 | | Re: Voting page for 9906
|
|
(...) Yes you're right it should be named 4x4x3.5, my mistake, and the origin is rather obscure. Any opinions, anyone, on where the origin should be located - on the small barrel the origin is at the top to aid placement of a 2x2 round plate as a (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L.A. Times article on Legoland 'masters'
|
|
[cross-posted to lugnet.cad.dev. Followup to the appro ng] (...) Lego (...) Augh! LDraw'ers, get your pixels out. Steve (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
|
I like this idea, but maybe two messages, one in the morning one in the evening. This way it makes it easier, because you can reply to things that came in during the night, and then to things that came in during the day. I think we ought to hold off (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Voting page for 9906
|
|
[group snipped to lugnet.cad.dev] (...) That's fine with me. If people would rather have the pannier placed under Minifig (or Minifig Accessories), I'll also rotate & relocate the part, so it will sit on part #973 (minifig torso) by default. Steve (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Voting page for 9906
|
|
I realize many authors have been away on vacations and may have missed these questions/comments. On some of these, I would like responses before I vote on them (even if the response is "what are you talking about?" 2500c01: I don't think the lights (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
|
(...) Though this last sentenced looks quoted, I assume that you Greg "author of zany sigs :-)" Majewski wrote it. I'm not frustrated like a lot of folks (for obvious reasons) but where the future of an individual with regard to a community is at (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
|
How about a 1 post per day limit to the cad.* heirarchy as a probationary condition? This would force Jonathan to more carefully consider what he posts, and would give everyone a break from the deluge of sometimes rude or irritating posts. Is this (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
|
(...) Wow, you must be REALLY frustrated with all this :-| (...) You're missing the entire point of what 80 million people have already told you, "But it WAS posted." You are basically saying, "Well, if I hadn't have posted it, people wouldn't have (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Reverse engineering (Was: Why TLG doesn't have a leg to stand on anymore.)
|
|
(...) You have (as I read the law) been allowed to do that in EU for a few years now. Play well, Jacob ---...--- -- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk -- -- Web...: <URL:(URL) -- ---...--- (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
|
(...) The message was posted by me. my newsreader seemed to stuff it up and post to .geek as well as mailing it to tore so the message was posted by me but it should never have been so therefore it should not have been seen by people on this group. (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
|
(...) According to the NNTP headers in the message, it was posted by you to lugnet.off-topic.geek on Tuesday, August 3, 1999 at 11:16:38 GMT, from studun26.murdoch.edu.au, using Netscape 4.03 for Win95. Still baffled? (...) Apparently you posted it (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
|
(...) Tore (...) Agreed to all of Eric's above points. (...) Going solely by what Tore posted, no, he was not rude. Mercy triumphs over justice (but each has its place), so let's take these following points one at a time, not as a convoluted lump, (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts for LDraw or parts for POV-Ray?
|
|
(...) Both l2p and l3p have their advantages depending on the goal of the user. l3p is great if you want a rendered version of a model, no matter the parts. l2p is great if you want a more detailed/smooth render and the parts are available. Thanks (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
|
(...) No no no my friend. You cannot say in the least that your post was not rude or that it was cancelled out in effect by Tore's kind reply. Just because Tore himself didn't react at you doesn't mean it was rude. Posting mishaps happen, and (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | I apologize
|
|
I apologize to everyone I have annoyed, flamed, pissed off or offended. I am sorry for saying things like: Where can I get xyz Can someone please make me xyz How do i make xyz Has anyone made xyz I need xyz Here is my attempt at xyz, is there (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
|
(...) He actually took the time to answer my questions, therefore he does not consider the post rude and since it was meant only for his eyes that means that the opinions of the rest of the group as to the rudeness of the post do not matter as the (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
|
(...) mail folder I did) And that makes it OK? It was still extremely rude whether you sent it to Tore or posted it. It showed no respect for Tore at all. Eric Remove ".nospam" when replying by E-mail. The New England LEGO Users Group (URL) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Please move this discussion to lugnet.admin.general (was: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET)
|
|
(...) Oops! Adam, the 'Followup-To' header needs to be part of the message header, not the body of the message. (...) The above message should have been posted with the 'Followup-To' header set to a lugnet.admin.general. (But don't get mad at Adam; (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
|
(...) I only sent it to tore himself (at least acording to the message in my sent mail folder I did) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.starwars)
|
| |
| | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET
|
|
(...) LOL! :o) (...) Heh....that sounds like a good stress relief device :P I wonder if this could go down in the books as 'Wilson Therapy.' ;o) -Tim <>< (URL) timcourtne ICQ: 23951114 Commonwealth Edison: What do you do with OUR power? Get paid to (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.starwars, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
