 | | Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
|
(...) I'm not sold on this idea that there needs to be a transition between Duplo and System that uses POOPs. Who among us was seriously challenged by th 2x4 brick when we were 5 years old? When we were 4 years old? Heck, even 3-years-old? Nope. I'm (...) (24 years ago, 26-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
|
(...) If one were speculating one could certainly speculate in that direction. Tooling costs do need to be amortized, after all. (...) Makes it easier to do the instructions and easier to assemble. As well as balancing out color loading. (...) Seems (...) (24 years ago, 26-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
|
Stop fighting! You're both right. (...) That statement is too strongly worded. I can come up with a justification for the existance of any part you care to name, and an example of a model that would be weaker if it had to use the composite parts (...) (24 years ago, 26-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
|
(...) I remember when I was a child, I really loved every new specialized part that arrived. I was lucky enough to experience the dawn of classic space at five years old, and I just couldn't get enough of the new parts present in classic space: The (...) (24 years ago, 26-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
|
Tim, I agree with just about everything you said. The solution, as I see it, is stricter "age-rating" by TLC. POOPS, SPUDS, and SA's (and other acronyms for combining pieces) _DO_ have their place, IHMO, as "transitional elements" for younger (...) (24 years ago, 26-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
|
"Frank Filz" <ffilz@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:3A99D1EF.5BDE29...ing.com... (...) when (...) Fine, if you're going to be picky about my statement, I'll revise it. Certain poops are a waste of money, and have no business existing. (...) (24 years ago, 26-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
|
(...) I'll continue to disagree, and I'll happily take those classic space printed 1x6x5 bricks off the hands of anyone who feels POOPs should never exist. I must say that I get tired listening to folks whining about POOPs when it is regularly (...) (24 years ago, 26-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
|
"Paul Gyugyi" <paul@gyugyi.com> wrote in message news:G9C6Fu.3uB@lugnet.com... (...) Ok, my bad. The Single Purpose Useless...thing kinda did me in there :-) Still, POOPs are evil, nasty and very bad things. (...) Ok. (...) I don't know (...) (24 years ago, 26-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
|
Hi Tim, I agree with you completely, but I must correct you on the use of a term: SPUDs(*) are single-purpose-usele...decorative pieces. Think "rowboat". The 3-high 2x4 brick is not a SPUD. POOPs are pieces-out-of-other-pieces. I used to call these (...) (24 years ago, 25-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
|
(...) One thing which needs to be taken into account for the X x Y x Z bricks where Z is greater than one is that I think they were generally introduced for printed bricks. It's far cheaper to print a single brick than have 2 or 3 or 5 separate (...) (24 years ago, 25-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
|
(...) Check out Shiri Dori's Scronym Guide: (URL) As for the Bridge issue, I can only say the 2x4 3HBCs (triple-height brick (...) I can't see the composite pieces saving money. If you are already producing the individual pieces in great quantity, (...) (24 years ago, 25-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
|
Mike, I think you letter was 'well spoken'. I have a few points and questions of my own to voice. While it is a good idea to engineer sets made for smaller children to enjoy, they should be able to use pre-existing parts in the sets they buy to (...) (24 years ago, 24-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
|
(...) I agree with almost everything Tim stated. If people are critical of TLC or Lego Direct it's because I don't think that it necessarily follows from anything that we already know that TLC has to continue to plod along like a dinosaur with a 3 (...) (24 years ago, 24-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
|
(...) You are correct. I have to say that I agree with this message on all points and that I too believe that LD is doing all they CAN to satisfy what this growing community wants. Heck, if it weren't for the efforts and communication we have (...) (24 years ago, 24-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
|
(...) news:G98BDD.92q@lugnet.com... (...) buy (...) deserve. (...) audience. (...) are (...) on (...) that (...) is (...) so (...) too (...) le (...) whole (...) be (...) to (...) that, (...) like (...) would (...) the (...) quality. (...) want (...) (24 years ago, 24-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
|
Completely correct. I think this sums up the sentiments and ideas of the last several years quite nicely. Now if only Lego will listen. Then again, it DOES take time for large companies to change. Maybe they are re-structuring in that direction (...) (24 years ago, 24-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Eccentric Slope Packs!
|
|
"Timothy D. Freshly" <timfreshly@shaheenlaw.com> wrote in message news:G95yuH.5Bo@lugnet.com... (...) Not to my knowledge. Same goes for half pyramids, gable connectors(I think that's what they're called, those roof peaks that have an overhang so (...) (24 years ago, 23-Feb-01, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
|
"Mike Cormier" <jcormier@stfx.ca> wrote in message news:G98BDD.92q@lugnet.com... (...) But (...) I agree that we've been far too critical of TLC as a group. But, I disagree on SPUDs being any sort of 'solution.' When I chilled at Erik Olson's place (...) (24 years ago, 23-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Eccentric Slope Packs!
|
|
Brown 2x4 roof peaks are available in 3756. </alan> (24 years ago, 22-Feb-01, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Eccentric Slope Packs!
|
|
To all, (...) Indeed. Not only for buildings, but for space creations as well, maybe blue too! : ) Scott "I'm dreaming of a white slope pack.... just like the ones I used to know..." S. -- ***...*** Please visit (URL) (24 years ago, 22-Feb-01, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
