 | | Can't we all just hug and make up? (don't abandon ship!)
|
|
Hello, I would never try to be out of place, but I have been reading Lugnet for 4+ years now, and people just get way too offended at these things. I just finished reading Joel Kuester's letter and i was appalled! Hey, people mess up sometimes, but (...) (22 years ago, 17-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Discount code clarification and update
|
|
(...) <snipped some stuff> (...) Jake, Is the timing of this in anyway related to the events of the past week? Jude Beaudin (22 years ago, 17-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) I'm a fan of the product, not the company. My support of TLC as a company is due only to the product itself. I have some serious issues with TLC's choice of products (Jack Stone, Bionicle, etc.) and with some of their business practices (...) (22 years ago, 17-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Discount code clarification and update
|
|
All, Back in January of this year, when LEGO Direct provided the AFOL community their own coupon code for discounts on bulk bricks, an error was made on our part. We should not have used the character string "J2LUGNET" in the code, because it (...) (22 years ago, 17-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.announce, lugnet.lego.direct) !!
|
| |
| | Re: Question: Why allow postings of lego.direct on lugnet at all? (sarcasm warning)
|
|
(...) For my Lego news, I come to Lugnet almost every day. I only visit Lego.com every 2 weeks or so. If TLC announcements weren't on LUGNET, then the balance would move a little the other way. For example, every few days we see a list of S@H (...) (22 years ago, 17-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
I for one do not think that Lugnet changed after Todd left. It is still the great place that it was. I think that all the complaining people should go get out a Lego set and build it. Makes more sense that spending hours worrying that Lugnet is bad. (...) (22 years ago, 17-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) Jeez. I used to think that the overall tone of lugnet changed the day Todd took a pointed leave of absence too, but I think this is wrong-headed thinking. While Suz doesn't always come across as the friendliest person online -- I recognize (...) (22 years ago, 17-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) I try to avoid the 'me too' kind of post, but this is how I feel as well. Thanks for presenting your side of the story and I hope that Lugnet, as a body, can learn a little restraint on the 'reply' button. I'm very sorry that the reactions to (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Question: Why allow postings of lego.direct on lugnet at all? (sarcasm warning)
|
|
Why do people seem to think the site wide posting would mean we get 'spammed' in every group with the marketing stuff? Rules can be made that that has to stay in the L.D group.. just as BST stuff has to stay in B.S.T.. people follow the rules.. why (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Question: Why allow postings of lego.direct on lugnet at all? (sarcasm warning)
|
|
Dear Lego® Fans! Dear people of the Lego® company and Lego.direct! This is Lugnet: the network for Lego® users, not for Lego® producers or dealers. So after the strong discussions of the last few days let me allow to put even some more oil into the (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct) !!
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
"LUGNET Admin" <suz@lugnet.com> writes: [...] (...) [...] Thank you for this. I accept your apology and I hope that you can successfully mend the rift with TLC. I am very glad to see your prompt (given the circumstances) reply. I support you and (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
Suz: I don't think you did anything wrong. These people seem to be spring loaded to he pi**ed off position. After all is said and done this is still just a toy and if it is all that important to all these people to get so upset they need to get a (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) Wow. That was a very strong post, Suz. I refused to join in the attack on you mostly because I don't have a very good attitude about LEGO myself at the moment, but I was another one who was amazed at your post and wondered. You've shown great (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) Don't let your irrational fears hold you back. Define them and deal with them. I work in a big business. The objective is to avoid biting the hand that feeds, avoid killing the golden goose etc. I think you can trust TLC to generally respect (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
In lugnet.lego.direct, Suzanne D. Rich writes: [snipped a GoodPost (tm?)] Suz, This was actually the post I've been waiting for. I have been following this thread, wondering what could have made you so angry. You see, I have been around LUGNET for a (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) Okay, what kind of marketing info are you taking about? We've been fairly specific, i.e., mentioning that we like polls, info on new sets, services, and bulk packs, and the like. Do you really not like that? Do you not want input on some of (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
I must say that I couldn't post onto this thread because I know how it feels to be personally attacked by others, though my experience was far less than yours. I innocently posted something, that in my mind was okay, and everyone attcked me, my (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
In lugnet.lego.direct, Suzanne D. Rich writes: [quite a thoughtful post] Well, I must say you put a lot of thought into this, but as they say, nobody is perfect. This post must have really taken some time to word, but I commend you for your effort (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
I do want to answer this, but it'll be long and right now I'm exhausted.. I will. I promise. -Suz (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) Hug all 'round! Seriously, thanks, Suz, for your apology post. Hopefully all the heat around this thread will die down soon. Perhaps that post should also be sent directly to Jake? This thread is pretty huge and it might be hard to find in (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) I think that's a really good idea. I'll ask Dan and Todd about coding for it. Polls are good because lurkers are apt to participate. And with the member system, it'll be easy to prevent multi-submissions. but of course that means only members (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
Suz's post must have been difficult to write. She's right about screwing up, but who here hasn't done something they regret? I have enjoyed LUGNET for years, and have this is my first post. Clearly people are upset by Suz's behaviour, and want to (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
Just taking it as a whole... I am not so much anti-TLC as I am pro-fan as far as Lugnet is concerned. I think a lot of you haven't given that idea much thought. As far as being a lego fan myself, let's say a 1 is not much of a fan and a 10 is very (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
<snip> That must have been a very tough post to write, Suz. My hat is off to you. Here's hoping for the best going forward. ++Lar (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) In lugnet.lego.direct, Tony Kilaras writes: (...) Well, I certainly see that now.. :-( After my posting yesterday, I had to return to my job, where there are no computers. So, not until 6 p.m., when I got home, did I receive my accumulated (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct) !!
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup? (everyone’s overreacting!)
|
|
In response to your comment Richard, Although harsh, I think that it is fair for Tim to be disgusted. Tim approached the situation diplomatically, (even though the intial comment was not intended at him, it still affected him and his website a great (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.starwars, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
In lugnet.lego.direct, Richard Marchetti writes: ... (...) While this is probably an unneeded 'me too' post, I was also thinking about what the LEGO-run discussion forum would be like: - Since lego.com's audience is appreciably younger than (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) Ouch! Thats quite a negative attitude there. I do not know they would, nor would I think they would. There are some people such as yourself that think everytime they type it comes out as a marketing ploy that is poorly as disguised as an (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: LEGO - Small shop horror story
|
|
(...) I will only use this as an absolute last resort. I'm still trying via several channels to get the message to SOMEONE in the chain of command that this behavior is inexcusable. *I* don't want to harm the LEGO company's reputation. I like LEGO (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) I know it's your playhouse and you can do how you choose, but you are not being a very good host with responses such as this Suz. You really should follow the posting proceedures regarding comments of this nature and send email to Jake if this (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) Right, and Todd said it was "fine." Identifying it for what it is and generally sequestering it to a specific forum is probably a good idea. There really isn't a problem here. --Hop-Frog (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) Right, that's the reality of discussing their product lines (of course, some of us also speak very favorably about clone brands too, but whatever). If TLC/Lego Direct were allowed to make "product placement" type comments in different (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct) !
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) It is my experience with "message board" systems that some people like to take part in a heated discussion from time to time. When someone posts something which is regarded as foolish by a majority, there are commonly a lot of people who jump (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
I'm afraid I don't quite agree. "Todd Lehman" <todd@lugnet.com> wrote in message news:Gxpxys.59@lugnet.com... (...) messages: (...) know about upcoming releases before they're all over the media. (...) posted in the forum. (...) they're going to (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) I don't buy this stance. I prefer discussions like this to be held openly. I _like_ the fact that we get to put in our two cents. Todd and Suz are both seriously bright folks, but they just can't think of everything. Why shouldn't we know (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) readable by NNTP & mail, for which colour isn't doable, as there is little or no control over the client. I see no reason, however, why posts from official LEGO users cannot have an official LEGO sig attached (by the server) and maybe even a (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
EWOK!!!...!!! (...) 8< YUBB YUBB >8 (...) 8< YUBB YUBB >8 (...) 8< YUBB YUBB >8 (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
WOOKIE!!!...!!! (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?
|
|
(...) Well that is one approach to looking at it...yes for several...errr... many years North America (US and Canada) was spoiled. I'll have to agree somewhat to the approach you are taking. I don't disagree with a world point of view. My qualms is (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Terms of Use violation (was Re: Why the absence of LD in their own newsgroup?)
|
|
(...) Actually Bill Ward is right... as an admin, Suz needs to lead by example. What she posted earlier today was in my opinion very shocking and inappropriate. I have to also look at her flaming policy as of late and "judge her by her own words"... (...) (22 years ago, 15-Jun-02, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.admin.general)
|
