|
|
 | | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
| (...) So would I (personally). (...) Me too. In fact, I would take a stronger position against clone bricks than against purely-MOC bricks. This isn't to suggest that every official TLG element is a fragrant flower, but IMHO all clone elements are (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: New newsgroup lugnet.cad.dev
|
| (...) The ml isn't currently gatewayed with the ng. A gateway could always be established, however, if the need arose. (...) It is (or at least was a few minutes ago) when you sent out your other message. --Todd (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
| (...) You did a good job of it, though I don't think you'll like the replies from people (personal prediction). (...) I would personally severely disapprove. Though it could be argued to include clone bricks (which your described part would fall (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: New newsgroup lugnet.cad.dev
|
| We're not gatewayed, right? That is, I got a message from L-CAD@LISTSERV.UH.EDU that I replied to and I went to the people still subscribed to the list, but it did not appear here. That's what I expected would happen if we weren't gatewayed. (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Non-TLG Parts
|
| I'm not sure how the best way to broach this subject, but to jump head first best. First, I have wondered how the community feels about the creation of non-standard parts. By this I mean parts that TLG has not created ( at least not to my knowledge (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
|
