Subject:
|
Re: to LEGO factory : You are not being fair.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego
|
Followup-To:
|
lugnet.off-topic.fun
|
Date:
|
Wed, 24 Nov 2004 05:37:00 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3838 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego, Sean Kenney wrote:
> Dear LEGO Factory...
>
> I couldn't find any contact info on the LEGO factory web site, so I am
> posting this message here.
>
> [Week 1's winner?]
>
> You have pronounced the "Senior winner" of the contest's first week, yet this
> person has clearly cheated, as well as has violated the rules of the
> competition.
>
> He/she violated the rules:
> This model was built on a base greater than 16x16. This simply and clearly
> violates the terms of the contest. Why was it allowed to even compete?
> Allowing entries that do not meet the terms of the contest will only
> encourage people to do whatever they want.
>
> He/she has clearly cheated:
> The model's upload image was corrupted for 4 days. (And I feel bad for this
> person! No one would vote for a model they can't see.) But after no votes at
> all for 2 days, 150 votes were instantly collected on this model, while the
> model was still unviewable! 93 more votes came in before the image was
> fixed. Then it grabbed about 100 new votes. Tell me, why would only 100
> people like it when they can see it, if 243 people liked it when it was
> garbled?
Ouch. Did TLC hire Diebold? :^)
- John Ladasky
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | to LEGO factory : You are not being fair.
|
| Dear LEGO Factory... I couldn't find any contact info on the LEGO factory web site, so I am posting this message here. Week 1's winner? You have pronounced the "Senior winner" of the contest's first week, yet this person has clearly cheated, as well (...) (20 years ago, 22-Nov-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX) !!
|
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
|
|
|
|
