 | | Re: Clones Database (was Re: MB sightings) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | (...) It costs money to run a server. You wanna throw your own money at hosting content related to imitation brands, go right ahead. There are plenty of hosting services. (...) I agree. (...) I'm not against helping people find information about (...) (24 years ago, 6-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.db.scans)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database) —Richard Parsons
|
| | | | | (...) Before Todd wears yet another hammering, a quick note in support, feel free to hunt me instead. Contrary to the culture of entitlement popular in the US (you know, I'm owed stuff just 'cause I'm here, ne'er-do-wells protesting 'I have rights' (...) (24 years ago, 6-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.db.scans)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database) —Jason Rowoldt
|
| | | | | | | Hey, I think Todd was being overly polite there (see: Are we being to nice?). What he <b>could</b> have said is: "**** off, this is LUGNET. This is our site. We will host what we want to host. You want register MegaBlocksUG or TycoUG .com? Go ahead, (...) (24 years ago, 6-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.db.scans)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database) —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | | | (...) I have a real problem with Lugnet being considered Todd and Suzanne's exclusive sandbox -- in reality, it is and it isn't depending on what part we are examining. People contribute time, money, content, scans, etc. It strikes me as a community (...) (24 years ago, 6-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.db.scans)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database) —Shiri Dori
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Oh, certainly!! Neither Todd nor Richard are saying that. I think the inference is that everyone hanging out here is part of the community; but the sandbox itself? Yep, that's Todd and Suz's only. And ultimately, if they decide they don't want (...) (24 years ago, 6-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.db.scans)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Dan & Jenn Boger do, yes -- and have done incredibly huge great things in the past few months for the data in the DB. Selçuk Göre and Joshua Delahunty also have access and have done huge great things too. --Todd (24 years ago, 7-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.db.scans)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database) —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | | | | Well, just to throw in $.02 here, I'd be curious to see a clone database, and I might even use it from time to time. However, two things: A. If we view it as Todd & Suz's sandbox, it's their choice. B. If we see them as fulfilling our needs/wants in (...) (24 years ago, 7-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.db.scans)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database) —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) It's not in the business plan. (...) It's also a matter of principle. (...) LUGNET would not be LUGNET. (...) --Todd (also baldly going :-) (24 years ago, 7-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.db.scans)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database) —Selçuk Göre
|
| | | | | | | | (...) No reasons?..:-) What do you think that this "L" of Lugnet stands for?..:-) Selçuk (24 years ago, 7-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.db.scans)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database) —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Well, if there isn't support for a clones database that's fine. But I still think that the L stands for "legos" in the generic plastic brick meaning -- at least for most people that see it. Most are not purists, especially from the outside. (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.db.scans)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Treacleheads (was Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database)) —David Low
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Warning: exactly the kind of post that should go to .o-t.vent follows. So I've o-t.d'ed, but since this <treacley juggernaut> of a thread is still in .au, I'm not holding back. And I should say that I'm more than a bit <treacley>'d off with a (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Treacleheads —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) Parts one and three of this argument only hold true if you decide in advance that they're true. If, as a LEGO user, I identify a single brick as "a Lego," why is it grammatically incorrect to refer to several bricks as "Legos?" Forget about (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Treacleheads —Eric Joslin
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Are they the only thing keeping LEGO from complacency, or are they driving LEGO to juniorise the heck out of everything? If they didn't have to contend with competition, would they be dumbing down their sets, or would they be producing (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Treacleheads —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) My take is that LEGO's trend toward Juniorization would continue with or without market competition, since we have evidence of its roots long before any serious competitor hit the market. LEGO can't blame (not that they do) their own reduced (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Treacleheads —David Low
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) (assuming it's an open question...) Could you ever have a total, _total_ competition vacuum? Because if there's a market, there's kids, and if there's kids there's no vacuum since they can always make up their own games. And if they couldn't (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Treacleheads —Eric Joslin
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) I don't really think so, no. Because to have a total competition vacuum assumes that you're talking about a company that makes boxes full of elements and hands them to kids in a round grey room with absolutely nothing else to do. I guess a (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (canceled) —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Treacleheads —David Low
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Absolutely, which why it's In My Humble Opinion. (...) I would argue (and again, this is entirely the way it works in my fat head)that you, as a LEGO user, would be as wrong (or right) to identify a single brick as "a Lego" as you would be if (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Treacleheads —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Fair enough, but you must agree that because of that circular reasoning the argument won't convince anyone who doesn't already agree with it. (...) I understand and accept that, but many people identify LEGO as a singular noun in that usage, (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Treacleheads —David Low
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) I am so _not_ going to get in a cultural relativism argument over grammar and aesthetics. I'm a liberal in principle and a conservative in practice (except for anything from the seventies). (...) Yeah, it's not really a disagreement. I know (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Treacleheads —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Huh? The argument is circular whether viewed from a cultural relativist standpoint or not. (...) I understand that you're working on very little sleep, but to proclaim someone's lexicon as "illiterate garble" just because it doesn't adhere to (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Treacleheads —David Low
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Okay. The decision in advance that "a usage is wrong" is subjective (and legitimately so) from the relativist viewpoint. And you're right, it will only appeal to people sharing those cultural norms of grammar and aesthetics (hence the (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Treacleheads (was Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database)) —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) It's wrong, but not for that reason. It's wrong because it's an adjective, and adjectives don't really have plurals. But in popular usuage, it's a noun, and there's no reason for it to not have a regular plural. And people do say "I drank a (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Treacleheads (was Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database)) —David Low
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Thank you Matthew. And because I've had two hours sleep in about forty I'll just point out that 1. fast and red are in fact adjectives, hence the first example, and 2. Coke is a trademark and a proper noun (like LEGO) hence the second example. (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Treacleheads (was Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database)) —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) It's normal language behavior. People call Netscape Navigator "netscape". I even know people who (not so much now, but a few years ago) call Microsoft Word "microsoft". No one says "may I have a kleenex facial tissue". It's natural to treat (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Treacleheads (was Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database)) —Selçuk Göre
|
| | | | | | | | | | Dave Low wrote: Just for being clear, I already share your arguments that I snipped, and I already give some comments in my posts about it, but I have some objections here..:-) (...) Are you sure?..:-) All the non lego people around here (who (...) (24 years ago, 9-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Treacleheads (was Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database)) —Mark Sandlin
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) I didn't realize they'd heard of "Lego Lar" in Turkey. Wow, he gets around. ;^D ~Mark "Muffin Head" Sandlin -- Mark's Lego Creations (URL) (24 years ago, 9-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database) —Selçuk Göre
|
| | | | | | | | "Overview and Definitions lugnet.com (“LUGNET”) is a privately owned Internet site designed and run primarily for the benefit of those who enjoy building with, discussing, collecting, buying & selling, trading, and exchanging information about (...) (24 years ago, 9-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.db.scans)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) Hear Hear. Very well put, Richard. I would hasten to add that the contribution of time, money, scans, information, etc. to Lugnet is subject to the Terms and Conditions, just like participation here. Merely contributing something doesn't give (...) (24 years ago, 7-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.db.scans)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database) —Eric Joslin
|
| | | | | | (...) But even then we come back to the fact that Todd is paying to run the server, and paying for the traffic. If he just plain doesn't want Lugnet to host scans of clone instructions or catalogues, then it won't. Of course, meanwhile, there are (...) (24 years ago, 7-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.db.scans)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Sticking it to Todd (was Re: Clones Database) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) Most definitely. I was referring to Todd's stated intent (from way back...) that he might at some point place the code that runs LUGNET or parts of it under GPL. (that's probably an incorrect paraphrase of what he said, though, I think it was (...) (24 years ago, 7-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.db.scans)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Clones Database (was Re: MB sightings) —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | (...) Even inasmuch as I'm a huge fan of clone brands, I have to agree that LUGNET is a resource primarily for LEGO users. The space provided in off-topic.clone-brands is sufficient for the few fringe discussions that pop up. (...) Whatever else you (...) (24 years ago, 7-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| | | | |
