 | | Re: UKLug —Tony Priestman
| | | | James, First, let me say thanks for putting in the effort to get something usable and pretty together. Then, let me say that I don't like it :-) The function is fine, but the form is lacking in several areas. - It's not very 'LEGOey', that is, (...) (23 years ago, 2-Aug-01, to lugnet.loc.uk)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: UKLug —James Stacey
| | | | | thats fine. its nice to get some feedback :) the idea was to give it a professional edge. We figured a slightly more muted colour scheme would detract less from the images. Remember eventually this site is prolly gonna be stuffed with mocs and Lego (...) (23 years ago, 3-Aug-01, to lugnet.loc.uk)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: UKLug —Michael Edwards
| | | | | | Well i am lurking in the background and making my come back and i like to say that its good to see a protype website for the UKlug on the way :) I second Tony option :) Needs to be LEGOye and UKye as well :) My 2 pennies -- Michael Edwards Lugnet (...) (23 years ago, 3-Aug-01, to lugnet.loc.uk)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: UKLug —Tony Priestman
| | | | | On Fri, 3 Aug 2001, James Stacey (<GHHIB3.1s6@lugnet.com>) wrote at 08:58:10 (...) Muted colours are fine, but it would have more impact if they were muted *LEGO* colours. In fact, the two sites you cited earlier - lugnet and brickset - both make (...) (23 years ago, 4-Aug-01, to lugnet.loc.uk)
| | | | | | |
