 | | Re: TLG investigation —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | I'll no doubt post a more detailed response later. For now, here's what I want, apologies in advance if the terseness makes it read as rude. 1. TLG must take the AFOL community seriously. We are a small market, but an influential one, and one that (...) (26 years ago, 15-Feb-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: TLG investigation —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | c /Jerome/Jeroen/ * * Sigh. Larry Pieniazek wrote: <blather> (Jerome, you're a good start...) <blather> (26 years ago, 15-Feb-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: TLG investigation —Jasper Janssen
|
| | | | | | (...) YM /s/Jerome/Jeroen/ HTH. HAND. Jasper (26 years ago, 16-Feb-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: TLG investigation —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | I'm not getting into editor wars with you. :-) My syntax was XEDIT. If you've ever written an Xedit macro in exec2 instead of REXX, you're old. Communication was did. (...) (26 years ago, 16-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: TLG investigation —Jasper Janssen
|
| | | | | | (...) I have by now forgotten what that syntax I used was originally from, but I've gotten used to it on ASR. :) (...) It could be me, but I don't get it? Jasper (26 years ago, 16-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: TLG investigation —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) That's a saying/shorthand from NITPICK FORUM back in my IBM days... Here's more detail: "Communication was did." is ungrammatical. Everyone knows it. But most people can quickly parse out that the statement is saying that some communication (...) (26 years ago, 17-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: TLG investigation —Jasper Janssen
|
| | | | | | On Wed, 17 Feb 1999 15:10:46 GMT, Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote: Lar also wrote (which attribution he snipped. Naughty Larry.) (...) <snip explanation> (...) Immensely. I'd never seen that particular phrase before - and that's confusing, (...) (26 years ago, 18-Feb-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: TLG investigation —David Blomberg
|
| | | | (...) ...snip... smummarizing Larry: (...) I agree with Larry. I would probably not bother to join such a club if it did not offer service packs and bulk parts for adult modelers. This newsgroup and individual websites are providing a wealth of (...) (26 years ago, 15-Feb-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: TLG investigation —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | D Blomberg wrote: <snipped a pretty good summary... (1) Too bad I could not get to the point that well :-) > (...) Agreed. EXCEPT for the fact that no matter how we rearrange things, we cannot get a green 1x4x3 train window to appear for a (...) (26 years ago, 16-Feb-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: TLG investigation —Nico Hoogerbrug
|
| | | | Like Larry Pieniazek wrote, (...) I would talk so loud, because it happend before. Who had ever dreamed of seeing light blue bricks. But LEGO modellers used them for the Tower Bridge model in 1996, listed although but not free available.I think they (...) (26 years ago, 17-Feb-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| | | | |
