 | | Re: We are ready. —Ben Roller
|
| | | (...) I noticed that, but was being hopeful. :) Also I was ignoring the fact that they could just put up one set of instructions and say "hey, this one was developed since 1955." (...) So, is that what Lego meant? Does Brickshelf even have (...) (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: We are ready. —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) I dunno. Note the smileys... :-) Maybe it's the routing they will go in future. I do NOT want to speculate further as I don't want to jiggle Kevin's elbow more than I just did. (...) Funny, I was thinking of saying the same thing about YOUR (...) (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: We are ready. —Rob Doucette
|
| | | | | | (...) I get that alot from developers... 4 Q too! (22 years ago, 21-Apr-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: We are ready. —Cary Clark
|
| | | | In lugnet.lego.direct, Ben Roller writes: ... (...) ... I have one Samsonite-era set from the early 70's: (URL) includes a single sheet showing models that _can't_ build with this set. I was amused. (In the set's defense, the back of the box shows (...) (22 years ago, 19-Apr-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| | | | |
