 | | Re: Aw, no SNOT?
|
|
Good reply! I was gonna post this, it's pretty much what you said... Well let's not turn this into a big philosophical discussion here, but SNOT has *many* building benefits, only one of which is hiding studs. It also lets you create unusual shapes (...) (15 years ago, 12-Jun-09, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Aw, no SNOT?
|
|
(...) First of all, clearly not the answer he was looking for. Second, SNOT is not so much about producing a smooth-surfaced model as it is about allowing you to build in any direction. Take, for instance, my (URL) Nerd Herd car>. The bulk of the (...) (15 years ago, 11-Jun-09, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LEGO Queen Mary 2 - Making-of
|
|
(...) That has nothing to do with the confusion between short (US) tons and long (imperial) tons, which was what led us here. (...) ROFL!! I had hoped you'd realise I was being humourous, or maybe you did and decided to bite anyway, in which case (...) (15 years ago, 8-Jun-09, to lugnet.boats, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego dealer closing down, clearnce sale
|
|
(...) I don understand, but my reasons for doing so: I was adviced to do so. Reason why I was adviced so: trade/sale/buy group is not really active, but the posting belong there. So that is posted correctly. But, those, who might be is not reading (...) (16 years ago, 9-Mar-09, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Lego dealer closing down, clearnce sale
|
|
(...) May I ask you to please stop spamming all the groups with this? One message was more than enough, and the ones who might be interested have seen it. Thanks for understanding. Regards, Matija (16 years ago, 8-Mar-09, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Do you think there are too many Lego® groups on Flickr?
|
|
(...) It's just a turn of phrase. Richie Dulin CO Legeaux (16 years ago, 20-Feb-09, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Do you think there are too many Lego® groups on Flickr?
|
|
(...) Not gone, I don't think, but not all that active anymore. DaveE (16 years ago, 19-Feb-09, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Do you think there are too many Lego® groups on Flickr?
|
|
(...) I hear that he's an active overseer at Wikipedia now. (16 years ago, 19-Feb-09, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Do you think there are too many Lego® groups on Flickr?
|
|
(...) And at least one of the .o-t curators seems to be long gone, but I could be wrong. Richie Dulin CO Legeaux (16 years ago, 18-Feb-09, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Do you think there are too many Lego® groups on Flickr?
|
|
(...) I wasn't sure that anybody actually reads o-t.d anymore. (16 years ago, 18-Feb-09, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Do you think there are too many Lego® groups on Flickr?
|
|
(...) A good question, CM Bob. There certainly seems to be a lot of them these days, some of which seem to have a narrow focus (there's even one called 'LEGO® Complaining'!). At the moment I cope with the huge number of LEGO groups by the simple (...) (16 years ago, 18-Feb-09, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - The Book of Job
|
|
(...) A devastatingly brilliant member of LUGNET commented on this very subject a while back. Read his wisdom (URL) and be forever changed. Dave! (16 years ago, 27-Nov-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - The Book of Job
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Anders Franzén wrote: snippity (...) snip (...) At least 2 sources I've read claim it was a dragon. (URL) Here's one of them>. sjf (16 years ago, 26-Nov-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament - The Book of Job
|
|
(...) Hi! When looking into The Book of Job again (latest Swedish version from 2000) I noted that, as you correctly says, Yahweh created Behemoth, not defeated it. I have read somewhere that Behemoth is a Hippopotamus, which fits well to Yahweh's (...) (16 years ago, 25-Nov-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ahh infinity, how I love ye! Was Re: George Bush has legitimised terrorism
|
|
(...) I'm sure you'll have at least two or three ways of getting in touch with me at that time... Dave! (16 years ago, 11-Nov-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ahh infinity, how I love ye! Was Re: George Bush has legitimised terrorism
|
|
(...) See, this is why people should never admit when they've made a mistake. And I will continue to ridicule the Myers-Briggs Test Instrument while there is breath in my lungs and blood in my veins, thank you very much. Dave! (16 years ago, 11-Nov-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ahh infinity, how I love ye! Was Re: George Bush has legitimised terrorism
|
|
(...) Oooo, there's still hope for Myers-Briggs! DaveE (16 years ago, 10-Nov-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Ahh infinity, how I love ye! Was Re: George Bush has legitimised terrorism
|
|
(...) I'm not sure what to make of this; I'll get back to you in a few years. JOHN (16 years ago, 10-Nov-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ahh infinity, how I love ye! Was Re: George Bush has legitimised terrorism
|
|
(...) Well, it's not as though I was thinking about it every day, but it was sort of bubbling on the back burner, along with a hundred other random things. Jon Palmer's post in ot.pun was another of them, but I already commented on that one a while (...) (16 years ago, 8-Nov-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Ahh infinity, how I love ye! Was Re: George Bush has legitimised terrorism
|
|
(...) It takes you FIVE YEARS to admit you're wrong, Dave!? Or have you just been thinking about the example for that long? I don't believe that you had even procreated before this discussion. ROFL JOHN (16 years ago, 7-Nov-08, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
