| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) To Suz et All, I, as many of the members of the community, am thoroughly disappointed with your course of action, Suz. Infantile isn't descriptive enough of a word to talk about what you've just done. Not only have you shot yourself in the (...) (22 years ago, 14-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
|
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup? (everyones overreacting!)
|
|
~O.K. now everyones overreacting! Lugnet is looking out for its best interests
Lego is looking out for its best interest
And I'm sure FBTB is doin the same thing too
But before anybody does anything rash lets just take a step back and reflect (...) (22 years ago, 14-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.starwars, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) I know that I personally harbor a fear of LUGNET becoming a platform for free advertising for TLC. I don't really know what harm would befall the community from that, but it seems somehow wrong. I don't know how to express this fear (...) (22 years ago, 14-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
|
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) Why? I see no reason to differentiate between two people simply because one had the luck and skill to get a job at the same place we would all love to work for. It seems to me that an employee of Lego is more likely to be an AFOL than not, and (...) (22 years ago, 14-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
|
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) Jake, I'm glad to hear that. We're very interested in that as well. On the one hand, we want to keep the groups as pure and fan-to-fan as possible and remain true to that vision, but on the other hand, we want everyone to enjoy as close (...) (22 years ago, 14-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct) !
|