| |
David Simmons writes:
> I must agree with Matt, and I'm not even a trainhead. 4561 looks like a
> futuristic pipe dream, not a realistic funcitioning train. What's with all
> the glass? That just looks dumb. Where the damn engine?
>
> Dave
I am not intending to start another morality flame here, but is the profanity
really necessary? I think TLG would be more inclined to listen if you simply
asked, "Where's the engine?" rather than "Where's the @%*$ engine?" If you
are truly passionate about the topic of the engine, you can use words which
carry more weight through articulation. I think that kids surfing this NG
can get enough profanity by going to see a movie, they don't need to get it
here too.
Duane
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Profanity (was Re: Trains)
|
| I'd hardly call that a profanity... nor 'hell', but that tends to get picked on a lot on American TV shows too. But we're rapidly heading off-topic here - the problem is that Lego trains resemble no kind of (mother-flippin') train that is currently (...) (26 years ago, 8-Jan-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Trains
|
| I must agree with Matt, and I'm not even a trainhead. 4561 looks like a futuristic pipe dream, not a realistic funcitioning train. What's with all the glass? That just looks dumb. Where the damn engine? Dave Matthew Bates wrote in message ... (...) (...) (26 years ago, 7-Jan-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
7 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
|
|
|
|
