Subject:
|
Re: New Part: x727 - Trailer 4 x 16 Ramp
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dat.parts
|
Date:
|
Mon, 29 Apr 2002 16:39:11 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2016 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Tore Eriksson wrote:
> I am very, very sorry for my childish overreaction to your relevant comments.
> It just happened to be you who brought the last straw...
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:
> lcad0201:
> 1. 3070bpc2.dat
> Old part by me, converted to groove by Jaco
I believe the same thing happened to *all* 3070 parts. The file was not
updated because of a defect in your part, but because of changing
standards in the files.
> 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
I don't think BFC was around when you made these files. So it's the
same thing - there was nothing wrong with your files, they're just
getting upgraded to newer standards.
> 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 understand completely - I went through the 2002-02 update, and
realized I hadn't contributed any real parts, just some aliases and
other administrative-type files. :\
> 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.
I think we all do that. Well, I know I do. It's a little embarrassing
when I get called on the carpet for submitting files with obvious
errors. :0
> 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.
That is a problem. Chris had some interesting ideas for addressing this
issue.
> 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).
Yeah, that is just a bit ironic. James did an incredible job, producing
as many parts as he did. But he was working on his own, without a lot
of feedback. A key difference today is that this is a group effort, and
I'd expect a group to hold its members to higher quality levels.
But I hear what you're saying about balancing quality and quantity.
Steve
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: New Part: x727 - Trailer 4 x 16 Ramp
|
| I am very, very sorry for my childish overreaction to your relevant comments. It just happened to be you who brought the last straw... (...) My parts do have problems. Let's have a look at the occurance of my name in the updates lcad0103, 0201, and (...) (23 years ago, 28-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
|
|
|
|
