Subject:
|
Re: Amount spent - LEGO code update (Re: Brad Justus' Comments - Why Complain?_
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 28 Dec 1999 12:37:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3123 times
|
| |
|
|
I think spending thousands on Lego toys does not reflect your Love of the
Brick, but may well reflect on your sanity or your worldly success. I also
thought your addendum to the Lego geek code was quite clever, and it caused
an LOL or two here. Thanks for having the courage to say what you did and
for continuing your advocacy of your stance.
--
Have fun!
John
The Legos you've been dreaming of...
http://www114.pair.com/ig88/lego
my weird Lego site:
http://www114.pair.com/ig88/
Hooray! Hooray! Its Y2K! A new decade starts next year.
Wayne R Hussey wrote in message ...
> What do you want? My opinion wasn't "serious" when it was thought I'd only
> spent a few bucks and was a neophite to the Lego Collecting Family - Mark
> asked me "to come back when I'd spent 20 to 30 grand", been there, done • that.
>
> And now the interpretation of what I say in response is taken as a way to
> validate my opinion? Why is this a contest?
>
> I stated my opinion (however poorly), and I'll have no problem if you • choose
> to disagree with that opinion - as many others have. But why should the
> disagreement take the form of whether I'm qualified (or you're qualified) • to
> state an opinion to begin with? No one asked for your qualifications in • order
> to state your opinion - as I was.
>
> I am still interested in what you have to say about my point of argument. • So
> far, this series of responses has not been to my argument - only to me.
>
> Or maybe you could present your own opinions about those who want to • encourage
> others to act against Lego's wishes regards the posting of inappropriate
> material. Whatever. Just move on.
>
> My (or anyone's) investment, in time or money, is not relevant to this • topic
> or to the value of my (or anyone's) opinion.
>
> The statement I began with is: We have no rights to use intellectual • material
> generated by The Lego Group - and that if we want to behave as adults we • need
> to treat their wishes with respect and responsible action. And that
> responsible action includes not complaining about their expressed wishes.
>
> Disagree if you do. But disagree with the message, don't aim at the • messenger.
>
> Wayne
>
> In lugnet.general, Jeff Thompson writes:
> > In lugnet.general, Wayne R. Hussey writes:
> > > I believe that my 25 years of collecting and building with the Brick, and
> > > about $50,000 spending - not counting increased rents, storage materials • and
> > > other expenses - during that time, qualifies me as "serious".
> > >
> > > In lugnet.general, Mark Harrison writes:
> > > > Hey Dad!! You seem to be too old to play with Lego.
> > > >
> > > > So your message isn't a gripe?
> > > >
> > > > And can't be very serious if you've only spent a couple of bucks on • lego,
> > come
> > > > back when it's more like 20 or 30 grand.
> >
> > > >
> > > > Mark H.
> >
> >
> > While I'm tired of commenting on the civility issues,
> > I do want to note at this point that while I am impressed with
> > the people who can afford to spend tens of thousands of dollars
> > on LEGO, I'm not impressed enough to grant that their opinion
> > is more important than my own.
> >
> > Although perhaps if other people feel otherwise, a "amount
> > spent on LEGO" code should be added to LEGO geek code.
> > (reference: http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Lofts/9639/lcodev22.txt )
> > With this simple indicator, we all will know how seriously
> > to take your opinion.
> >
> > $----- I can't afford to buy LEGO. In fact, I can't afford to buy
> > food and am starving to death.
> >
> > $---- I have to shoplift LEGO. I now post to LUGNET from prison.
> >
> > $--- I have to choose between LEGO and paying my bills.
> > Unfortunately, it's too cold in my state to live without
> > heat.
> >
> > $-- I have to choose between LEGO and paying my bills. But
> > who needs electricity?
> >
> > $- I buy only from garage sales - it's cheaper that way,
> > and it's so much fun separating out the broken elements from
> > the ritvik and erector set pieces.
> >
> > $ I buy a set or two a month, preferably on sale.
> >
> > $+ I buy a set or two a week.
> >
> > $++ I buy hundreds of sets a year to auction the pieces off.
> >
> > $+++ I am Larry (or the equivalent) [1]
> >
> > $++++ LEGO Shop At Home calls ME every morning to see how I'm
> > doing. Tremble, mortals.
> >
> > $+++++ I own the LEGO company.
> >
> > --
> >
> > jthompson@esker.com "Float on a river, forever and ever, Emily"
> >
> > [1] Larry might argue that there is no equivalent.
> >
> >
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
21 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
