Subject:
|
Re: Names of things.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.loc.au
|
Date:
|
Sat, 12 Oct 2002 00:27:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1823 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.loc.au, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.loc.au, Richie Dulin writes:
> > In lugnet.loc.au, Larry Pieniazek writes:
>
> > > I'm disputing the assertion that BSB is the "wrong" name but Dark Shark is
> > > the "right" name which was made upthread. I see no prima facie basis for
> > > that assertion, and was asking for some support for it from the person who
> > > made it, or anyone else either for that matter.
> >
> > Any 6285 distributed by LEGO Australia would be correctly called a 'Dark
> > Shark'. It would therefore be the original name *in Australia*.
>
> OK, now you're making the assertion too, and just as unsupportedly. Granted
> that LEGO originally released this set with multiple names in english
> speaking countries... they apparently have now decided to use just one. What
> makes your statement "correctly called a 'Dark Shark'" true?
Because I have a catalog, distributed by LEGO Australia. Calling it a Dark
Shark.
>
> LEGO can call things what they want, when they want, and whatever they *say*
> is correct *is* correct,
Absolutely. And they called it 'Dark Shark' in Australia.
> aussie whinging about it notwithstanding.
I'm not whinging about it! Just pointing out that in Australia, the correct
name - as advised by LEGO Australia (who probably know) - is Dark Shark.
> It's
> their product after all. Who are you (or I) to say what's correct and what
> isn't?
I can say what's correct if I have an appropriate source to back up that
assertion - and a LEGO catalog distributed by LEGO Australia is, I think, an
appropriate source.
>
> By making this assertion, you're supporting Ben's
> anti-everyone-except-australia ranting.
No I'm not. And I certainly wouldn't support AEEA ranting.
Note that I nowhere said that Dark Shark was correct anywhere but Australia.
Nor would I think of suggesting that the rerelease of 6285 should be called a
Dark Shark for Australia.
> Which is too bad, really, as it's a wasted effort on his part.
Maybe, but if a point he makes is true, then I'll support it.
Cheers
Richie Dulin
Proud owner of the parts of a 6285
(Hey, I don't think the model is important, let alone the name ;-))
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Names of things.
|
| Richie, I think this will be my last response to you. If Ben chooses to respond I will respond to that, but I am now starting to wonder if you're deliberately misinterpreting what I am saying, for whatever reason. Let's go back to what Ben said, (...) (22 years ago, 12-Oct-02, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Names of things.
|
| (...) OK, now you're making the assertion too, and just as unsupportedly. Granted that LEGO originally released this set with multiple names in english speaking countries... they apparently have now decided to use just one. What makes your statement (...) (22 years ago, 11-Oct-02, to lugnet.loc.au)
|
61 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
