Subject:
|
Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego
|
Date:
|
Thu, 30 Dec 2004 15:05:34 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
13153 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego, Reinhard "Ben" Beneke wrote:
> In lugnet.lego, David Koudys wrote:
> > In lugnet.lego, Ken Nagel wrote:
> > > In lugnet.lego, David Koudys wrote:
> > > > In lugnet.lego, Ken Nagel wrote:
> > > > > In lugnet.lego, David Eaton wrote:
>
>
> > Finally, I have stated this over and over again and yet you delete, obfuscate,
> > and adhere to your bottom line, which, as shown by all evidence, proves you to
> > be wrong. But you still adhere to it. You obviously haven't convinced ne that
> > you're even remotely right, nor, by your apparent lack of debating the actual
> > issue, does it seem this is going to change. We're done.
> >
> > Dave K
>
> Dave,
>
> as you write yourself, you have stated things over and over again. But you have
> not convinced me. And I have not seen a single pro-TLC posting within the German
> AFOL community. They are obviously tending towards Ken's opinion as I do. Some
> people do not care at all. And I myself should not care as well, because I never
> bought a set 10152 and I will not buy one unless they are doing one in grey
> instead of bley.....
Hey Ben,
I have, and he has, and we all have stated our POV over and over again. The
thing is, the points that Ken made were refuted by others, as well as myself, in
this very thread. These points were not addressed but summarily deleted, and
the original faulty claim that TLC somehow didn't keep their word was
reitereated.
I love debates. I love debating. I love going on and on about whatever subject
is put in front of me (especially one that I have some passion about, such as
our chosen hobby here) and I would like to think I have an open mind to be able
to see other people's POV. One of the issues specifically with this part of the
debate is that there is no debate--points made by 'the other side (me and those
that agree with me) are not refuted and/or removed from discussion, and
reiteration of, in my opinion, faulty logic. This is not debating. This is,
again in my opinion, blindly adhering to an idea contrary to available evidence
and 'shouting down' the other side. Stamina in a shouting match--to basically
'stick to your guns' until the other side just gets tired of trying to talk
sense--does not equal a debate.
> Nevertheless I am deeply disappointed by TLC. They called the set limited in
> Germany and gave certain numbers. They said this would be the last chance for
> fans to get Mearsk bricks from TLC. (Then the base for these statements chaged
> as you said - I know that point of yours, but still disagree strongly).
And I thought that, since day one when they came out with this set, it was known
that the limitation of the set was due to the limitation of colour--that TLC
didn't change their statement--they've been forthright with us from the
beginning.
I've stated that very notion--
TLC stated that the set was limited--True.
TLC stated that the reason for the limitation was the limitation of Maersk Blue
pellets--True.
Maersk came to TLC with the colour and a contract to make more--True.
With a new contract, and the Maersk Blue colour, the reason the 10152 was
limited becomes null and void--True.
If you would like to dispute any of these points, again, I'm all for the debate.
Don't use my example, but show me where TLC 'broke their 'promiss''. In doing
so, remember that the example that Ken gave way back was a faulty analogy and
was summarily refuted (again, with no response).
>
> I had partly lost my faith in statements from TLC and this has now again come
> worse. That is why I am thinking this rerelease is so bad. They could have
> solved this so easy by changing the set number by one digit or changing the
> package design (or changing from bley to grey :-). That would have caused some
> minor costs, but now they have bad reputation due to this very thread (and
> others all over the web and real world). I am sure this loss of reputation is by
> far more cost effective than a the costs for a change.
And I say that they've earned a 'better reputation' from this neck of the
woods--many people I know are excited about this--new contracts that will
provide lucrative returns for TLC as well as wonderful sets for the AFOL
community--it's a 'win-win' for all involved.
Again I will reiterate--for people who state they are so concerned about TLC and
their chosen hobby, in my opinion, you really have a strange way of showing
it--"Hey TLC--don't you go signing that contract because you will make money if
you do so!"
>
> Happy new year!
>
> Ben
>
> P.s.: I think if you are done with Ken, then we are done as well. And this means
> at this very point, that you have decided to devide the community.
> Do you really think we cannot live within one community and have different
> opinions? I prefer 7-wide trains and still 8-wide Homa and John are friends of
> mine.....
See, projecting these ill-will ideas on me is akin to me asking you "Are you
still beating your wife?" The question immediately it puts you in a bad light.
I state emphatically that it is not I that 'decided to divide the community'.
Rather, in my opinion, I try with my actions, words, and deeds to promote this
hobby. Further, I try to promote what I believe is best in maintaining a
relationship amongst AFOLs as well as between the AFOL community and TLC.
Since there are those who are vehemently adhering to a very faulty view of what
actually transpired, I believe it is these people who are embittering and
dividing the LEGO community at large. It's much like that school yard bully,
with the inordinately large chip on his or her shoulder, walking around daring
someone else to knock the chipp off. Anything that happens is perceived by the
bully as a dare--"You looking at me kid??".
After years of 'Jack Stone', 'bley', 'Galidor', 'Znap', and some would even say
'Bionicle', certain members of this AFOL community are holding huge grudges
against TLC. Anything that TLC does now is slanted by this pent-up
frustration--The past 'transgressions' of TLC has embittered people to look at
*anything* that TLC does as wrong. And, again only my belief, that's exactly
what happened here. I here phrases like 'downward spiral' and the like, which
shows to me that these people group this decision in 'with the rest', instead of
analysing the 10152 issue as a separate one, as it should be.
If one were to actually analyse what transpired specifically relating to the
10152 issue, instead of grouping it with 'transgressions of the past', I believe
that one would come closer to my interpretation. Look at the facts (as outlined
above) and try to prove guilt in this specific instance.
Finally, when I said I was done, I meant I ws done 'debating' with Ken. A
flurry of posts between the two of us and no one was saying anything
different--compounded with the apparent lack of his trying to refute any point,
idea, or example I made. I forgot what they called it in a chess game, but if
both sides repeat the same move over and over again, with no chance of winning
for either player, the game is called.
Dave K
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
| (...) SNIP (...) SNIP (...) A debate is an exchange of FACTS in order to prusuade the other party to your point of view. The facts that you seem to be dissapointed that I stick to are Lego said this was the "last chance" to buy Maersk blue and there (...) (20 years ago, 31-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
| (...) Dave, as you write yourself, you have stated things over and over again. But you have not convinced me. And I have not seen a single pro-TLC posting within the German AFOL community. They are obviously tending towards Ken's opinion as I do. (...) (20 years ago, 30-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
257 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
