Subject:
|
Re: Clone DATs--any interest?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Tue, 23 Nov 1999 23:32:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
777 times
|
| |
|
|
At 11:44 AM 11/23/1999 , Steve Bliss wrote:
> > In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Dave Schuler writes:
> > > Hi, all! At the risk of subjecting myself to good-natured public • outcry and
> > > ridicule, I was wondering if there's any interest in DAT files for such
> > > "clones" as MegaBloks, Block-Men, and TYCO. I already posted a link to a
> > > zip-file on offtopic.clones, but I was hoping for wider exposure.
>
> I think there would be some interest in have virtual clone parts available in
> LDraw format.
Though there might be some interest in them, I don't think they should be
sanctioned officially from Lugnet or ldraw.org.
> In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Todd Lehman wrote:
>
> > Not to put a damper on your enthusiasm for clone parts, but please don't
> > post any clone parts here even if you *do* get a generally positive
> consensus.
Agreed.
> Where can he post them? Would lugnet.cad.dat be acceptable? Maybe
> lugnet.cad.dat.ideas? Or would it be better if Dave (and anyone else with
> clone parts) puts the clone parts on a webpage, and just posts a link?
I think that anyone who wants to distribute clone parts should do them on
their own personal web pages, completely aside from Lugnet or
ldraw.org. They should also make it clear that the above mentioned
sites/services do not condone the activity of posting clones, and also make
it clear that the parts represented are NOT representations of official TLG
parts.
It sounds like Todd is pretty firm against clones on Lugnet. I'm taking
the same stand with ldraw.org, unless there is an overwhelming majority in
favor of them [1].
> What about DAT content which is not based on building bricks, where can it
> go? I used LDraw to design a two-bed loft for my kids, and I was thinking
> about posting it. It is totally not related to LEGO, but it might give
> people ideas about how they might do more with LDraw.
That's a good question. I'd be interested in seeing that file, Steve. An
off-topic .dat group??
For the most part, I feel LDraw should be restricted to Lego. That's what
James designed it for. But I do realize that there are limitless 3D
modelling possibilities with it, and those should be recognized to an
extent so long as it does not detract from the main purpose of LDraw.
[1] Which I seriously doubt happening.
-Tim Courtney
ldraw.org Project Coordinator
http://www.ldraw.org
http://www.zacktron.com
AIM: timcourtne
ICQ: 23951114
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Clone DATs--any interest?
|
| (...) Count me in the minority, then. Making parts is hard. If someone wants to make parts I say more power to them. Perhaps making clone parts will refine their modeling skill, which has to be a good thing for all of us. I understand the issues but (...) (25 years ago, 24-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | Re: Clone DATs--any interest?
|
| (...) They are clearly different situations. Both sites are led by individuals. In Todd's case with Lugnet, he does own it and can make decisions on his own about what happens to it without room for question. In my case with ldraw.org, I serve as (...) (25 years ago, 24-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Clone DATs--any interest?
|
| (...) Not to put a damper on your enthusiasm for clone parts, but please don't post any clone parts here even if you *do* get a generally positive consensus. Note that the charter for lugnet.cad.dat.parts only allows for official LEGO® elements: (...) (25 years ago, 22-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
64 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
|
|
|
|
