| |
In lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, James Brown wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, Bruce Schlickbernd wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, Bruce Hietbrink wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, Terry Prosper wrote:
| |
I’m only saying that this site is called LEGO-USER GROUP network. Not
Bricks user group network. Dave can go post his LEGO MOC like anyother in
the announce.MOC forums, but this site is dedicated to LEGO, not clones.
|
| |
If you want to change this website’s orientation and ask that it should be
called Bugnet instead, go ahead, maybe you will succeed and this whole
clone issue will be irrelevant. But as of now, it’s not
|
I don’t think this is a really valid argument in this discussion, because
the same people would probably object to clone brands displayed at
Brickfest, Brickswest, etc, and probably dislike clone brands on
Brickshelf, all of which have “Brick” in the name rather than “LEGO”.
On the original question, I would think that if you posted in announce.MOC
with a warning that it contains clone parts and made the follow up to
off-topic.clone-brands, it should be okay. That way people could easily
ignore them if they want to, but they aren’t totally relegated to a black
hole.
|
I can’t say that I recall anyone at any time every complaining about
anything because it was 100% non-Lego on the Pirates board, much less some
small percentage. For that matter, no complaints come to mind on the Castle
board. Is this just a tempest in a teapot,
|
Yes, IMHO. Dave asked ‘anyone mind if I post clone MOC’s to announce.moc,
Terry said ‘I do’ and Richard said ‘that’s wrong’ to Terry. They proceeded
to spar, with occaisonal comments from the peanut gallery, like me.
|
“Yes” to what question? In that despite whatever Terry may have said, almost no
one makes a fuss about non-lego bricks? I understand the sequence of the fuss,
which honestly, is neither here nor there to me.
| |
Lugnet is mildly biased towards brand purity; this is one of Richard’s pet
peeves, and so he is agitating for change. More power to him; I can’t summon
up the energy to care enough about the issue to take a side.
|
I’m saying does a side need to be taken? I haven’t really seen it as an issue
(beyond this thread).
-->Bruce<--
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: A serious clone question
|
| (...) No, of course you don't need to take sides. To me, there are 2 separate issues here: 1-Was my answer to the theorical question from David stated in an offensive way towards anyone? 2-Was Hop-Frog's comments abusive? This IS a storm in a glass (...) (21 years ago, 18-Aug-03, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: A serious clone question
|
| (...) Yes, IMHO. Dave asked 'anyone mind if I post clone MOC's to announce.moc, Terry said 'I do' and Richard said 'that's wrong' to Terry. They proceeded to spar, with occaisonal comments from the peanut gallery, like me. Lugnet is mildly biased (...) (21 years ago, 18-Aug-03, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands, FTX)
|
66 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
|
|
|
|
