 | | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) I would be one of those who would be prevented from voting (at least this year), and I don't have a strong objection to not being able to vote. The restriction is designed to make the LSC a technical group voted on by technically involved (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) I personally feel the restriction is a good idea. However, playing devil's advocate, I feel obliged to point out that since it would increase my voting power (since I am eligible as a software author), it's in my best interests to be in favor (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: motm/sotm
|
|
(...) I agree somewhat, but I think it's better than having no contest in the mean time. -Tim (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | New SubPart - s/6309s01.dat : Duplo Tile 2 x 2 without Top Surface [DAT]
|
|
Without the parts tracker we are starting to get duplication of effort. For Thomas Garrison primarily, here is the subpart for the 2x2 Duplo Tile part, which I have been waiting to submit for some weeks. Chris 0 Duplo Tile 2 x 2 without Top Surface (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Non proportional BOM in LPub
|
|
When I generate Layouts this comes out: (URL) scale and proportions are out of bound here. I would expect the BOM to be smaller that the actual building step? Jaco "Jaco van der Molen" <jmolen@zonnet.nl> schreef in bericht (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
