To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 10836
10835  |  10837
Subject: 
Re: We may all be Lego collectors, but Lego isn't a Beanie-Baby style collectable
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Wed, 13 Jun 2001 18:09:20 GMT
Viewed: 
1200 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Daniel Jassim writes:

Sounds good to me, but why do you feel it is necessary to repeat yourself?

You said "whatever", suggesting that you didn't agree. I restated it in
hopes that you would clarify if you do or don't agree that inclusiveness is
good.

Are you sure you are not addressing me? Have I mocked someone or done
something I am not aware of?

I think James B put his finger on the disconnect nicely. It's about paradigm
shifts. Being in the middle and enjoying both, I have a harder time
understanding the extreme view of someone who actively dislikes collectors
(not you, Dan, mind you, you did not say that you did, but others have in
the past) as well as the extreme view of someone who gets upset if a builder
opens a set (that he purchased fair and square and thus should be able to do
what he pleases with his property).

Not that I disagree, but again you've tagged this sentiment in reply to my
post.

Not that you disagree with what?

Perhaps there is an unpleasant history behind this topic that I am not
aware of, since I am a relative newcomer. Your tone seems to reflect a
desire to prevent another rehashing of the arguements before. Let me assure
you that I am not interested in putting things on a petty level or "actively
disliking" anyone.

I will admit that I am not fond of materialistic or
greedy people in life, in general. Materialism and egocentricism reflects a
shallow mentality, in my opinion, and I have little esteem for people who
cling to and showcase their purchases and possessions. I don't act or intend
to be judgemental but if people feel otherwise, so be it, I won't "shift" my
paradigm in this regard.

Great, (aside from the loaded words) but I don't see the connection to
collectors, per se. This is a connection you seem to be making and it smacks
of class warfare, something we have been through before and something I'd
rather avoid.

My point merely is that we should not denigrate those that enjoy the hobby
in other ways or for other reasons than we do. You seem to be, at least by
association or inference, saying that there is an equivalence here...

collector==materialistic==greedy==morally wrong

If you *are* saying that I have an issue with it.

If you *aren't* saying that, I think you need to be clearer in your speech
because you sure are leaving that impression. IMHO. And that's divisive,
which I'd rather not see.

++Lar



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: We may all be Lego collectors, but Lego isn't a Beanie-Baby style collectable
 
(...) I said "whatever" because I sensed you had more to say on the matter, which you obviously do. Did I not say "everyone has their thing" and for collectors "to collect away and enjoy their collection"? How much more inclusive would you like me (...) (23 years ago, 14-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: We may all be Lego collectors, but Lego isn't a Beanie-Baby style collectable
 
(...) I'm glad my "elaboration" was helpful, and I hope I am clear now. <snipped discussion> (...) Sounds good to me, but why do you feel it is necessary to repeat yourself? Are you sure you are not addressing me? Have I mocked someone or done (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

65 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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR