|
|
 | | Re: Datsville
|
| (...) That is really neat! Today is the first I heard of Datsville, nice work! (...) Not a bad idea, would add a nice touch and all. I'm open to it, anyone else? -Tim <>< (URL) timcourtne ICQ: 23951114 'You have a pretty sexy voice for being a Lego (...) (25 years ago, 6-Sep-99, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | | | Re: Datsville
|
| Hey, your not alone. I've been checking it at least once a day since the whole thing came about. :) Ryan ***...*** REPLY SEPARATOR ***...*** (...) (25 years ago, 6-Sep-99, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | | | Re: Datsville
|
| John VanZwieten: How often can we expect updated views of Datsville? I can probably just as well admit that I impatiently have checked the Datsville web site[1] regularly the whole weekend. Play well, Jacob PS: Does it make sense to host Datsville (...) (25 years ago, 6-Sep-99, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | | | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET, REV 1.1
|
| (...) Some of us think there is, and some of us, (including many stalwarts) feel they've been trying for many many months and have exhausted all the other alternatives. I dunno who is right, which is one reason why I suspect a vote was taken. I (...) (25 years ago, 23-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | | | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET, REV 1.1
|
| In article <FGxBz2.D9F@lugnet.com>, John VanZwieten <john_vanzwieten@ema il.msn.com> writes (...) No problem :-) I'm not currently interested in the CAD groups, and this vote came as a bit of a shock. Bearing in mind the good nature of the people (...) (25 years ago, 23-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | | | Re: CFV: Jonathan Wilson's posting privileges on LUGNET, REV 1.1
|
| Tony Priestman <Tony@you-rang.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:Xy5anEAMzAw3EwE...n.co.uk... (...) _PLEASE_ NOTE: All the lugnet.cad* groups invite novices who want help honing their skills. Those of us who author parts _love_ to guide newbies in (...) (25 years ago, 23-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | | | Re: [ldraw.org] Update
|
| (...) Than that's not a problem with ldraw.org, that's a problem with the server Mike's pages are on. I can upload my copy of mlcad13.zip to ldraw.org and have two download location choices - he ok'ed the download from ldraw.org. I'll make a note of (...) (25 years ago, 21-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | | | Re: [ldraw.org] Update
|
| (...) I agree. -Tim <>< (URL) timcourtne ICQ: 23951114 Commonwealth Edison: What do you do with OUR power? Get paid to surf the web! Visit: (URL) (25 years ago, 21-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.publish)
| | | | | Re: [ldraw.org] Update
|
| (...) Why? Seems to me that changing to white or grey or blue, if it meant approval from TLG would be no big deal... Red is the color they use for most everything brickish. (...) Probably would in fact be trade dress, as would every other thing (...) (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.publish)
| | | | | Re: [ldraw.org] Update
|
| The links to the MLCAD page and download are not connecting. Pat J (...) (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | | | Re: [ldraw.org] Update
|
| The links to mlcad page and program aren't connecting. (...) (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | | | Re: [ldraw.org] Update
|
| (...) I thought about that. The problem is, ldraw.org *doesn't* do pieces which aren't real-world LEGO. Funny colors, maybe. Fake pieces, never. Steve (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.publish)
| | | | | Re: [ldraw.org] Update
|
| (...) I suggest capitalizing LEGO in the linking image and adding the (R), otherwise, great job! --Bram (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | | | Re: [ldraw.org] Update
|
| Steve Bliss <blisses@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:37bd7e8a.724234...net.com... (...) But we could design our own keyboard tile (w/ all the letters even) and a computer screen w/ a 2X3 brick on it! But you'd still have the problem with (...) (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.publish)
| | | | | Re: [ldraw.org] Update
|
| (...) Playing with it in photoshop should actually work pretty well. Just shift the hue to get blue, you won't even have to play with saturation. --Bram (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.publish)
| | | | | Re: [ldraw.org] Update
|
| (...) Like, right underneath the logo-bar. How about: "This site is better than official! It's [fan created], and The LEGO Group has nothing to do with!" Steve (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | | | Re: [ldraw.org] Update
|
| (...) The more I think about it, I think a simple letter would do. But first I think we should experiment a bit with different logos and present them printed on the letter so they can review them right there and state their preference. Once I get (...) (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.publish)
| | | | | Re: [ldraw.org] Update
|
| (...) On the small logos it probably would not work, so another solution would have to be devised for that. (...) I'd prefer to keep it red. I don't think a wireframe fade would be considered under TLG's trade dress if a squabble arose. (...) I (...) (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.publish)
| | | | | Re: [ldraw.org] Update
|
| (...) Well, if we were to contact TLG, what would be the best approach to it, to get on their good side? I'm not totally objected to contacting them, I just would like to make sure we've done everything we can to have them not jump on us beforehand. (...) (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.publish)
| | | | | Re: [ldraw.org] Update
|
| (...) Personally I didn't think twice about the Adequate.com red brick on the button. 1) I don't see it around that often and 2) to me the red 2x2 doesn't represent TLG (but to some it may). (...) Thanks :) Uhm, the 6982 was intended to be a (...) (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
|
