| | Re: July MOTM is ready to go!
|
|
Terry, Regarding the new rules, I like them, except for the part about not specifying a web address and not providing multiple views. All of my renderings would fit into the "model" category except for this. I like to provide a web link to multiple (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jun-01, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
|
| | Re: July MOTM is ready to go!
|
|
Hi Shiri, If there is any thought of voting for mine, then vote for one of the others. I've already won twice. I just wanted to enter this to show off some more models. I don't really care about winning. There are plenty of really strong entries (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jun-01, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.castle)
|
|
| | Re: July MOTM is ready to go!
|
|
(...) Such big decisions! Silly castle people, can't you take turns? The vote'll be split among you all! Who do I vote for? I'm torn, Brad's cathedral is cool but Tamy and Elin and the dragon... ugh!! -Shiri (23 years ago, 25-Jun-01, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.castle)
|
|
| | July MOTM is ready to go!
|
|
Hey all, Time to vote. (URL) luck to the entrants. And notice that there is a link to an additional rules page. I've decided to try a split format. A model-only contest and a scene contest. The rules are spelled out on how and what to enter. (URL) (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jun-01, to lugnet.announce, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
|
| | Re: MOTM Parameters question
|
|
(...) Short answer: Yes A parts "unofficial" status should not be a hindrance to its use. Similar to the use of a "mock-up" part to fill in where no official piece yet exists. If it does the job in place of a part that is not yet available, use it. (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jun-01, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|