 | | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
What Jim has stated was done so perfectly that it doesn't need any "me too"s, but here is my total agreement with his words anyway. And I think that the administrative reasons for creating this newsgroup and also limiting official TLC access to (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) There is a big difference between _saying_ they can't answer a particular question and not responding at all. It's the "not responding at all" bit that seems to cause a lot of the grief here on Lugnet. Deidre drb@tasmail.com (22 years ago, 6-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) WOW... and then I wonder why Lego only post 'marketing-related' stuff here (lugnet). We (adults) can WORSE than the kids on FBTB. Over there when LD says it can't answer, the general felling is okay we understand. Here, if Lego doesn't answer (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) I'll take that bet... how much did you want to lose? (22 years ago, 6-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) --- (...) All good and valid points, but I do understand and sympathies with Suz. Because it really seams as though LD is simply using Lugnet as a marketing forum to test their products and promote their objectives. I may be new, but it didn’t (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
I think the reason Jake is more apt to respond to the questions on FBTB is due to the nature of that forum: it's like a reading time for the children where he is treated like Superman. The preadolescents dote on Jake. Also, from my observation of (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) Isn't it against the rules to do so, though? Or is it just against the rules for Jake to ask in his post that someone do it but OK if someone figures out that it needs doing on their own? I'm admittedly confused about it. (...) There really is (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) I think you're right. Besides, quite often when someone from TLC posts something important, it's quickly forwarded to the appropriate groups (if necessary) by Lugnet readers. It's also nice to know that all posts from TLC's employees (about (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
"Jeff Stembel" <aulddragon@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:Gx9EIE.L17@lugnet.com... (...) about (...) official (...) anywhere, I (...) absolute (...) complaining (...) so (...) then (...) face by (...) forum (...) forums, (...) love to (...) (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) In my opinion this is the key point moreso then limiting where TLC employees can post. I can understand the limits. I believe it was established so that it could be determinied if a person was posting AS an employee of TLC opposed to just (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
