 | | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) I don't know about that. After seeing Lego's lastest offering, it seems that the clone brands are where they're getting ideas now. Ha ha, only serious. Ben Roller P.S. Ok, I need some advice here. At this point I'm not intending to talk to TLC (...) (22 years ago, 13-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
Suz: Is their absence especially irritating because they have used references to Lugnet for certain marketing practices (like the Mania Magazine, I think it was), and that probably without permission? So they trade on the Lugnet name but don't (...) (22 years ago, 13-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) But Lego Direct didn't leap onto LUGNET willy-nilly without first having reviewed the types of discussions that go on here. Anyone (and certainly an outreaching department of a multi-billion dollar company) could have predicted the way that (...) (22 years ago, 13-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) Current policy already allows this. Jake, for instance, is using his unofficial account right now. And conversations similar to the recent '20 Questions' have always been allowed on LUGNET. LEGO employees are welcome everywhere on LUGNET. The (...) (22 years ago, 13-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) Very good points, Jeff. I wasn't going to hop in on this thread myself to be totally honest. It disturbs me in many ways. But at this point, I have something I really want to get out. The attitude posters and administrators on this site (...) (22 years ago, 13-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct) !!
|
