 | | 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)
|
| |
| | 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: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) I think it would be great -- I don't know of any existing restrictions other than the possibility that no one has published their efforts in this regard. I would be more receptive to other brand-name parts than to mangled pieces, however -- (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) :) Um, I didn't know there was a thing out there for MOC bricks.. interesting... (...) Yep, I don't mean any offense either, and I agree with you Todd. (...) Another good idea.. group, lets keep the creative juices flowing.. Ldraw Consortium? (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | 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: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) I am totally opposed to this. LDraw was started to model Lego elements and that is what we have adhered to. And as long as I have the watch, so to speak, I will not knowingly allow fictitious parts into an official update. I even have some (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) Oh, sure. All parts that go into the updates go through a peer review process, then the collection is assembled by Terry for distribution. Even assuming the non-Lego parts survive the voting, all that would be needed is policy on Terry's end (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) Is there a way (or rules) to prevent non-TLG parts from creeping into the official LDraw updates? That seems like the only practical/logical danger...any other objections (like mine) would be personal/subjective. I don't use LDraw/LEdit enough (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) I considered modeling some K'Nex pieces in LDraw. There aren't that many different (useful) K'Nex pieces. But then I realized that the sizes would be all wrong for the movement keystrokes in LEdit. So I gave it up. Steve (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) You're a brave man. ;) (...) I think you've gotten a taste of how the community feels. This has come up before, with some half-height plates (I think these were Tyco parts, maybe MegaBloks did them, too). They were not allowed into a parts (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) Preach it, brother! (...) :) Keep Building!! -Tim <>< (URL) timcourtne ICQ: 23951114 New Lugnet Newsgroup? lugnet.off-topic.tim...ie.die.die ?? LEGO: SP++++c(6973)[ip++++ bt2++++ ex+++ ft+++ sp+++ ut++] AQ+++(6175)[an+++ as++ hn-- sr--] (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) Agreed. I can't see it getting through the voting process, anyway. (...) view (...) Easy, boy. Non-TLG elements have their place in Ldraw. One of the uses of Ldraw is to share models, but another important use is to keep a record of your own (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) You know, I thought of this after I posted. A while ago, someone posted a Mindstorms "Rocker Boogie Rambler". (1)(2) It used MOC LDraw pieces to represent rubber bands, and those parts were inlined into the model. I wouldn't have any moral (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Clone "semi-bricks" (Was: Non-TLG Parts)
|
|
Some time ago, I made some "plates", or, as I call them, 12 LDU high semi-bricks. I call them semi-bricks for two reasons: 1. They are exactly ½ the height of a Lego brick 2. They are clones, ie not real bricks I strongly oppose the idea to include (...) (26 years ago, 10-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) I think that was Linc (?) But he did that to represent TLG rubber bands, much the same as others have done to represent hoses. So that wasn't a case of "non-TLG" pieces. As far as message size goes, yes it does inflate things a bit, as do (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) I agree with that. I would have no objections to linking to custom sites for non-lego parts. The more the merrier. I just think that LDraw should remain just that. Not MBDraw or TDraw. :-) -- Terry K -- (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) One man's trash... Seriously, while the piece quality of other brands is inferior, some of the sets they are offering are at least as good if not better--especially when you consider the price. I'm not saying (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) Only when the competition is (a) competent and (b) putting out superior or nearly superior stuff. If the competition puts out junk, is that an incentive to improve? Early LEGO Town and Castle sets were incredible, for example, and TLG created (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) Right, but a TLG consumer affairs rep gave me the insight that the market has changed since then. The rep tells me today's child market is different, and she sees the definite change (though convenienlty doesn't call it a 'decline') in the (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) Um, I wouldn't object either, as long as it is off-site and clearly marked as unofficial clone parts. We don't need to see "Keep Ldraw Pure" buttons popping up on people's sites.. ;) Keep Building!! -Tim <>< (URL) timcourtne ICQ: 23951114 New (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) Hmmm. "LDraw Purists Homepage", anyone? Steve (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) LOL :) Though I would support one of those (if necessary) and plaster the 'pure' image on my site if the condition of the clone parts sunk to that level.. *sigh* -- bad week.. [1] [2] [1] Not at all related to this list, but was a general sigh (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) I'll admit, I'm something of a Lego fanatic myself. However, I have had some very good experiences building with Tente and Construx. I wish now that I had never gotten rid of my Tente pieces. :-( (...) Hmmm... I would suggest that a (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) It's both. Not that I'm closed-minded, but I really have a lot of trouble imagining a competitor ever coming out with a better product in the same category as LEGO. And even if one did -- and even if the product were totally LEGO compatible -- (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) I thought the expectation (and specification) was that the newsserver lugnet.com was to be used for LEGO-oriented discussion and communication. The *.off-topic hierarchy is just there because we occasionally get off-track. Steve (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) I'm not sure the appropriate quality-level of MegaBloks could be modeled in LDraw. They'd fit together just as well as LEGO-based LDraw parts. :( Steve (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) Yeah... I was just being conservative/literal in my interpretation of the charter for the .cad.dat group. I think it really should be modified to say that it's for .DAT files based on LEGO-brand elements only. (Would this cause great unrest? I (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) If there are any other creations out I for one would like hear of them. (...) Hmm, I never mangle I improve :-). (...) I've tried a number of different methods, but none seemed to fit the bill. Roy (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) The only problem with this for me is that I'm along for the ride because of the LDraw program and not necessarily for LEGO. I know they are pretty closly related now, but that may not be completely true in the future. James program is amazing (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) The Internet thrives upon discussion. Without it, the net would be void and without substance. The multicast transfer of ideas causes the net to grow and become more coherent. In a sense, this also applies to us. (1) Nothing is lost from (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) That is unfortunate. It just has always seemed logical for the element to exist, but have never been able to reason out why it doesn't. I had hoped that it did exist and that I had somehow missed it along the line. Oh, well... Roy P. S. I'm (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) Cmon, Todd, who ya sayin' cheated? (Roy hangs his head and shuffles his feet) Tell me it aint so, Todd. ( Small tear forming in the corner of his eye ) Snifff! (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
Actually, I already have one of these. :/ Haven't modeled it in L-Draw though so maybe I'd better shut up before this thread gets sent to one o' them off-topic groups. Doug (...) (26 years ago, 13-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) I feel a sudden urge coming on to take a batch of 1x10 plates to the belt sander and make 1x10 tiles. Then I'll shave off the stud on a classic smiley and have a realistic Jean-Luc Picard head. He'll need to sit in a comfy reclining chair, so (...) (26 years ago, 13-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) I have one of those. :) Jasper (26 years ago, 13-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
Okay, I think I see the consensus on "home made" parts in LDraw. How about a slightly different twist? One of the messages in build group mentioned he used the loops off of broken 1 X 1 with side loops to get a female to female connection. Would it (...) (26 years ago, 14-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) made (...) Okay, Todd, point taken. Push the envelope too hard and its bound to burst ;-}. Don't you think milling the studs to .01" and microgrinding the excess would work better? Oh, and apply some toulene (...) (26 years ago, 14-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
