Subject:
|
Re: LCD - LEGO Connection Database - Proposal
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Wed, 30 Jan 2002 17:59:10 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1131 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Tim Courtney writes:
>
> > > > LEGO is sensitive about the use of their name. [No different than GoB(tm)]
> > >
> > > GRIN. Um, yes, true. But of course there ARE other examples of using LEGO in
> > > acronyms. Can you think of one off hand? (hint, you're typing in its general
> > > direction)...
> >
> > I think in an acronym is different to them than using the name outright.
>
> Well that's kind of my point. LCD is an acronym, just as LUGNET(tm) is. So I
> don't see LCD standing for "LEGO(r) <mumble> <mumble>" as being bad or wrong
> per se any more than that LUGNET stands for "LEGO Users Group NETwork" being
> bad or wrong either... But if it is restricted in applicability to just
> LDraw formatted stuff then sure, change it.
>
> But I do not see this as the major discussion point around all this, do you?
> Other matters seem more important, ne?
LDraw is promoted as LDraw, LUGNET as LUGNET, etc... My concern was this was
initially being promoted as LEGO Coordinate Database. If it is promoted as
LCD then I agree the issue is not as important.
I sent this to Tim in a private email because I was not sure how important
it was and I knew you would be there if I posted it. <g,d,r>
Jude
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: LCD - LEGO Connection Database - Proposal
|
| (...) Well that's kind of my point. LCD is an acronym, just as LUGNET(tm) is. So I don't see LCD standing for "LEGO(r) <mumble> <mumble>" as being bad or wrong per se any more than that LUGNET stands for "LEGO Users Group NETwork" being bad or wrong (...) (23 years ago, 30-Jan-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
80 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
