 | | Re: Lego Island
|
|
(...) in (...) Hey, I remember that game! I only played it once, though. The most fun part of the whole game was going up into that big tower and clicking the cabinet so that the monkey would come running out. As for the minifig idea, I personally (...) (26 years ago, 4-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Custom Kits & Communications
|
|
(...) Amen to that. After all, we are talking about a child's toy. TLC *should* stick to marketing to the youth of the world (God knows we need kids playing with LEGO a lot more than Ninetendo, watching MTV, etc) while providing bulk services for (...) (26 years ago, 4-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Lego.com Builder's Gallery Down
|
|
I just wanted to point out that the Builder's Gallery at lego.com is down. When you click the "vote for model" button, none of the pictures on the new page load. Also, if anyone from TLC is reading this, I think you should check out this line of (...) (26 years ago, 5-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Island
|
|
My wife just found this game in a bargain bin at Best Buy in Nashville for $4.99!!! I think it is a great LEGO attempt at a simple adventure game... I want a RPG that includes the TOWN, or any other theme... That would be cool.... Gene (26 years ago, 5-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego Island
|
|
(...) My favorite part is running people over -- they fly apart and then go back together again. Just like real life. I also like the ambulance scene in the intro. (26 years ago, 5-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) LEGO has respectfully requested that the leaked information on this thread be deleted or otherwise removed from view. Since this was a formal request and TLC's privacy rights are in question here, this is a legal issue and I will be deleting (...) (26 years ago, 7-Aug-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.announce)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
Oh OK. Sorry LEGO (...) Jorge Rodríguez rodriguez.136@osu.edu (26 years ago, 7-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
Well, at least that proves it wasn't a hoax... (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not associate my personal views with my employer (26 years ago, 7-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Ahh, hmm. So, the information has been released to Target Stores, and Target has placed it in their computer. An employee of Target who has access to that information legally (ie, he was not sneaking into his bosses' offices) shared it with (...) (26 years ago, 7-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct) !
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Gotta agree with Eric here. And wow, I guess I either need to spend more time reading various groups again or give up entirely. In fact, I'm a little scared after looking at the little dots view of this thread. Most of what I'm seeing are (...) (26 years ago, 7-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Well said. ~Nick (URL) (26 years ago, 7-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Oh, and P.S.: Todd only deleted a lot of the reply messages because the original message was in with the reply, which makes a lot of sense. Most of the replies were mostly "Wow, that's cool" so, personally, I feel Todd did exercise good (...) (26 years ago, 7-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Yes, I deleted as few messages as possible -- only the ones which contained references to the materials which were asked to be deleted. --Todd (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) What if someone goes in to Target, asks an employee for that info, gets it, and then posts it here? (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Well, you know, the same exact thing would have happened if LEGO had asked the same thing a year ago. The only difference now is that they're paying attention, so they notice things like this. And they use e-mail, which makes things go faster. (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) I don't really have a problem with your reasons for canceling the various posts that began this thread. My problem is that TLC seems to be asking you to replace their clothing when *they* are the ones walking about nude! If they have a problem (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Interesting question. The info is out there. It WILL be discussed. I've received numerous copies of it already. I could simply post it on my website or to RTL or any number of places (either taking credit for it or as anonymously as possible) (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Me too. But in this case, *Target* is the source of the leak. At this point, it's fair game. The only issue that comes into it for me is the one of respect for Lego. Out of respect for them, I personally will avoid posting data that I might (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Apple's quiet crackdown began more than two years ago. Heads rolled, because they leaked bogus information that was planted to detect the leak. Apple may have gotten "better publicity" for last month's crackdown on photos of "the cube", but it (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
However, In reality LEGO was only doing their usual pre-sale marketing prep... ie: updating retail store databases in preparation for the upcoming December release... This however should be a problem directed at Target abd its handling of said (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) The problem here is that target is so big that they could take action against efforts by TLG to tell them how to run their stock systems or whatever (e.g. discontinuing the sale of lego) and that would loose sales for TLG. (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) This cuts both ways, Target can't NOT sell Lego at all or they will lose sales too. However they can deemphasize it or cut shelf space for it (which seems to be happening at Target and Kmart at least) ++Lar (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Which again would cause them to loose sales/profit? In the UK there is a phrase "cut your nose off to spite your face" - that is what target would be doing if they even deliberatelly reduced lego sales by 1%. Scott A (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Not if they can then push Mega Bloks more and make up for it.... (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Lego the Bully
|
|
Did anyone look at FBTB today? Seems that Lego strong armed Tim to remove the list of 2001 Lego sets from the page. Has Lego done this before? It seems to me that since the information was not gotten from a source inside Lego (whether or not it may (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) No, Lego asked Todd not to publish information they consider "confidential", and he agreed to not do that. You're still free to discuss it. But, if you want to *publish* it somewhere, you'll have to find a publisher that won't honor Lego's (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Either way, the problem is at Target. Once it's out, it's news. Frankly, I find it silly when companies "crack down" on things like this. It's their own fans they're hurting -- and it's the most rabid fanatical ones who *care* about stuff like (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Exactly. What, precisely, is the point of telling us not to talk about it? The sets might get cancelled? The prices might change? I think anyone reading this information knows that might happen. Competitors might get the info? Uh, so? I'm sure (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Even worse, they didn't even ask us. They asked the admin of the site to remove the posts. (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Uh, kinda... NICK #:^< (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Not to put you on the spot, but how long do you envision waiting for Brad J. (or somone at Lego) to post explaining their position before you post his email? I'm very interested in insight into (wow, three "in" words in a row) TLC's reasoning (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) reading (...) Ooh, mabey they'll cancel the M****** T* M*** like sets and make pirats!!! NICK #:^A (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Clarrification needed
|
|
Todd, Is this section for debate about how Lego and LD are working with the consumer? Or should all that be moved to .debate? I was wondering because I posted a large opinion piece about LD and "recent events" into .debate. Bryan (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
Eugwe Coral <eugwecoral37@cs.com> schrieb: FyyoI7.MJ1@lugnet.com... (...) What you wrote makes a lot of sence for me, but if this was the case, why did TLC ask Todd to cancel the message and not Target. Note that only Target would be affected if (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
i agree completely. i didnt get to see the set info before it was canceled, so i dug around and got it from a confidentail source. This is outragues and i think TLG needs to stop overreacting. ps if you want the set info.. .email (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) I'm also voting for this. If you (Todd) are going to cancel a post by someone at the behest of Lego (who neither sponsor nor endorse LUGNET), release the legal document asking you to remove it. I suspect that it was in the form of a 'please (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Todd, as the big kahuna, has the right to censor messages at his discretion since LUGNET IS afterall, his site. He's done it before, he's done it in this case and I'm sure he'll have to do it again. It's in the best interest of the LUGNET/TLC (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Probably not more than another 8 or 9 hours. I sent a polite request to Brad today asking for his permission to post a verbatim copy of his email, and cc'd the LSI attorney who he originally cc'd on his request, and also left a phone message (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
(...) Whoa whoa whoa! Watch what you say, please. For the record, I have *NEVER* censored a message here and never will. Any message I have ever removed has been under one of four cases: 1. Someone is unable to cancel their own message for whatever (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: 2001 Set info
|
|
You've got a point. IF Jorge Rodriguez was honest about Targets policy I don't think Lego would be so tight up about their sets for next year. Of course, Lego seems pretty bottled up abut everything now a days. ANY WAY, someone's gonna be really (...) (26 years ago, 8-Aug-00, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
