 | | Re: A new area of LEGO.com: the Build section
|
|
(...) The only conclusion I've been able to reach is that AFOLs probably aren't part of the target market at www.lego.com. AFOLs are useful for spreading contagious enthusiasm and giving feedback on the website, but we really don't need to be wowed (...) (23 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: A new area of LEGO.com: the Build section
|
|
(...) There are a couple good sources of stats like this. Statmarket.com used to be one of them, but now you have to pay to get access to their stats. After they changed to pay-only, a couple handy pages like these popped up: (URL) links to lots of (...) (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: A new area of LEGO.com: the Build section
|
|
(...) Well, www.lego.com has been "too cool" for me since virtually day one anyway, so if its webdesigners can't figure out these issues, it'd be no big loss if I can never access content on it. LUGNET is *much* more friendly (and more human IMO) (...) (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: A new area of LEGO.com: the Build section
|
|
(...) Does anyone have any reliable stats on how many people are left out (as a percentage) due to platform issues, due to using obsolete browsers (perhaps for perfectly legitimate reasons) and due to running with restrictions turned on? Where I am (...) (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) was (...) small (...) bread- (...) hasn't (...) Funny? The KB I work for not only has the Chrome Castle sets but also just got the Women's Soccer Team in. Just FYI. -Mike Petrucelli (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
