Subject:
|
my take on the 2000 leaks controversy
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Sat, 11 Dec 1999 09:10:07 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
323 times
|
| |
|
|
Here is what I believe to be the rules about posting:
1.if it is from a 2000 consumer catalog anywhere in the world it is ok
2.if it is on the lego website, accessable from the lego main page
somehow then it is ok
3.if it is on the lego website but not accessable from the main lego
page somehow (i.e. it is hidden) then it is not ok
4.if it is from a vendors catalog then it is not ok
5.if it is from another source (e.g. a TRU employee) then it will be
delt with on a case by case basis.
todd, anything to add/correct?
--
Jonathan Wilson
wilsonj@xoommail.com
http://members.xoom.com/wilsonj/
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: my take on the 2000 leaks controversy
|
| The rule of thumb as proposed by some appears to be that we should pretend the 2000 Lego doesn't even exist until 2002 rolls around. ;) -- Paul Davidson Jonathan Wilson <wilsonj@xoommail.com> wrote in message news:385214EE.BB7B7A...ail.com... (...) (25 years ago, 11-Dec-99, to lugnet.general)
|
4 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
