|
|
 | | Re: Another PT Suggestion
|
| (...) Try something like that: (URL) (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: Classic Space Flag
|
| (...) Likewise. But the odd thing is, I have two Beta-1 Command Base sets, and I own exactly zero such flags. Can anyone shed some light on this interesting question? XFUT to .general, naturally. LFB (22 years ago, 1-Jul-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.general)
| | | | | Re: PT Author question
|
| (...) Generally, I'd let the author of the fix handle it. But yeah, fixes to fixes are ok. (...) If you've tried to contact the author without a response, then it's ok to fix an official part. Steve (22 years ago, 30-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: Classic Space Flag
|
| (...) The only set that had this part was 6970 Beta-1 Command Base. I looked up the instructions for this set on Brickshelf and the flag seems to be completely missing from the instructions. I would surmise, based on other sets from the same time, (...) (22 years ago, 30-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Classic Space Flag
|
| See: (URL) this part exist as a decorated/patterned element? Or was the flag-pattern strictly a sticker? Steve (22 years ago, 30-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.space)
| | | | | PT Author question
|
| This is actually a double question: 1. For parts on the PT that are fixes of existing parts, it's it considered okay to upload a new version of the part, fixing any errors or hold vote comments that my exist? 2. What about for original parts if the (...) (22 years ago, 30-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: PT Suggestion
|
| "Steve Bliss" <partsref@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:GyICs1.3o2@lugnet.com... (...) it (...) be (...) It's more complicated to program, but wouldn't it be an idea to show the next part that is similar to the one you've just looked at? Eg. you (...) (22 years ago, 30-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: PT Suggestion
|
| (...) I've been thinking more about this, I'm not sure what a good "next" would be. The current (URL) queue page> works on sort of the current data. Posting a review upsets that sort, so it's hard to say "give me the next file after the one I just (...) (22 years ago, 30-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | Re: PT Suggestion
|
| (...) Define "next" in this context. With a good definition of "next" I think it would be great... (22 years ago, 30-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| | | | | PT Suggestion
|
| Dan mentioned an idea to me, but he's letting me post about it. Probably because I was the one who wanted to see what other people think. On the review results page (you know, the little page that says you posted a review successfully), would be (...) (22 years ago, 30-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
|
