 | | Re: The Free Super Chiefs
|
|
(...) I think it is fair that LD kindly put the limit in place when they realized it would help even distribution. Don't get ticked off because you did not order 20+ when you had the chance, after all we all had the same window, which I think is (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Free Super Chiefs
|
|
(...) First, it's not a "right" but a privilege of opportunity dependent upon TLC's policies. Second, TLC can produce as many or as few as they wish, and they can impose whatever purchasing limits they care to impose, whenever they care to impose (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Free Super Chiefs
|
|
(...) Okay then, not fair is that tons of people ordered 20 + right off the bat before the limit was in place and now I am denied the right to get three more? Come on. (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Free Super Chiefs
|
|
(...) As a hypothetical example, if you had ordered $1000 worth of LEGO and it was delivered to me in error, would you accuse me of stealing if I kept it and didn't pay for it? Or how about if I saw three Super Chiefs sitting on a delivery cart and (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Free Super Chiefs
|
|
(...) I had originally indended to post this following the first reply, but my e-mail server was down and by the time it was back up, two others had replied, so i deleted my authentication. But I see that this is going to continue ;), so i'll jump (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Free Super Chiefs
|
|
(...) No I would not, I would assume the limit was set in place for a reason, even if I didn't like it. It's their store and they can set any limits they want, I don't have to shop there. (...) Fair?! Nice way to rationalize. Maybe they realize that (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Technic MOTM needs a new name.
|
|
This thread got me thinking. As you may or may not know, my site is called 'LEGO on my Mind'. (URL) visual motto of this site has always been a picture of a man with bricks for brains. After it had been around a couple of years, another site (...) (23 years ago, 20-Mar-02, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Time to write Lego Consumer Affairs a (nasty) letter..
|
|
(...) You know what I mean. =) Though I have to admit that the 2000-2002 products lines have been superior to the things they were producing before.. 10.9 cent apiece? What sets are you buying? Surely not Jack Stone! (23 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Important Questions
|
|
(...) Hejsan! (...) Yes. (...) Only if they make it out of anti-matter and keep it away from 1 x 16 beams. (...) 3,4% of my Technic figs are left handed while 97% of my minifigs did not hear the question due to ear-lack. Of the 3% that gave me an (...) (23 years ago, 12-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Important Questions
|
|
(...) Only if "YOU ARE INSIDE A BUILDING, A WELL HOUSE FOR A LARGE SPRING", or "YOU ARE IN A LARGE ROOM, WITH A PASSAGE TO THE SOUTH, A PASSAGE TO THE WEST, AND A WALL OF BROKEN ROCK TO THE EAST" and "THERE IS A LARGE "\'Y2' ON A ROCK IN THE ROOM'S (...) (23 years ago, 12-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Important Questions
|
|
Greetings all, It seems to me that LUGNET could use a good lighthearted release from all the friction that's gone on here recently. To that end, I've developed a list of questions that I think we ought to consider... If you're exploring a mammoth (...) (23 years ago, 12-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Santa Fe War Bonnet sticker alternative
|
|
(...) Hellow! First, I'm directing this to offtopic. (Jared is my best friend) Jared, I would reccomend you to look around- and figure out when to move to another newsgroup! As for the spiffcraft... I need your digital camera! I've rendered it, but (...) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
(...) I'm sorry, but I cannot agree with you. A lot of people had expressed their opinions on this subject, you included. When Scott Arthur did so, this suddenly became wrong, and had to be pointed out? I can't see any logic in this, sorry. It's not (...) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Not the most constructive title Ben!
|
|
Judge not lest ye be judge Benjamin! . .. ... .... ..... ...... ....... ........ Spydèr ........ ...... ..... .... ... .. . Fading back into the night… (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
(...) Incidentally, that is why I set FUT .debate. Scott A (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Spyder is definitely bad for lugnet
|
|
(...) (URL) his 11 posted "newsgroup articles", and his (surge of 4 most recently), I would largely suggest that his input is for the most part negative. I wouldn't stoop personal name calling against him directly. This really doesn't do anything to (...) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
(...) Indeed, and why? Scott A =+= Have you inspected Arthur’s Seat yet? (URL) reasonable man adapts himself to suit his environment. An unreasonable man persists in attempting to adapt his environment to suit himself. Therefore, all progress (...) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
(...) If you mean Larry P'k, he has already done that at least once. Scott A =+= Have you inspected Arthur’s Seat yet? (URL) reasonable man adapts himself to suit his environment. An unreasonable man persists in attempting to adapt his environment (...) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
(...) Scott will do. (...) Good. (...) To you. Perhaps, even to me. (...) Perhaps we can talk about that once you demonstrate how you give others a hard time when they post a message in a dead thread? Or perhaps you were stirring the pot? What am I (...) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: On Hiatus
|
|
(...) Actually, he did. It didn't make front page news (I mean, evidently you didn't notice it). Which bolsters Scott's point, doesn't it? Maggie C. (who knows she should just shut up and stay out of this whole thing) (23 years ago, 11-Mar-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
