Subject:
|
Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 6 Jan 2002 22:22:49 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1044 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim Courtney writes:
> "tom" <tinosanto@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:GpI890.8D8@lugnet.com...
>
> > And who are you to even think about suggesting this? Are you an admin of
> > brickshelf?
>
> Who are you to chastize him for an opinion? The admin of LUGNET?
ummmmm...
> > > I realize that Bionicle is just a fad and these images will probably
> > > dissapear in 4 months (at least until the new wave comes out) but I • can't
> > > wait that long.
> >
> > Whaa, whaa, whaa... Would you like some cheese to go with that whine? And
> > this is comming from a person who is selling bionicle masks in his • brickbay
> > shop... tsk tsk tsk!
>
> I imagine in Jon's opinion, Bionicle avatars are much different than
> Bionicle masks. These pixelated images are plentiful on Brickshelf, and
> they add little value (in my opinion and in the opinion of others here) to
> the Brickshelf Gallery. So what, someone thinks differently than you, deal
> with it.
So because something adds little value to you its ok to ban it? Hmmm, you
know cad images add little value to me - so can we ban those while we are at it?
> > I am getting very tired of people like you - and what I mean is the type • of
> > person who thinks to themself "I do not like this - so lets ban it and get
> > rid of it form where I go!" and do not have the maturity to think to
> > themself "You know, I do not like this, so let me just ignore it."
>
> Were you around LUGNET when the Mad Hatter was here? Do you think HE should
> have been let alone to roam LUGNET and destroy the community?
Not for the first goround, but for his second attack (as far as I know it
was his second) But I see him frequently on RTL and I have afew views on
him, if you like we can start a new thread about it, but he is not the point
here - apples and oranges.
> I'm not equating the Bionicle avatars to him, but Jon has a valid point when
> he talks about them. And its an opinion, he prefaces his message with
> 'There might be a few who disagree with me on this, but I think something
> needs to be done about this.' How arrogant and whiny about him, no, how
> arrogant of you to try to stifle his opinion just because you think he's out
> of line. Should his opinion be banned because you don't like it?
Funny you use that last line... you make it seem wrong. But that is exactly
whay Jon did, he does not like something so his answer is banning them, now
is that wrong? You just made it seem so....
> > How are these updates effecting you? Other than having to look at the • folder
> > icon and click 'next' one or two more times? Just because you do not like
> > it, just because you do not see the point does not mean others do, and • does
> > not give you the right to try to ban them from a sitw you really have
> > nothing to do with.
>
> Aah.... 'the right.' Well, he certainly is not in violation of the LUGNET
> TOS from what I see, so he most certainly does have the right to post this
> particular opinion here. Seems you're out of line in telling him (and
> making it objective by using that wording) that he's out of line.
Maybe thats my free speech, once again you make it seem its wrong when it is
what he is doing...
> > You do not pay for brickshelf, you have no admin duties
> > there - so why are you calling for the banishment of them?
>
> Funny thing about free speech, anyone can say whatever they want without
> people like you trying to tell them what not to say because you don't like
> it.
But its ok for him to say do not post these images because I do not like
them? You keep getting caught in this.
> > Bionicle is made by Lego, brickshelf is for lego items, so to make it • simple...
> > Bionicle = Lego
> > Brickshelf = Lego
> > so
> > Bionicle = Brickshelf
>
> The Bionicle avatars might be a derivitive of Bionicle, but they are not
> Bionicle. Unless someone had an avatar of a photo of an actual Bionicle, or
> a piece of Bionicle literature produced by LEGO. These are pixelated images
> for the purpose of a chat avatar which (albeit poorly) resemble Bionicles.
> And there's a lot of them, and they're crowding out pictures of real (or
> virtual representations of the same with a measure of realism - for the
> nitpicky) LEGO.
How are these not Bionicle?? They are as much bionicle as the cad images are
lego. Just because they do not have the same tools as the cad heads do, does
that make them wrong and bad and not lego?
> > I can fully understand that you do not like Bionicle,
>
> Did he say that in this thread? Or do you know from somewhere else?
He did say they were a fad and he hoped it would fade out among other
things. Do you say this about things you like?
>
> > but you have to
> > understand that not everybody shares in your view. And for you to come • here
> > and whine that you are "very tired of checking out the BrickShelf recent
> > updates page to see it flooded with these annoying pixelated images." • shows
> > me you lack the maturity aand the ability to overlook them.
>
> There's quite a few of those, they're hard to overlook. But of course, that
> makes me immature too according to you. I suppose if everyone else here
> except you found the images in the same distaste, you'd call all of us
> immature.
Not immature, nice try to twist my words. What you and others are failing to
realise is that this is the part of lego they love! Just because you do not
love the same part are they wrong? This is how these people choose to
express their love of Bionicle. Is that wrong? Because you do not like it
does that make what they are doing wrong?
> The problem is not with Jon or Jeff or myself expressing our opinions. Its
> with you.
>
> > It seems more and more people are doing this here on Lugnet - 'I do not • like
> > this, so lets ban it!' I mean get real, just let it go people.
>
> What if Kevin posted stats that the flooding of avatars were hurting the
> viewership of Brickshelf? Brickshelf is a great resource, and a few are
> concerned about it being abused. So what?
Then let Kevin say that. And you are not really concerned about it being
abused, you are concerned with these lego images that you do not like. If
you were concerned about misuse of brickshelf you would be complaining about
the non-lego items on brickshelf (and YES these bionicle images are a PART
of lego - like it or not). Do a search for misc ond non-lego on brickshelf,
look at those - then if you are trully concerned about misuse of brickshelf,
complain about those, not these lego related items.
> > You know what personally bugs me - people who open a brickbay shop and sit
> > there thinking 'I want my store name to start with an 'A' so it will be on
> > the top of the brickbay list - but not look like I am trying to get it to
> > the top of the list.'
>
> Looks like a cheap shot at Jon if anything. His store 'Attack of the
> Bricks' doesn't even pretent to have to start with A to be at the top of the
> list. Look at 'AAA LEGO Sales' or worse yet '_LEGO' appearing at the top.
> Ya, its crummy, but boo hoo. Jon's name is probably a play off the SW Ep II
> title 'Attack of the Clones.'
Not a cheap shot, just a try to turn the tables on him. And yes, the
'_lego' and 'AAA Lego sales' are obvious attempts to get the store at the
top, but can you honestly tell me (you not him) that getting his store name
near the top never entered his mind?
>
> > my 2 cents.
> > And no, I am not one of the people who have posted any of these images. I
> > just do not like petty whiners.
>
> But you are one. You're whining about Jon expressing an opinion. Taking
> your own advice, why can't you just ignore it?
And taking your own advice... Should these images be banned because you
don't like them?
Tim, you are a bigwig over there on the cad site, so why don't you go ahead
and make the program be able to make these type of bionicle images so you do
not have to look at pixelated images any more (I know, the horror). But
would that make it more visabally appealing to you?
tom
> -Tim
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Bionicle Avatar pictures flooding BrickShelf
|
| "tom" <tinosanto@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:GpI890.8D8@lugnet.com... (...) Who are you to chastize him for an opinion? The admin of LUGNET? (...) can't (...) brickbay (...) I imagine in Jon's opinion, Bionicle avatars are much different than (...) (23 years ago, 6-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
122 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
