To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.cadOpen lugnet.cad in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 CAD / *33575 (-10)
  Re: LDraw.org Bylaws Drafts: Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
 
(...) I see. I wasn't clear on what role the LSC has. I've gone back over the posts dealing with that subject and understand it better now. Nevertheless, I still think it was a valid question. (...) Not really. It's less to do with the way I worded (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
 
  Re: LDraw.org Bylaws Drafts: Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
 
(...) Perfectly. Thanks. As I said originally, I don't doubt your integrity or devotion to ldraw.org, TLC employee or not. I was just hypothesising to myself about what a conflict of interest might entail and thinking, perhaps unreasonably, that (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
 
  Re: LDraw.org Bylaws Drafts: Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
 
(...) Apologies for not making the timeframe - they're *just* about ready and they should be ready to go tomorrow. -Tim (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
 
  Re: Naming of parts
 
(...) The following official parts do not follow this rule: 4859 32059 2401 2450 2419 30503 6106 (21 years ago, 3-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
 
  Re: New MINI Moc: The Shadow
 
(...) Dude, that is neato. Original and it refuses to yield to the demands for a cockpit and landing gear. Well played. Now only if oyu could wedge a minifig in there ;-) Kyle (URL) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.space)
 
  Re: LDraw.org Bylaws Drafts: Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
 
(...) I do apologise if I misinterpreted your words, but I would suggest that my interpretation is an extremely reasonable one given the word choices you used. (...) I would think not, but I look to the steering committee to do a lot more than make (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
 
  Re: LDraw.org Bylaws Drafts: Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
 
(...) Hi Allister - Thanks for that clarification. Actually, I was at a momentary loss for how to approach the answer, but now after thinking it through I have something to say. I would hope that whoever is elected to the Steering Committee would (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
 
  Re: LDraw.org Bylaws Drafts: Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
 
(...) I agree. (...) I suggested nothing. I was merely asking a question. Can you just answer it without reading motives into it that don't exist? Is it really necessary to be a member of the steering committee in order for suggestions on the (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
 
  Re: LDraw.org Bylaws Drafts: Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
 
(...) I concur. :) I haven't been following this thread at all up until now, but Jake's post caught my eye. And I agree with what he said - only I want to go a little further. Couldn't anybody that even has association with TLC possibly have a (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
 
  Conflicts of Interest
 
(...) All: While the goal of avoiding conflicts of interest is a laudable one, in practice large numbers of committees operate with members who have them. It is far more important that potential conflicts be disclosed as they crop up. If the (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR