| |
In lugnet.dear-lego, Allan Bedford writes:
> In lugnet.dear-lego, Ray Sanders writes:
>
> > Yep. If the instructions were on TLCs site, there would be much more exposure
> > and probably more utilization. 100GB/day ? Who knows.
>
> Isn't that a good thing? Wouldn't it be better to have them available to
> anyone who wants them? Exposing them to more fans would result in more
> folks renewing or embracing an interest in LEGO bricks, wouldn't it?
Yes, and if that were the only issue then it would be a good thing. But like
I said in my post in response I fear two very serious things that out weigh
that.
- ALL the 'lesser quality' instructions would be removed since it's a
corporate 'image' thing to have everything just so. Some exec (above Brad)
somewhere would force it because it "makes us look bad to have tattered
instructions... and who cares that those are the only ones available"...
LEGO(r) does not, to my knowledge, have a full archive of all instructions
ever produced. In some cases, the BrickShelf instruction currently available
is the best extant, until someone actually came out of the woodwork with a
better one.
- The development process is so cumbersome that it would be very labor
intensive for someone (coming out of the woodwork as above) to submit
instructions, have LD personnel approve them, have them get propagated to
the site, etc... also chances are (given how the bulk items are
"searchable") that the interface would be terrible.
No, (and I'm not just blowing smoke here, I've talked to a lot of the
players and am drawing my conclusions based on what they've said to me about
this) the BEST solution would be for TLC to pay for the bandwidth at the
BrickShelf site consumed by this but let Kevin's current excellent process
handle updates.
To address your concern, which IS valid, wide exposure is a good thing...
the lego.com site could well heavily advertise that BrickShelf is a (non
affiliated but SPONSORED) resource available at "this URL"...
A side note: One downside of posting tattered instructions is that in some
cases, that has discouraged others from submitting better copies. After all
"why bother, there's a good enough one up there already". I wish Kevin
posted a "Here are replacements I really really want" in a more public way.
But I digress. At present it's a moot point.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
11 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
