Subject:
|
Re: What is a "review"?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 10 Jan 2002 03:27:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2283 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Richard Marchetti writes:
> In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > No, but it's not relevant. What is relevant is his familiarity with Jack >Stone.
>
> Allan's familiartity with other lego sets and elements is absolutely
> relevant, how could it be otherwise?
It's not relevent because he's not making the comment on other elements,
he's making comment on the Jack Stone one.
> That fact is practically the soul of
> his reviews. As to his familiarity with Jack Stoned, I'll concede his
> methods might have been more exhaustive -- but I remain unconvinced that his
> not having built the set(s) precludes his ability to form and express
> studied opinions about them in writing.
That's right he can form and express opinions in writing. It's when he calls
it a "review" that it worries me.
> > So perhaps the question becomes is building a set more like these activities
> > than the purely viewing-ish types you chose?
>
> I am sorry, Larry -- but Jack Stoned and those tiny SW sets don't leave much
> to the building imagination. I saw a Jack Stoned set broken open on the
> shelf at Wal-Mart once. And you know what? The set was exactly how I
> imagined it to be! I spent two minutes building it in my mind as I scanned
> the elements. It's Crap -- you and I would both know this by looking at the
> set! Photos would and do suffice in this instance. Check out pgs. 40-41 of
> the U.S. Holiday 2001 S@H catalogue. Richie makes much of the fact that
> Allan cannot understand the nature of the Jack Stoned column elements -- but
> excepting the fact that the element apparently accepts an antenna element
> through top and bottom, I can well surmise that it accepts a portcullis and
> so forth. Look at the picture for #4611 -- it's all right there.
But Allan managed not to see it from pictures...
> It all depends on the complexity of the set and your experience with
> other lego sets and elements.
>
> But like I said, more complex sets would probably require a more tradional
> review approach. I guess I am riding the fence on this whole built v.
> not-built review approach...
Cheers
Richie Dulin
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: What is a "review"?
|
| (...) Allan's familiartity with other lego sets and elements is absolutely relevant, how could it be otherwise? That fact is practically the soul of his reviews. As to his familiarity with Jack Stoned, I'll concede his methods might have been more (...) (23 years ago, 10-Jan-02, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
63 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
