Subject:
|
Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 9 Dec 1999 00:00:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2076 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Jasper Janssen writes:
> On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 01:33:54 GMT, "Richard Franks"
> <spontificus@__nospam__yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Once you start doing that, the temptation is to release newer ones.. I
> > thought Suzannes words about fans trying to show each other the latest
> > information to appear cool or gain popularity was a bit harsh. But her words
> > seem to have been
>
> It's the reality of the internet.
Very possibly so, but it's still a bit disappointing!
> > So yeah, maybe now these are taboo, hit-hungry people will seek them out and
> > display them. But is this rebelling for a cause or for effect?
> >
> > The analogy? That publishing scans that could harm the LEGO community, isn't
> > rebelling against something worthwhile(2), it's just rebelling for the sake
> > of it. Rock on guys!
>
> You seem to be talking to someone else.
I try to rarely address my comments specifically to one person - if I can I try
to make it impersonal. So while I was replying to your post, I wasn't talking
to you in particular.
> I'm trying to discuss something here, and all I can get is another
> rant about how bad it is to display the new dealer catalogue.
You're right - I did answer your question in my first line, then ranted for a
bit, gave it another two sentences and then ranted some more.
I could argue that my rantings extended the discussion beyond the original
question, but either way - I can see how receiving a rant (aimed at you or not)
in response to a fairly asked question can be frustrating.
> Excuse me for being intensely underwhelmed.
No - by all means go ahead - if I squiff up I'd rather know about it then
blindly do it again!
The undercurrent of my feeling on your question, (perhaps obscured a bit by my
other points), was that once you condone some recent retailers catalogs being
displayed, that they will become a hot item that people will scramble to see
and people will compete to display the latest ones. Also that now they are
taboo this may happen anyway, which would be a bit sad (1)
Take care!
Richard
(1) If I was feeling antagonisic I'd say that you ignored this point and ranted
at me instead ;) (2)
(2) But I'm only feeling a little bit antagonistic, so ignore the above!
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
| (...) I personally couldn't give a DAMN about the # of hits to my site, as my site already occasionally hits the limit, and I can't afford more bandwidth right now. I wanted (and got) the scans for my own personal use, to peruse and plan what sets (...) (25 years ago, 9-Dec-99, to lugnet.general)
| | | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
| (...) Quite. But you do learn to live with it. As someone once said "Instant Access, Instant Idiot". (...) I wasn't feeling very forgiving at the time I wrote that[3], so that probably led to me seeing things that weren't intended. (...) Yup. That's (...) (25 years ago, 9-Dec-99, to lugnet.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: COMPLETE LIST OF NEW SETS FOR 2000
|
| (...) It's the reality of the internet. (...) You seem to be talking to someone else. I'm trying to discuss something here, and all I can get is another rant about how bad it is to display the new dealer catalogue. Excuse me for being intensely (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-99, to lugnet.general)
|
105 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
