 | | Re: Where Have All the Studs Gone? —Chris Phillips
| | | | (...) Having purchased the set online, no I did not have that luxury. I wanted to get an NXT, I am satisfied with that purchase, and I believe I made that clear in my original post. But I wonder why all the smooth surfaces? Why is there no way to (...) (18 years ago, 5-Dec-06, to lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Where Have All the Studs Gone? —Ross Crawford
| | | | | (...) Indeed they are, but the answer as I see it has been touched upon many times before - the LEGO system is constantly changing. It has always been changing, I don't see many sets with (URL) these> or (URL) these> in them any more. (...) Again, (...) (18 years ago, 5-Dec-06, to lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Where Have All the Studs Gone? —Chris Phillips
| | | | | (...) My assertion about the relative merits of studded/studless beams would not have an easy proof, but it might make interesting fodder for the .technic newsgroup. (Congratulations on your new curatorship, BTW!) I welcome the opportunity to (...) (18 years ago, 5-Dec-06, to lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Where Have All the Studs Gone? —Ross Crawford
| | | | | (...) Indeed, and I believe it already has been touched on there. And I believe any discussion of your assertion will end without consensus, as I believe there is little if any advantage either way. I still prefer using mostly studded bricks, but my (...) (18 years ago, 5-Dec-06, to lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
| | | | | | |
