 | | Re: Clone DATs--any interest?
|
|
(...) I've been trying to keep a low profile on this thread after having stirred the pot at the beginning, but now that I think of it, I have a few pseudo- philosophical questions. There've been myriad discussions of the merits and shortcomings of (...) (25 years ago, 26-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clone DATs--any interest?
|
|
(...) Personally, I wouldn't care one way or the other *intrinsically* if ldraw.org decided to host off-brand elements... What I (personally) would be very sad to see is LEGO stuff being *mixed* with off-brand stuff. That's what I meant by going the (...) (25 years ago, 26-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clone DATs--any interest?
|
|
(...) I hate to reply just to insert a "me too", but I whole-heartedly agree. And folks (I won't name names) second-guessing James' prejudices without actually having *met* him exhibits more than a fair amount of arrogance, IMHO. The way I (...) (25 years ago, 26-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clone DATs--any interest?
|
|
I am pretty purist myself and can't see using clones or modeling with them (except in trains if some clone comes along and delivers what most trainheads want at acceptable quality levels), but I repeat my thesis: Why be exclusionary? What's wrong (...) (25 years ago, 26-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clone DATs--any interest?
|
|
(...) I read that page and I don't recall 'Lego' being mentioned once. But your interpretation is correct. (...) The 'Centralized LDraw Resources' is, but the meaning behind it is subject to change. (...) Ewww! Ewww! Ewww! Ewww! Ewww! You've proven (...) (25 years ago, 26-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clone DATs--any interest?
|
|
(...) Reading the (URL) page, I always thought it was just assumed (in the "commonly understood" sense) that the purpose of ldraw.org was to unify LDraw things that were specifically LEGO-related (i.e., not for non-LEGO stuff). But maybe that's just (...) (25 years ago, 25-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clone DATs--any interest?
|
|
(...) I agree. Happy Thanksgiving! -Tim (URL) timcourtne ICQ: 23951114 You know what you'll never see?? A fat Chinese man with flaming red hair running full speed while taking a crap. -Tom Ace (25 years ago, 25-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clone DATs--any interest?
|
|
(...) Sure would. (...) You're probably more right than I am here. Afterall, it promotes LDraw, and the point of ldraw.org is a centralized resource. Not allowing non-Lego LDraw models on the site would be contradicting that charter and encouraging (...) (25 years ago, 24-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clone DATs--any interest?
|
|
[ FUT lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw and lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands. This does not (imo) belong in lugnet.cad.dev, so please stop cross-posting to that group. ] Dave Schuler: (...) That would certainly be a possibility, but if you accept to use the (...) (25 years ago, 24-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clone DATs--any interest?
|
|
(...) Hmm.. Maybe I could reduce the controversy and hassle if I just put together a site of my own (Geocites and Xoom are free, right?) and put any pertinent clone info there instead of taking up space on one of the more official sites. If I were (...) (25 years ago, 24-Nov-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
