 | | Re: Introducing LEGO Direct
|
|
(donning flame-retardant attire) When these young people walk out into the real world, they will find that not everyone is testosterone-driven, regardless of their gender. Gender and aggressive behavior do not line up evenly. I have known aggressive (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Horrible quote from the Scala web catalog
|
|
(...) Nope. The message I'm being presented by LEGO is that they don't care enough to proof their text. 'faciest'? Steve (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.scala)
|
| |
| | Re: Introducing LEGO Direct
|
|
TLC has produced some non-conflict sets, the one that comes to my mind is 6595 'Surf Shack'. I somewhat suspect that this set was sort of a prototype-Paradisa set, although without the pink. Train sets would also fall into this catagory. Ray (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Introducing LEGO Direct
|
|
(...) Part of my frustration is that it's difficult to _find_ Lego system toys that are generally appealing to girls. Almost all of the sets are fire trucks, police stations, race cars, or space/castle/pirate sets, and as someone else mentioned, all (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Introducing LEGO Direct
|
|
Eric Kingsley wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> I know I'll prolly get lit up good for this, but here goes. Generally speaking, I don't see LEGO as being a toy sought out by girls. Now before you ignite the torches, let me explain. First, take an (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Brad Justus is real
|
|
(...) Why not? BO2K runs on Windows NT and Win2000 boxes. (The new version of Netbus does too, but I'm not sure if that's publicly available yet.) (...) But if you anticipate what packets the remote side will return, you can generate the appropriate (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: "If it were my toy company..."
|
|
(...) Easier than designing and making new parts. (...) Ditto. (...) They do this anyway. (...) Ditto. (...) Ditto. (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Introducing LEGO Direct
|
|
(...) A good point. And arguably (perhaps unfairly, but that's a further debate) a traditional male testosterone-driven worldview. Why does "play" mean "conflict"? (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Introducing LEGO Direct
|
|
(...) Wow. You think it is such a bad idea you had to let us know twice? You must really hate the idea, then. ;) Jeff (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Introducing LEGO Direct
|
|
(...) Yeah, but just think, with a Pikachu Lego Piece, you'd have a new "Evil Monster for Knights to Slay(TM)". :) Although, I think I'd save that spot for Jigglypuff. On the upside, I'd have a Jesse Minifig(1). ;) (...) Ick. Is that show still (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
