 | | NQJ2? Re: NQJ - Brick It Forward - not goodbye, but adieu —Calum Tsang
| | | | (...) Can lightning strike twice? You know, I was skeptical about NQJ. But I'm surprised, it actually worked and in fact, everyone got something positive out of it. Once the leap to sets was made, NQJ or Set it Forward, was actually viable. So...I (...) (19 years ago, 8-Dec-05, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: NQJ2? Re: NQJ - Brick It Forward - not goodbye, but adieu —Timothy P. Smith
| | | | | (...) Calum, you may be starting too big- you need to work up to it. (IMO). That being said, I've got a 4892 set- (URL) New in Open Box. I split the back of the box open to check out the contents, but everything is still sealed up, the instructions (...) (19 years ago, 8-Dec-05, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: NQJ2? Re: NQJ - Brick It Forward - not goodbye, but adieu —Calum Tsang
| | | | | (...) Here's my rationale: a) I thought that the "brick" rounds of NQJ1 were kinda stupid. When sets began to be traded, it actively became interesting because there was a reason for playing beyond random stupidity (though your tile is now AFOL (...) (19 years ago, 9-Dec-05, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
| | | | | | |
