 | | Re: More color problems
|
|
(...) I found you problem Mike. How are you telling MLCad to use Trans-White? I suspect you're clicking Custom and then choosing Transparent. I'm inferring this from L3P inclusion of this color: #declare Color0x06FFFFFF The LDraw color number is 47 (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | More color problems
|
|
I, like David, am having problems with color as well. I have used transparent elements before and they have rendered beautifully. However, in this case there seems to be something wrong and I really don't know what it is. I am trying to render a (...) (21 years ago, 5-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.ray, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Bylaws - new proposed clauses
|
|
(...) What about MegaBloks, or any other company that may have an interest? Why pointing the finger on TLC only? Why not have a more general clause about conflict of interest? -- Anders Isaksson, Sweden BlockCAD: (2 URLs) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Naming of parts
|
|
(...) Doh! I posted without reviewing the current conventions. I suppose I could have inferred that the correct orientation puts the narrow (or corner-less) edge toward the front along the long axis of the part? Thanks for the quick answer, though! (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Bylaws Drafts: Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
|
|
(...) Thanks for your confidence. Based on my experience in the company so far, working relationships I have with Community Development people, and experience in the hobby in general, I do not believe the pressure you hypothesize about is likely to (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Naming of parts
|
|
(...) Then you'd just use "Plate 4 x 8 Without Corner Left" and "Plate 4 x 8 Without Corner Right" -Orion (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Naming of parts
|
|
(...) If LEGO were to produce a rectangular plate, say a 4x8, with a missing corner, what would be a good way to describe it? The part could easily have a mirror-image part, so it wouldn't be enough to say "Plate 4 x 8 without corner," since that (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | LDraw.org Bylaws - new proposed clauses
|
|
Thanks to everyone who has been participating in the bylaws discussion. These are important issues, and in my view the opinions put forth have been by and large well thought out and productive. I think we've covered the lion's share of the possible (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Naming of parts
|
|
(...) This one should be Wing 3 x 4 (...) These ones are plates with one corner clipped, I think the 'Without Corner' label is better than Wing. I'd like to add these ones to the list: 2621 2625 I had renamed 2625 while it was on the PT for BFC (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Naming of parts
|
|
(...) How about these two: 30033 Plate 2 x 2 with Rod Frame Octagonal (URL) 30094 Bar 4 x 4 with 4 Studs (No entry at LUGNet) I suggest changing the last to: 30094 Plate 2 x 2 with Rod Frame Rectangular Christian (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
