Subject:
|
Re: Sept/Oct LEGO Magazine
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego.direct
|
Date:
|
Fri, 20 Sep 2002 10:56:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1057 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego.direct, Jake McKee writes:
<snip>
I can agree with all of what you said and still feel that giving blow off
answers was wrong. Write in a style that's accessible to children and a
style that's funny, and appropriate to their age group, sure. But if a
question is posed to you, either ignore it completely or answer it in a way
that doesn't make fun of the questioner or brush their question aside.
Neither of the two cited questions, in my view, were answered in an
appropriate manner. LEGO may well have good reason for not wanting to answer
certain questions but this is in my view (and of the non scientific sample I
took) not the way to do it.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Sept/Oct LEGO Magazine
|
| (...) Now hang on... I think "appalling" is a little too strong. (...) I'm not sure that I agree that the copy in question is "patronising". We do a lot of testing with the magazines (nearly every issue if I'm not mistaken) and fun stuff like the (...) (22 years ago, 19-Sep-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
24 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
