Subject:
|
Re: Have they done it again?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 22 Nov 2001 04:51:31 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
421 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Ross Crawford writes:
> In lugnet.general, Allan Bedford writes:
> > I'm just curious... not trying to sound ungrateful, but I'm just wondering
> > if they've done it again?
>
> Allan, I think you're being a little unfair. Specifically
>
> http://news.lugnet.com/lego/direct/?n=3643
> http://news.lugnet.com/lego/direct/?n=3308
> http://news.lugnet.com/lego/announce/?n=38
>
> seem to me to be announcements rather than questions requiring responses, and
> as such, according to the guidelines for .lego.direct,
> http://news.lugnet.com/lego/direct/?n=6, it was probably a bit rude for so many
> people to respond in .lego.direct anyway (ducks).
I won't argue with you at all. You're probably right. I guess my question
should have been, "Is LEGO at all interested in any sort of two way
communication, or will these always just be announcements?"
I guess I'm frustrated because in my replies to these postings I have asked
direct questions, none of which have ever been answered. Should I stop asking?
Example:
In my response to the recent question about "What Makes a Legend?" I had a
specific question about some wheels to which Brad was referring. This made
some difference to the answer that responded to his question.
http://news.lugnet.com/lego/direct/?n=3480
But my questions never got answered. Which effectively means that Brad's
question never got answered fully and completely. Which begs the
question... what sort of information/responses are they looking for? Do
they already have the decisions made and they're just feeling around for
feedback? Or are they truly interested in what people have to say?
> With regard to http://news.lugnet.com/lego/direct/?n=3462, Brad said "Thanks in
> advance for your help.". I would consider that thanks, wouldn't you?
Umm... honestly? No. But I'm a communicator. I like to communicate. I
feel like LEGO drops these infograms, then sneaks back behind the one-way
glass to see how we (the test subjects) will react to their news. They
don't seem to be truly interested in what we have to say, only if we prefer
green over blue etc.
> Seems redundant to post again just to says thanks again. Hopefully, LD will
> thank those who contributed by producing some great legends sets in the
> future. I'd be happy with that.
I'm not trying to get them to post just for the sake of posting. You're
right, thanking us twice would be redundant. I am interested in knowing if
they hear these comments. I'm interested in knowing 'who' hears these
comments. And I'm always interested in knowing how to get more and more
comments heard. Few companies in the world have the direct access to their
clients and the parents of their clients that the LEGO company has. I only
want to try and help them to use this communications channel more
effectively. I'm not trying to be a pain in the neck, honestly. I know it
seems that way sometimes. I just cannot figure out why the company doesn't
tap this incredible resource more deeply.
Regards,
Allan B.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Have they done it again?
|
| (...) many (...) asking? (...) be an indirect answer (though maybe direct confirmation would've been nice). (...) Hmmmm. Well, so far they've been pretty responsive to some enquiries here - we got some pretty quick responses when we had problems (...) (23 years ago, 22-Nov-01, to lugnet.general)
| | | Re: Have they done it again?
|
| In lugnet.general, Allan Bedford writes: "Is LEGO at all interested in any sort of two way (...) Give Brad a break-- he *is* the Senior VP of LD after all. That he even takes the time to post here instead of having someone else do it is remarkable (...) (23 years ago, 22-Nov-01, to lugnet.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Have they done it again?
|
| (...) Allan, I think you're being a little unfair. Specifically (URL) to me to be announcements rather than questions requiring responses, and as such, according to the guidelines for .lego.direct, (URL) it was probably a bit rude for so many people (...) (23 years ago, 22-Nov-01, to lugnet.general)
|
13 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
|
|
|
|
