Subject:
|
Re: Lego(r) Master Maniac designation?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 30 Dec 1998 16:24:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1323 times
|
| |
|
|
Stephen Jacquot writes:
> Matthew Verdier wrote:
>
> > Essentially, what is being discussed is creating an elite group of Lego
> > enthusiasts. A social club of Lego Maniacs. Fellow Lego Maniacs will dole
> > out the prize of holding this title based on the persons social standing
> > within the group. Oh sure, the group will try to quantify what makes one
> > eligible for membership, but it will ultimately come down to interpersonal
>
> I won't speak for Larry (whose idea this was in the first place),
> but that's certainly nothing like anything I ever had in mind, and
> if that's what this thing degenerates into, I'll call it a failure
> and move on. Do you believe that the outcome you describe is
> inevitable, or can you imagine ways to avoid it? Constructive
> suggestions always welcome.
I'm involved (running, actually) a local 'social club' based around a
completely different hobby, but the basics are the same, regardless of where
the special interest lies. The biggest single thing that a group can do to
avoid the 'elitism' problem is to make the membership open across the board.
I agree with Stephen that making this elitist is not the point, and not the
intent. What is being discussed is making a recognition system that is
broad-based and fair. What you are confusing that with is the creation of a
group.
> Most recently, the discussion has considered the possibility of
> separate awards for service and for skill. The service award
> (seems to me) is an unqualified good thing. It's a way for a
> grateful community to express its thanks to exceptional
> individuals (possibly organizations?) for service to the hobby.
> Since intemperate language might tend to undermine the community,
> I can see that being a possible criterion for the award. I've
I agree. It doesn't matter whether you are for or against or indifferent to
foul language. We are attempting to design a recognition for service to the
hobby. In my experience, foul language has only advanced a cause when it is
creative, well-timed, and infrequent. And even in those cases, the person it
is used against rarely appreciates it. While it is not necessarily a detriment
to the hobby, I challenge anyone to prove that it is a benefit.
> [Another thing that I like about the SIG based system, is that SIG
> members are more likely than a central committee to understand
> what mastery of their area requires, so are more likely to adopt
> appropriate selection criteria. Beyond that, who knows what could
> happen. As semi-independent organizations, SIGs could sponsor
> competitions, intermediate awards, newsletters, SIGfests, whatever.]
The problem with that being then the deliniation of SIG's. For example, if
someone designs a stunning moonbase with a detailed monorail train, is that
Space, or Train? Or both? But (mental whack) those are all details that can
be worked out later.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Lego(r) Master Maniac designation?
|
| (...) Although I could be dissuaded, I would prefer that the membership not be open absolutely, but that there be some minimal qualification that practically anyone could meet with some minor effort, perhaps any one item from an expanded version of (...) (26 years ago, 1-Jan-99, to lugnet.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Lego(r) Master Maniac designation?
|
| (...) I won't speak for Larry (whose idea this was in the first place), but that's certainly nothing like anything I ever had in mind, and if that's what this thing degenerates into, I'll call it a failure and move on. Do you believe that the (...) (26 years ago, 30-Dec-98, to lugnet.general)
|
39 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
|
|
|
|
