 | | Re: Expert Builder website - Great response results in first update —Kevin Wilson
|
| | | Allan Bedford wrote in message ... (...) were (...) Nobody minds a provocative and not necessarily kind review. There are enough of them posted on lugnet.reviews to make that obvious. Nobody minds you objecting to Jack Stone - many of us agree with (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Expert Builder website - Great response results in first update —Richie Dulin
|
| | | | | (...) Indeed. I don't have any particular desire for Jack Stone sets (though I do own two of them) but I do think they are great fun for 3-4 year olds. They are also apalling value in terms of price per piece. (...) Cheers Richie Dulin (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Expert Builder website - Great response results in first update —Erik Olson
|
| | | | | | All this brouhaha has made me buy me first Jack Stone set. Thanks a lot. (23 years ago, 9-Jan-02, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Expert Builder website - Great response results in first update —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) I would have to agree. You can certainly editorialise or write for entertainment value if you choose, but I think when you start using the word "review", you have undertaken an obligation to structure your article in a certain way. Honest (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Expert Builder website - Great response results in first update —Allan Bedford
|
| | | | | | (...) I see your point Larry. But the Expert Builder site isn't journalism... it's a guerilla marketing campaign. :) (...) I tried to set low expectations. I am not out to deceive anyone, just give a chance for other voices to be heard. It's really (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-02, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Expert Builder website - Great response results in first update —Allan Bedford
|
| | | | (...) I see your point. And I'll give it consideration. But as mentioned, it's a different site, with different rules than LUGNET. I do appreciate your comments though. If you take a look at some of the other products I've reviewed so far, you can (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jan-02, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Expert Builder website - Great response results in first update —Richie Dulin
|
| | | | In lugnet.general, Allan Bedford writes: [snip] (...) The problem I had with your "review" was not that it was bad, but that you'd included an untrue statement, and that inclusion indicated that it was extremely unlikely you'd built the set. And I'm (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-02, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Expert Builder website - Great response results in first update —Allan Bedford
|
| | | | (...) My mistake. Inferred, not back up by fact. My apology to you. (...) They are reviews. They are my own lame opinions. They are not fact. No where do I claim that I am the LEGO authority to be believed above all others. The site uses lots of (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-02, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | |
