 | | Re: New Civil Engineer letter
|
| (...) Reading your letter, I think you should send it, my remarks are better suited for an undergraduate class, or perhaps a high level high school class. I don't have any Civil Engineering background (other than that which would have been common to (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jul-01, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.mediawatch)
| | | | | Re: New Civil Engineer letter
|
| (...) I have now sent the letter. I didn't change it that much and it's still very long but I wanted to get it out there before I got cold feet about sending it at all! The text was: "Dear Sir I would like to take the opportunity to respond to (...) (23 years ago, 6-Jul-01, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | Re: New Civil Engineer letter
|
| In lugnet.loc.uk, Simon Bennett writes: <snip> (...) <snip> You rock. Very nicely done. I think I speak for a number of people when I say "thanks for doing this, well done!" ++Lar (23 years ago, 6-Jul-01, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | Re: New Civil Engineer letter
|
| (...) [text snipped] (...) Well, I didn't comment yet in this thread, because I'm not an engineer or a teacher (though I did start in engineering at uni), and I hadn't really thought much about it. I did have one small Meccano set when I was a kid, (...) (23 years ago, 6-Jul-01, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | Re: New Civil Engineer letter
|
| (...) Cheers Larry, I've got a nice warm Lugnetty 'included' feeling now! All we have to do now is just sit back and watch New Civil Engineer not publish it! Psi (23 years ago, 6-Jul-01, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | Re: New Civil Engineer letter
|
| (...) Crikey ROSCO, all I did was write a letter, you built the bridge! Psi (23 years ago, 6-Jul-01, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | Re: New Civil Engineer letter
|
| (...) That's great, Simon! I hope all of our comments and input were constructive enough. Your final revision of the letter was not too long, hit some very important points, and certainly made a good argument that Lego is a better "building system". (...) (23 years ago, 6-Jul-01, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | RE: New Civil Engineer letter
|
| (...) Ummm, can you adopt older (39 yrs) kids like myself? :-) Cheers, Ralph (23 years ago, 6-Jul-01, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | Re: New Civil Engineer letter
|
| "Ross Crawford" <rcrawford@csi.com> skrev i meddelandet news:GG1utI.nE@lugnet.com... (...) what (...) Meccano is also juniorizing, and putting out more "models" and less basic sets. -- Anders Isaksson, Sweden BlockCAD: (2 URLs) (23 years ago, 6-Jul-01, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics)
| | | | | Re: New Civil Engineer letter
|
| (...) Yes - nicely said. One difference that *is* significant from an educational standpoint (IMHO) is the use of tools. Meccano really does require you to use a screwdriver and spanner (aka wrench)...where Lego doesn't really require tools at all (...) (23 years ago, 7-Jul-01, to lugnet.robotics)
| |
