To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.cad.dat.partsOpen lugnet.cad.dat.parts in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 CAD / LDraw Files / Parts / *5942 (-20)
  BBB wheels
 
(...) I use the files provided on the web site of BBB, and haven't noticed any troubles. They, may be, are huge file ... I don't know, I'm not an expert in this domain. I simply use these files. By the way, the wheels are great stuff to play with. (...) (20 years ago, 24-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
 
  Re: BBB wheels
 
(...) OK they're available on the BBB site (URL) but they're HUGE! Has anyone done a cut-down version? If not, I will attempt it. ROSCO (20 years ago, 23-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
 
  Re: stud3 -- hollow vs filled
 
(...) Since this question crops up at regular intervals, I've added an explanatory note to the Primitives Reference : (URL) Chris (20 years ago, 23-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
 
  Re: stud3 -- hollow vs filled
 
(...) Note that FWIW, BrickLink and Peeron and other inventory resources tend not to get to this level of detail either, they typically do not differentiate this. (20 years ago, 23-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
 
  Re: stud3 -- hollow vs filled
 
(...) Hello, James! [snip description of situation leading up to the question] (...) The standard in the LDraw library is to use stud3.dat for all stud3-type anti-studs, regardless of whether they are actually hollow or solid. The reason is that (...) (20 years ago, 23-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
 
  stud3 -- hollow vs filled
 
Hello, everyone. When I was working on 71427 (expect a post on l.c.d.parts soon), I noticed that the two small underside studs were modeled with a pair of cyli4-4s and a disk1. When looking for the proper primitive to replace that with, I noticed (...) (20 years ago, 23-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives, FTX)
 
  Re: Brick 1 x 6 x 5 with Rocket Launch Pattern – RELOADED
 
(...) Thanks for the reminder about that! I always forget. Still, a quick "ya we're discussing it" followed by a "what do people think" here doesn't hurt. (20 years ago, 17-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
 
  Re: Brick 1 x 6 x 5 with Rocket Launch Pattern – RELOADED
 
(...) The LSC mailing list archives are public and a link to them can be found here: (URL) we're not completely out in the open (i.e. discussing policy on Lugnet), our discussions are available for any one who wants to follow along. -Orion (20 years ago, 17-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
 
  Re: Brick 1 x 6 x 5 with Rocket Launch Pattern – RELOADED
 
(...) Hopefully the latter. I did not intend to have any condescending tone in there at all! I'm talking about appropriate process. If you read it in there I must not have done a very good job of communicating and I apologise. Either that or you're (...) (20 years ago, 17-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
 
  Re: Brick 1 x 6 x 5 with Rocket Launch Pattern – RELOADED
 
(...) Actually your (and any other non-LSC member's) input is not wothless and actually has a great influence on what decides. We decided when the LSC first formed that we wouldn't do anything without at least discussing the pros and cons with the (...) (20 years ago, 17-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
 
  Re: Brick 1 x 6 x 5 with Rocket Launch Pattern – RELOADED
 
(...) Yeah, I got the blinking error message in preview and still posted it. I couldn't figure out the problem. Sorry, It must be the .bmp thing. I didn't think of that because they were only 8k apiece, but I can see why you'd want to avoid the (...) (20 years ago, 17-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
 
  Re: Brick 1 x 6 x 5 with Rocket Launch Pattern – RELOADED
 
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Don Heyse wrote: (switched to plain text for clarity) Don, I don't think your FTX image embed worked. Did it work when you used preview (you DID use preview, I am sure)? If it did, there's a technical problem somewhere... (...) (20 years ago, 17-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
 
  Re: Brick 1 x 6 x 5 with Rocket Launch Pattern – RELOADED
 
(...) Sorry I'm a bit late to the party (been on vacation) but I think you should submit it. It looks good enough for me. Actually I think it's too good not to submit. Compare your part (as seen in LDRAW): (URL) And this official part (as seen in (...) (20 years ago, 17-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
 
  Re: New game: Orphan part of the week
 
(...) Yes, yes it is. :) (...) Good to know. Maybe I should start a "free to a good home" list of links on the l.c.d.parts sidebar... (...) Heh. I thought about that, too. Give each piece a vector (speed and direction) based on the centerpoint of (...) (20 years ago, 16-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
 
  Re: New game: Orphan part of the week
 
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Willy Tschager wrote: at RANDOM I've chosen: (...) Sure is a pretty part though, isn't it :-) The last thing I would want to do is keep such a beautiful, high-quality part from reaching its full potential and graduating to (...) (20 years ago, 16-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
 
  Re: New game: Orphan part of the week
 
(...) Making posts like this is a good idea. More communication. :) (...) Definitely don't just update somebody's part without saying something. Emails only take a moment to send. (...) 3-4 months is a long time to wait for a reply to an email. How (...) (20 years ago, 16-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
 
  Re: New game: Orphan part of the week
 
(...) I think the method we currently use is good: Make all reasonable efforts to contact the author. If the author doesn't reply after a reasonable period of time (3-4 months is good) then make the fixes needed. Also, many held parts are known to (...) (20 years ago, 15-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
 
  Re: New game: Orphan part of the week
 
(...) Yes, I think that sounds like a good idea. The Contributor Agreement we are putting in place addresses taking over orphans inasmuch as authors agree that LDraw.org has: " - The right to create derivative works of the Work" That covers it I (...) (20 years ago, 15-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
 
  Re: New game: Orphan part of the week
 
(...) If we have not done so already, I would say we make a 'ophaned parts clause' and display it on the parts tracker pages. I would say if there has been no author or last change author changes or notes for some period of time, the part would be (...) (20 years ago, 15-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
 
  Re: New game: Orphan part of the week
 
(...) That's just too funny of a vision not to snicker at. Thanks. (although the Pepsi in my nose isn't going to leave a mark, is it?) (...) I would... although it might be worth dropping a note to the last known addy for John Van Z, after that, if (...) (20 years ago, 14-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

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