branded construction set or idea book
instruct one to cut (do any direct you to cut string or must a perfectly
pure LEGO construction use string only in the lengths provided).
Now I won't claim perfect purity for myself. I'm willing to use string
from a craft store instead of string from a LEGO branded product. I
haven't yet decided to use my Lugnet stickers, but would probably
consider using them. I will probably use some non-LEGO fabric sails for
ships.
I do own some clone parts, and will probably make some use of them
(right now the only clone parts I have included in a model display are a
truck I made of Mega Bloks which was inspired by a rather amusing
looking breakdown I saw one time on the highway - a frame 18 wheeler
trailer, used for carying logs or other long materials like that that
don't need a bed, had come apart and the back end was sitting in the
right hand lane, and the tractor with the front part of the trailer
still attached was sitting in the breakdown lane - of course I had to
re-create this with Mega Bloks!).
If we don't allow ZNAP, then how do we handle Technic? Were Technic
parts included in System sets from the very beginning, or did it take a
while for Technic parts to appear in System sets. If it took a while,
was mixing Technic into a System construction impure until the parts
started appearing in System sets (and then does that imply that you can
only use Technic parts that have already been used in a System set in
your "pure" System creations?). Or are Technic parts impure also, and
thus a bunch of official sets need to be classified as impure? What
about Scala parts? At a minimum, Minnie's Birthday includes a Scala
originated part. What abotu Belville? What about Fabuland?
Now there are some classifications of constructions which would be of
interest if we ever have some large building contests:
- constructions which only use basic bricks and plates
- constructions built from a specific set or set of sets
> If LEGO buys knex, and they decide to integrate the two different lines, that
> will just give us MORE pieces to play with. Although, it would also give us
> more pieces to sort and store... ;-)
Hmm, I wonder about that. I'm not sure I'd consider it "pure" even if
TLC bought Knex and made an adapter piece. I guess my reasoning is that
the geometry of Knex is not (I assume) designed to follow the geometry
of LEGO bricks.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: non-Lego elements
|
| (...) When the GMLTC does train shows, the standard question is "Is it all Lego?" We always tell people that we've used a few non-Lego decals, and the string on a couple of our truss bridges - although we chose string that looks as close to Lego (...) (24 years ago, 24-Aug-00, to lugnet.build)
| | | Re: non-Lego elements
|
| In lugnet.build, Frank Filz writes: (major snippage) (...) Just a bit of insider info (albeit, the information is now 2+ years old) - K'NEX owns the patent for combining LEGO and K'NEX. I have no information to validate or refute any purchase of (...) (24 years ago, 24-Aug-00, to lugnet.build)
|
6 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
