 | | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) Well, as a fan who would enjoy having an easier time of obtaining certain elements I hope that the last part is true. Of course, we have this discussion all the time -- and if we are not having it at some point, we cycle back to it eventually. (...) (23 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: A new area of LEGO.com: the Build section
|
|
(...) Much better! Now I'll have to spend a while exploring... :-) Thanks Tomas! (23 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) Well put. (...) Maybe. But what if most of us come to our senses and stop doing things like buying 20 garage door packs at a time? :-) (23 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
"Mike Walsh" <mike_walsh@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:GD6Kwp.9JI@lugnet.com... (...) guiding (...) do (...) lose (...) more (...) Perhaps the original point would be better stated as "the market is always right" i.e. if majority of your (...) (23 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
"Harvey Henkelman" <HarveyHenkelman@webtv.net> wrote in message news:GD6Gpw.n5B@lugnet.com... (...) Define 'right' The customer has the ultimate decision to accept or decline But they are often 'wrong' They buy the wrong products for the wrong (...) (23 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
| |
| | RE: A new area of LEGO.com: the Build section
|
|
(...) I believe this problem exists for Netscape 4.x on all platforms. Netscape 4.x does a horrible job with CSS positioning anyway, so I don't know if it's a big loss. --Bram Bram Lambrecht bram@cwru.edu (URL) (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: A new area of LEGO.com: the Build section
|
|
(...) It's dead. Web sites that just use plain HTML without JS or animations or other glitz are just not "cool" enough. I agree with you, don't get me wrong. But the reality is that the vast majority of Web users these days are using M$ Internet (...) (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: A new area of LEGO.com: the Build section
|
|
(...) I'd vote for a no-javascript fix. Until Lego's website is viewable without it, you're alienating people who don't have Javascript due to platform or security issues. Whatever happened to plain old regular HTML, anyway? Cheers, - jsproat (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GD6KF3.828@lugnet.com... (...) I agree with Larry. The customer is not always right. I have seen this dozens of times with our customers. What customers do have the right to do is (...) (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) I disagree. It's not an unequivocal truth, although it has to be a guiding principle. There ARE exceptions. ++Lar (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) LEGO® must remember that the customer is always right, period. -Harvey (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: LEGO Systems Announces New Chief as President
|
|
Gary, Can you give a little background on the limited bulk sales that Lego had in 1987? I have never heard of this and I'm sure others would be interested as well. Bryan "Gary Istok" <gistok@umich.edu> wrote in message (...) (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: A new area of LEGO.com: the Build section
|
|
Protective undergarments notwithstanding, I have just checked on Netscape 4.75 for Linux (pretty darn close to what Chris was using), and the same bug is present. If you turn off Javascript you also turn off stylesheets, even if it looks like (...) (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Garage Doors Cancelled! (was Re: Trains, Garage Doors and more, oh my!)
|
|
(...) [snip] (...) Thanks for the update, Lindsay. It is too bad this all happened. /Eric McC/ (23 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: LEGO Systems Announces New Chief as President
|
|
(...) I don't think the 1989 date (President of Lego Systems) is correct. I was interviewed on the "25 Years of Lego in Canada" segment of CBC 'The Journal' TV news show back in 1986 (even though I'm just over the border in metro Detroit), and (...) (23 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
