Subject:
|
Re: New Part: x727 - Trailer 4 x 16 Ramp
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dat.parts
|
Date:
|
Sun, 28 Apr 2002 14:44:56 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
2092 times
|
| |
|
|
I am very, very sorry for my childish overreaction to your relevant comments.
It just happened to be you who brought the last straw...
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Don Heyse writes:
>
> Hi Tore,
>
> I'm not sure what to make of this. I think your parts are fantastic
> and I'm sure many people (myself included) enjoy them even with these
> insignificant flaws. I'd have thought your parts would have no
> problems with the official authorizing crew, even if I said nothing.
My parts do have problems. Let's have a look at the occurance of my name in
the updates lcad0103, 0201, and 0202:
lcad0103:
1. 777p11.dat
One new part by Chris Dee, based on a part made by me.
lcad0201:
1. 3070bpc2.dat
Old part by me, converted to groove by Jaco
2. 3010p20b.dat
Old part by me, improved by CWD
3. 3010p20c.dat
Old part by me, improved by CWD
4. 3010p20w.dat
Old part by me, improved by CWD
lcad0202
1. box4-1.dat
Old primitive by me, BFC adjusted by TH
2. stud5.dat
Old primitive by me, BFC adjusted by SEB
3. stu25.dat
Old primitive by me, BFC adjusted by SEB
4. 711.dat
Old part by me, improved by me
That makes nine hits:
* One new part, based on a part by me
* One old part by me, improved by me
* Four old parts and three old primitives be me, improved by others
I am vain. To say anything else would be hypocrisy. My reward for the parts
authoring is the ego-trip of seeing my works in other LEGO fan created web
pages, in MOC's at Brickshelf, and even in a few magazines. The "reward" I
get from the part reviews is listed above, plus a number of parts on hold.
Not very encouraging.
I see two main reasons why my parts have problems getting officialized.
First of all, I am a little impatient and sloppy with details and last
check. After I've spent hours with different tools, why can't I run an l3p
check that takes less than a minute? Sometimes I forget, sometimes I think
that there just can't be any errors in the last few minor adjustments.
Secondly, I promised James to concentrate most on very old LEGO parts. I
guess not many reviewers own these very rare parts and thus are able to
review them.
But I think there is a third reason, too. Imagine James Jessiman would have
submitted his parts to the Tracker today. (Yes, I know it's impossibe, but
this is a hypothesis) How many of them would be approved, and how many would
be on hold? One thing is for sure: none of his (or mine) classic windows
would be approved, for two reasons: The one is the non-thickness of the
glasses, and the other is the lack of details he paid attention to. Some of
them have very incorrect measures, too. (The windows is just a fresh
example, since I studied them closely this Easter.) When we claim that we
want to carry on his work and pay attention to details like he did, we
actually surpass his quality demands to the extreme (IMO).
> Am I too picky? Perhaps I should stop commenting. I don't know. I
> was just trying to help in whatever small way I could because I know
> I don't have what it takes to create new parts myself.
>
> Anyways, if my comments are annoying, let me know and I'll be happy
> to shut up and enjoy the parts as is.
Like I said, I over-reacted to your comment. I have left the discussions on
primitives, so the missing optional line on the 2-4cyli and how to solve it
is not on my desk. When we have a satisfactory solution to this problem, we
probably have a huge number of parts to apply this on, including this ramp.
But since we don't know how it will be solved, I can't do anything about it
by now.
About the "thumbs", it's a balance between how much time I am willing to
waste on the carpentry and the importance of the detail. I was aware of its
lack of "roundness", but to me it is good enough.
>
> Have fun,
>
> Don
>
> PS. What does the DS. in your PS. mean?
Actually, I don't really know. As we all know, PS means Post Scriptum. Every
time I have seen DS by the end of a PS, I have interpreted it as "End of PS"
/Tore
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: New Part: x727 - Trailer 4 x 16 Ramp
|
| (...) IIRC, part of what I did to these was to add the type 2 line inside the thin pattern rectangles and subjugate the pattern to subfile. These are techniques that proboably did not exist when you made the original part, so there is absolutely no (...) (23 years ago, 28-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
| | | Re: New Part: x727 - Trailer 4 x 16 Ramp
|
| (...) FWIW, I didn't take your response to Don as childish. You brought up a very valid point. Some responses to your parts that have been "improved" by others: (...) I believe the same thing happened to *all* 3070 parts. The file was not updated (...) (23 years ago, 29-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
| | | Re: New Part: x727 - Trailer 4 x 16 Ramp
|
| (...) Mail me a list of the old parts you mean, and I'll see what I can do. I can't promise a quick response, but I bet that I can find one of just about anything around here. I have a friend in the area who is a very serious collecter of old stuff. (...) (23 years ago, 29-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: New Part: x727 - Trailer 4 x 16 Ramp
|
| (...) Hi Tore, I'm not sure what to make of this. I think your parts are fantastic and I'm sure many people (myself included) enjoy them even with these insignificant flaws. I'd have thought your parts would have no problems with the official (...) (23 years ago, 16-Apr-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
14 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
