 | | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) I have never said anything about the money aspect. The amount is a little high when Flickr allows unlimited use for $25/yr but that is not the main problem. The only thing clear is that this person cannot be trusted with such a crucial role in (...) (17 years ago, 21-Jul-07, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) The ingratitude is staggering, Ted. That "crucial role" was created by that person. Brickshelf, the institution, is what it is today because of Kevin's generosity and commitment to it for the past ten years. (...) That spurious comment would (...) (17 years ago, 21-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) Brickshelf became what it is in no small part because of the thousands of people uploading content. Kevin is merely providing the real estate. Why are you surprised that people feel invested in it, and somewhat betrayed by these events? (...) (...) (17 years ago, 21-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX) !
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) Actually I have to disagree with you there. The crucial role BS has come to occupy is as an intersection point connecting LUGNET, MOCPages, Blogs, Classic-Castle, EuroBricks, BrickWiki and the dozens of other websites that have chosen (by (...) (17 years ago, 21-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) I knew somebody would offer that argument. Sure, Brickshelf depends upon content, but if Brickshelf weren't around, that content would be scattered across the net, unseen by most. "Merely providing the real estate" Are you serious!? That (...) (17 years ago, 22-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) Exactly! So, if someone doesn't come along and offer 100s of hours of personal time and $1000s of personal income to create a place like Brickshelf, it never happens, and the community never becomes what it is today. (...) Life is uncertain. I (...) (17 years ago, 22-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) (emphasis added) A slight correction: many of us felt upset because being denied to other people's content. I don't use BrickShelf to store my photos online, I use it to keep track of all the amazing MOCs out there. Are you suggesting I am (...) (17 years ago, 22-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) No. But I'm struggling with the term "betrayed". People felt understandably upset about losing a wonderful resource like Brickshelf, but the only way I could make sense of that word would be in the context in which I spoke. (...) No (...) (17 years ago, 22-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) I'm grateful that brickshelf exists, but I still don't see why that should give him a free pass for pulling a stunt like he did. It's simply bad business practice. If that's how he wants to run his business, that's fine, but I won't be a (...) (17 years ago, 23-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX) !
|
| |
| | Re: Update news on BrickShelf.com
|
|
(...) Maybe the plan was to cause a mass exodus from brickshelf to other services, in order to lower the bandwidth cost and make it manageable. If so, it certainly is likely to work. More power to brickshelf staying alive. It would be sad to see it (...) (17 years ago, 23-Jul-07, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
