Set Reference Set Reference (Popup) Parts Reference News News (United States)

Organizations / United States / 420

Age limitations —Shiri Dori     Hey all, I'm posting here to explain my opinion(s) about the age limitation in NELUG. I've talked to many people about my stand on this, especially during and after the WAMALUG Brickfest. Many people there expressed their agreement with what I said, (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug, lugnet.loc.us.ma, lugnet.general, lugnet.people) !!                 Re: Age limitations —Dave Schuler       (...) I expect, without trying to be too presumptuous, that you also get a few glances because you're in a demographic minority as far as the hobby is concerned, even insofar as it applies to "adults." (...) I've met some 16-year-olds who could (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Shiri Dori         (...) Not sure what you mean by "demographic minority"... my gender? Age? Or perhaps my nationality? I'm in a minority in all those aspects (at least as far as lego is concerned). (...) That's what I'm hoping for... (...) <grin> Yes, thanks. (...) (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Dave Schuler         (...) True enough! Specifically, I was referring to the fact that you're a woman, and that statistically you're in the vast minority on that qualification alone. Your nationality, too, now that you mention it, but it wasn't what I was thinking of. (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Erik Olson       I'm not involved in NELUG, but I want to contribute a comment: When I was 14, I belonged to a computer user group. I think the parallels will be clear. Once a month I cajoled an older person to drive me over to Texas Tech for a few crammed hours of (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller       In defense of the limit: there is another factor beyond what you listed. The liability issue provides a reason to make the line at exactly 18 (although we actually talked about making it 21). The "babysitting" concern wouldn't apply in your case, (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Chris Maddison         (...) That's just the thing, Matt. By the time she's "old enough", she'll be in Israel, it will make no difference to her. In my own opinion, as an outsider, I can't understand why exceptions absolutely *will not* be made. I joined GMLUG when I was (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Peter White       (...) Liability ? You worried about some homeboys carjacking the Town cars ? What responsible parent would want you guys "babysitting" anyone ? (...) 'Technically' means 'we aren't the one's discriminating', 'it's in the rules'. If it's an (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                Re: Age limitations —Tom Duggan       (...) you (...) this (...) age. (...) Although I haven't met Shiri yet, or even talked to her, from what I have seen from her postings, she very mature for her age. I haven't been to a meeting yet,(I will most definatly be attending the next one), (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                Re: Age limitations —Mike Poindexter       Shiri (and NELUG), I understand the potential problems of the age issue. I was the captain of a tournament paintball team where we had players that were under the age of 18. There is a much greater likelihood of injury in paintball than LEGO and (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Tim Courtney         (...) I agree 100%. (...) Excellent point. I can see the same thing in people I know. I see the liability issue and the maturity issue as the two main factors here. Liability is legally directly linked to age according to our laws, maturity does not (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller         (...) That requires us to become judges of character. It's not something I want to get into -- this is supposed to be fun. I can't see how rejecting someone with the words "you're not mature enough" are going to be fun for anyone. Saying "sorry, you (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Chris Maddison         (...) You said it yourself; this is supposed to be fun. How much fun do you think Shiri is having sitting at home wishing she could be in NELUG, but can't, because of an age restriction. If you can find a way that could *possibly* be fun, I'd like (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller         (...) I'm quite certain that I never said it was fun for her. I'm also pretty certain that you're not actually reading my messages other than to find lines you can pull out of them and disagree with. I'm sorry that Shiri feels excluded. I really (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                          Re: Age limitations —Shiri Dori         (...) I can tell you it isn't. Let me tell you, it's not easy to say things like this, which is why I'm glad Chris is saying what I think, simply because he knows what I'm going through. It's hard to say this, but yeah- I AM alone here. It's hard to (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                          Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin         (...) No. As soon as we make a personal exception for you, then we have to judge each person under whatever age limit we set personally, and as others have said time and time again, that is *not* something we want to get into. (...) Obviously, by (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Jeff Stembel         (...) Fine. Change the policy such that you don't have to do all that extra work that seems to be so loathed by your group, and still let excellent builders into the group who just happen to be younger than 18. As it stands, it is pointless, stupid, (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Eric Kingsley           Now I am Pissed OFF!!! I have heard just about all the name calling and disrespect that I can handle. You have personally ruined my holiday. (...) Obviously it was not pointless, stupid, or disruptive to NELUG members and frankly that is what (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Christopher L. Weeks         What is wrong with you people? (...) It has caused Shiri some emotional distress. Probably seeing everyone here fight about it has caused some more. You assert that their policy is "pointless, stupid, [and] disruptive." Wrong. It is pointed, and the (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller       (...) What exactly would we tell the person that got denied? "We don't think you're as cool as some other people, so you can't be in our club"? That's not likely to have a positive outcome of any sort. I certainly don't want to be the person saying (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                      Re: Age limitations —Chris Maddison         (...) What is "cool" and "not cool" has nothing to do with it. And, as I said before, just being a third party, I feel that this is VERY arrogant on NELUG's part as a whole...I think we'd all be satisfied if this were taken case by case; have a (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller           (...) I didn't say "*what* is cool". I said "*who* is cool". That's a completely separate issue. The actual words used may be "mature enough", but it won't feel that way to the recipient of a rejection. It's painful enough for Shiri to be rejected (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            Re: Age limitations —Chris Maddison             (...) OK, so replace "what" with "who". I still don't think that changes anything. (...) NELUG's (...) I apologize that I seemed arrogant. This is not so much an attack, and I'm sorry it came off that way. But it IS a very direct and straightforward (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller             (...) It's ok. It's difficult to convey intentions and tone in newsgroup postings and it's easy to misinterpret. (...) The counter question is: if it's a huge fight to get her in, will the situation be healthy afterward? (...) This might be an (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                Re: Age limitations —Jeff Stembel               (...) WAMALUG does not have geographic restrictions. Anyone able to make it to meetings can become a charter member, and *anyone* can join our list and post. Currently, we have members who come to meetings and events from about three hours north and (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                    Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin               (...) I loathe "me too" posting, and therefore don't do it. I am, however, in complete agreement with Matt in every post he's made. eric (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                Re: Age limitations —Chris Maddison             (...) and (...) That is a good point to think about. I'm not sure I can answer it. I think that should be between Shiri and NELUG. (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            Re: Age limitations —Tim Courtney             (...) NELUG's (...) That was then, this is now. Though I'm not denying your unanimous vote, but if the rest of NELUG still feels the same on the issue, I'd sure like to see their support for you now. You appear to be the _only_ one sticking up for (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller               (...) "Then" was less than half a year ago. I'm not sure how that can be construed as a long time. (...) I assure you that I am not just ranting on my own. Remember that LUGnet is not a real-time forum, and that not many NELUG members are likely to (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                    Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                 (...) Ok, let's consider them then: ] Why do you cater only to adults? ] ] The primary reason is that children already have their own "User Groups" ] called their classmates. On average a child building with LEGO® has a ] large number of friends (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                        Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller                   (...) I did ask for consideration of the FAQ *and* my posts. You're not doing that. (...) I assure you that I wouldn't be going to such lengths to discuss this decision if it were a solitary opinion of my own. I try to be a reasonable person. (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                            Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                   (...) Well, the FAQ is the only "policy" of the group that I see. Other than that, I see a single member of the organization sharing his views, which may or may not be those of the rest of the organization. I did notice that I didn't comment on a (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                            Re: Age limitations —Peter White                     (...) You could argue for 21(voting), 16(age of consent/age you can marry) or any myriad of ages around the world where people are subject to laws. (...) let's hope they're taking about Lego or maybe it's adult talk ! (...) Hey Frank, why don't we (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller                       (...) Do you really think attempting destructive action will help anybody? I don't think Shiri would exactly feel welcomed into this group if this were the way it happened. We're not a government. Voting isn't a binding sort of legal thing. It's the (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                    Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                         (...) I have to agree with Mathew on that one, and because of that we also need to be carefull about how much we antagonize the current members. What I hope to accomplish by participating in this debate is any of the following: - convince NELUG to (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Peter White                         (...) My aims too, Frank. By pointing out how you can be more ridiculous than the ridiculous shows that their position can be dismantled. They need to rename the group to include Adult in the title. Bad luck that Shiri doesn't live in a more (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Christopher L. Weeks                         (...) No it doesn't. You acknowledged that they could find a way to stop you. What it does is show that you are not seeking a consensus. That what you want is to belittle, demean, and bend people to your will. I suspect quite sincerely, that you are (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                    Re: Age limitations —Peter White                         (...) I can't see how she would ever feel welcome with people who are running this exclusive misnamed organisation. Not a government, how about legislative body. Have a secret ballot (as opposed to secret handshakes). By the way, I have no aim in (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller                           (...) I'm taking this seriously (and staying up later than I'd like, to discuss it) because I think Shiri's request deserves that. It doesn't sound like it's a joke to her. (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                            Re: Age limitations —Peter White                           (...) You like taking things out of context. That particular line was a joke, NOT the whole argument. I work nights, so I'm staying up too ! Don't twist things around and try and make it appear that your supporting her or her request, you are (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                            Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                           (...) I think Matther is giving consideration to Shiri's request. He has stated that he is willing to bring the issue up again in a future meeting. Let's not allow our frustration with the situation cause us to start throwing bricks (and I will (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                          Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                           (...) What's ironic is that Shiri did get together with a bunch of people in the Boston area (most of whom I assume are NELUGers). As I recall from watching the planning of the meeting at TCS and retirement to a nearby eatery is that Shiri was one (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                            Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller                             (...) It's not ironic; it's intentional. We're not hard-hearted evil people. See: (3 URLs) I didn't realize that Shiri wasn't allowed to participate in the window display at TCS; I was really busy at work during that time, so someone else will have (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                                Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin                             (...) I wasn't in on the window display, but I beleive that the reasoning behind it was pretty simple: It was an official NELUG "event", complete with signage at TCS saying that the display was by NELUG; therefore, a non-NELUG member shouldn't be (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                            Re: Age limitations —Tim Courtney                           (...) Actually, I was 18 at the time. I turned 18 the end of February this year. -Tim (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                            Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                           (...) feel (...) Oops... I'm starting to recall that you were pressing for a non-NELUG meeting so that Shiri could attend (but that's all just a muddle). On the other hand, as I pointed out before, nothing magical (except a few stupid legalities) (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                            Re: Age limitations —Tim Courtney                           (...) Yep, I was. (...) Exactly. -Tim (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller                         (...) "NELUG" mirrors the many computer users' groups in the world. I don't think any deep thought went into the name, but it has an implication that we are something different from the normal Lego kids' club. "Users' groups" are generally for (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                           (...) So Shiri isn't a "serious" LEGO fan? My dictionary doesn't define "serious" as implying "adult". I have to admit that I've never joined any sort of "users group" (<sick humor>of course if one uses the coloquial definition of "user" then I'm (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                            (canceled) —Matthew Miller                                                            Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller                           (...) I think you started replying before you read the whole message: (...) We felt that we had to draw the line somewhere. I don't remember the particulars of other people's opinions on this next point, but personally I think making exceptions / (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                            Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                           (...) as (...) No I did read the whole message. What I'm trying to do is get you to re- examine the reasoning that led to the feeling the group had to be adult only. So far, the only issues which I can accept as legitimate which have been raised are (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Peter White                         (...) Here, you go again, selective snipping. (...) What LUG isn't different from a kids club. We wouldn't even blink if a sixteen year old wanted to attend. But then in Australia we don't have a lawyer on every corner. (...) Rules need to be (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller                         (...) That was the one part of your post I was replying to. I don't think I removed anything relevant to my reply or that would characterize what you're saying. If I did, I apologize. (...) That I don't doubt. I'm concerned about consequences for (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller                           I mean: (...) ^ -mis (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                         (...) So what are you going to do when some 21 year old demonstrates the maturity of a 3 year old? As far as the maturity issue goes, all you're doing by specifying an age is reducing the number of potential conflicts, you can't eliminate them. So (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                    Re: Age limitations —Larry Pieniazek                       (...) Yep. Just as an aside, there is a process I often take architecture clients through (It's called QFD for the home audience to go look up if they want). It's quite formal and you get rather methodical and mechanical answers out at the end of (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller                       (...) You could. But 18 is the age where, in the United States, you are legally responsible for yourself. (The age of majority.) Many members of NELUG are concerned about the possible legal implications of accepting minors into our group. You mocked (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                    Re: Age limitations —Christopher L. Weeks                         (...) There is the ability to seek self-custody prior to 18 through the courts. What about in the extremely unlikely event that someone who has done so wants to join? (I realize that the rule is still 18, but what if the reason behind the rule flys (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                         (...) What (...) Probably irrelevant, there are still legal issues which make a cutoff at age 18 (such as voting, though the voting age has almost no bearing on this debate, I assume that there are other legal issues which are relevant). Also, NELUG (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                                                    Re: Age limitations —Todd Lehman                       (...) I disagree with the first statement there -- I think everyone (myself included) is getting tripped up over the word "adult." Do you really mean to say that it is important to us (NELUG) to be a group of 18-and-older LEGO fans? I think what's (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                    Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller                       (...) That's definitely important. But it actually _is_ important to some members (not unshakeably strongly for me, but maybe for some people, and I think it's a completely valid viewpointpoint) that it be an _adult_ group. After all, this is a (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                    Re: Age limitations —David Eaton                       Alright, I'm going to jump in here (I suppose it was inevitable) and say I'm agreeing with Todd-- (...) Well, I'll jump in here real quick with a minor point-- Lego's attitude has rarely (if ever, aside from the recent UCS sets and potentially LD) (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                    Re: Age limitations —Shiri Dori                       Uhhh... tiny nitpick :-) (...) ^^^^^^ (you do mean NELUG, right?! just checking... didn't know there was a requirement for LUGNET too!! <grin>) Otherwise, you brought up some extremely valid points. -Shiri (24 years ago, 6-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                    Re: Age limitations —David Eaton                       (...) Doh! The sad thing is I went through and tried to make sure I didn't DO that (I've been known to a couple times).. musta missed one... DaveE (24 years ago, 6-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                     (...) I (...) In the US (which is what matters here), 18 is the voting age. This is the commonly accepted age of adulthood in the US (though drinking and smoking usually require being 21, and 16 is the age of consent for many things, though kids (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                            Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin                   (...) Frankly, I would find the presence of bored parents disruptive. I have before. eric (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                            Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                   (...) before. Possibly, maybe even probably, true. It depends on what is open for the bored parents to do. If there is another room where the couple bored parents and the bored spouse can hang out and do their own thing, or if the bored parents are (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                                            Re: Age limitations —Larry Pieniazek                   (...) meeting (...) We are in hypothetical land here, unfortunately. I cannot speak for NELUG, only speculate. Organizing meetings is hard work. It's made harder when you have to: - make sure it's a bar that allows underage people - make sure (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                                            Re: Age limitations —James J. Trobaugh                   Larry Pieniazek wrote in message ... <snip> (...) I might have missed something here in all the 300+ post, but what is "the T" and "x"? (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                                            Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller                     (...) The T is the subway/trolley system in Boston. It's also the busses, but when people say "the T", they almost always mean trains. I'm not sure exactly what Larry means by "x", but I assume it stands for "getting there". [ -> off-topic.fun ] (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.off-topic.fun)                                            Re: Age limitations —Mark Herzberg                   (...) The "the T" is Boston's subway/train system. Sort of like how they call it "Le Metro" in Paris or "the Underground" in London. In Miami, we call our subway/train sytem "A waste of money", mainly because we know Miami is a car city, so only (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                                            Re: Age limitations —Larry Pieniazek                   (...) Funny, in the US anyway, it seems that the public transit that works the best was built a long time ago by private companies, and the public transit built recently in cities that didn't have any doesn't usually work at all. Here in Zurich, the (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.off-topic.debate)                                        Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin                 (...) And I assure you he is not the only NELUG or Lugnet member who feels the way he does. He is just the one who is getting to respond to these posts first- and he's doing it well enough that I, for one, don't see the need to parrot him. (...) (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                        Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                 (...) Unfortunately that is rather difficult for me to do since I'm in North Carolina. Frank (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                                    Re: Age limitations —Tim Courtney                 (...) Then I must be mistaken. I based that comment off of some stuff I read today before posting my first reply, set 8 months ago, with a reference to this decision being made 4 months earlier, so roughly a year. (...) Yes, I understand that, and I (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                        Re: Age limitations —Christopher L. Weeks                   (...) Wait! How can you both say that maturity isn't directly attributable to age and then support _any_ age cut-off. This makes it sound like you're just trying to implement a change for...<blink, blink>...for what? Maybe for Shiri specifically? (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                            Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                   (...) it, (...) Absolutely agreed on this. (...) 18 is certainly the age which makes the most sense, though 16 is also a reasonable age. Of course in some ways, I would argue that 21 may be the most supportable age if alchohol consumtion will be a (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                                            Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin                   (...) And frankly, this is precisely the reason I personally supported 21 as a cutoff age when we were discussing it. I am still extremely uncomfortable with the idea of anyone under 18 coming anywhere near a gathering of people drinking. eric (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                                            Re: Age limitations —Shiri Dori                     (...) Ah, I knew the drinking issue would come up. Here's my stand on this: I don't drink. I have no reason to. I cannot drink, as I am allergic to grapes, and moreso, I don't *want* to drink. If I were offered a drink, I'd turn it down. I can give (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                                                Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin                       (...) You desperately, desperately need to understand that this issue has nothing to do with you personally. eric (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                                                Re: Age limitations —Christopher L. Weeks                     (...) Well, I'm not exactly urging you to take it up, but... (...) OH MY GOD! (Oh wait, I'm a heathen.) This would be unbearable. Can you trade in your body for one that works properly? The fermented juice of the grape is one of life's great (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                                                Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                       (...) And in fact, the beverage most likely to be consumed at an adult gathering in the US doesn't have any grapes in it (at least as far as I know, I don't pretend to be an expert on alchoholic beverages). I would be dissapointed though which an (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                                                Re: Age limitations —Shiri Dori                     ROFL!! Thanks Chris, you just made my day, as much as my allergies are usually a serious issue to me I gotta reply on this one... (...) As am I, but I do say the occasionally OMG ;-) And I even pray once in a while, what can I do, that's the way I (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.off-topic.fun)                                            Re: Age limitations —Todd Lehman                   (...) Me too -- I totally agree in the case of alcohol (no pun intended :-) But must there be a single sweeping cutoff? Make the cutoff 21 for meetings held at bars or places where alcohol is present. Make it 18 or 16 for other places. Simple. (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                                        Re: Age limitations —Todd Lehman                 (...) I totally agree with Tim. And I realize that the issue isn't officially up for discussion when I say this, but I would still be in favor of lowering NELUG's age limit from 18 to 16. When the issue first came up last summer, IIRC, the number 18 (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                          Re: Age limitations —James J. Trobaugh                   (...) Actually it's 16 in Georgia also.(15 for a learner's permit) jt -- ---...--- James J. Trobaugh North Georgia LEGO Train Club (URL) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                            Re: Age limitations —Todd Lehman                   (...) D'oop! I stand corrected. Here's the chart I pulled data from: (URL) may be other errors. --Todd (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                            Re: Age limitations —James J. Trobaugh                   (...) It's easy to get it confused if you actually read the actually Georgia Department of Public safety codes, but for a Class D license (regular car) you must be 16 and have held a learner's permit for one year. (URL) did try to change this to 18 (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                            Re: Age limitations —Mark A. Herzberg                   (...) It is currently 15/16 in Florida. And, like Georgia, attempts to raise it failed. (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                        Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                 (...) As an interested bystander, that seems reasonable. Of course to some extent, an event at someones house is up to that person's discretion. Certainly if someone's blanket liability policy has anything to say about age, that must be adhered to. (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                    Re: Age limitations —Shiri Dori               (...) It doesn't matter if it's a long time or not - if new things are brought up, it's reasonable to request a second discussion about this. <snip> (...) Of course, silly me... I totally forgot to reply to the points in the FAQ. From the URL posted (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                    Re: Age limitations —Jeff Thompson                 (...) Whoever wrote this about being bored by "just sit[ting] around talking" must not remember being younger than 18. Teenagers are not inherently bored by sitting and talking. Particularly teenagers as bright and sociable as Shiri seems to be. I (...) (24 years ago, 7-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                    (canceled) —Jeff Thompson                                Re: Age limitations —Erik Olson               (...) You know what? LUGNET is a terrific place in the woolly Internet on account of the volume level doesn't get much louder than this. Matt might be the _only_ one sticking up for this position because it's July 3 and everybody is not hooked up to (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                    Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz               (...) with (...) I haven't joined, and in all seriousness, probably would not join because of this rule (and note that my main vested interest in a New England/Boston based LUG would be to point my nephew, who is under 18, to). (...) to (...) Well, (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                    Re: Age limitations —Erik Olson                 (...) OK. Normally "vested interest" means you've already invested something, money or effort, or you own the land underneath it. Like the members of a club have. It sounds like you have a "interest". (...) I disagree. (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                        Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                 (...) Frank (...) based (...) or (...) Well, since you're getting technical, I'll quote the definition of "vested interest" from the Random House Unabridged Dictionary Second Edition: ] vested interest ] 1. a special interest in an existing system, (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                        Re: Age limitations —Erik Olson                 (...) I think you have the opposite, because you don't like the existing system. You think you stand to gain by a change---therefore you are on the other side from the "already vested". Webster's is more precise. I rely on the 1967 edition, which (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                    Re: Age limitations —Jeff Johnston               (...) I disagree. NELUG is descriptive of the group: it is a group of LEGO users, based in New England. Furthermore, I think that forcing the current NELUG to give up the name (not that it would be feasible to do so) would serve no useful purpose. (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                      Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz               (...) to (...) based (...) that (...) NELUG (...) that (...) having (...) Well, frankly (to be frank as is my right as a Frank... :-), I see NELUGs insistence on being adult only as being stupid and political. I think that such attitudes have no (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                    Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                 (...) The above comment was out of line, and I appologize for it. I admit that it does reflect my feelings to some extent, but it's a poor way to debate (and it is critical for debate to be usefull to be carefull in sharing feelings like this. I do (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                    Re: Age limitations —Mike Walsh               "Frank Filz" <ffilz@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:Fx5tJo.F84@lugnet.com... [... snipped ... ] (...) so (...) I just returned from my parents house (Northern Virginia - I did make it to the LEGO Outlet, you just gotta like the scratch and (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug, lugnet.org.us.nclug)                                    Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                 (...) This sounds like a good policy to me. The idea of a sponsor allows a junior member to attend if they are able to convince at least one person to give them a chance (and contribute sufficiently to the activities that the rest of the members (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nclug)                                        Re: Age limitations —Eric Kingsley                 FUT lugnet.org (...) Well I don't know about the other "True" LUGs but I don't think being a LUG as opposed to an LTC had anything to do with it. I think it mostly came down to the demographics of our group at the begining. Like Todd pointed out I (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nclug, lugnet.org)                                    Re: Age limitations —Stephen F. Roberts               "Mike Walsh" <mike_walsh@mindspring.com> wrote: <chop an excellent disertation> (...) ...When we (WAMALUG) were making up our Charter, we wrestled with the jrfol issue some too. Some of us, myself included, wanted to be part of the club mostly to be (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug, lugnet.org.us.nclug)                                Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin             (...) As I said in another post, I am in complete agreement with everything Matt has said. I do not like "me too" posting, though, and if I see Matt eloquently defending the decision NELUG has made, I don't see the point in posting. (...) I have to (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                Re: Age limitations —Richard Franks               (...) She raised the issue of membership, that is a positive step. The fact that a lot of cause-fighters weighed in, happy to battle should not, IMHO be in any way the responsibility of the original poster. (...) I believe that argument is nullified (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                    Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin               (...) It would have been far more positive if she had contacted NELUG directly, rather than attempting to "shame" us into changing our policies by bringing it up with a wide crosspost on Lugnet. We are not hard people to get ahold of. Our webpage (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                    Re: Age limitations —Richard Franks                 (...) If the original post was only sent to lugnet.org.us.nelug group then would that have been acceptable? (...) You misread -- I never mentioned the topicity of the subject. (...) That's *your* read. As a discussion group, I think it's entirely (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                        Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin                   (...) Certainly more acceptable. (...) No offense, but I really don't think the opinions of anyone but NELUG members really matter in this decision, so I really don't think it's necessar to gauge their opinions. eric (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                            Re: Age limitations —Richard Franks                   (...) No offence taken - it's a good point. (...) Not necessary, but I think you'll agree that if there had been more positive suggestions (eg probation, age-limits for event locations etc), and less bickering and name calling.. then cross-posting (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                            Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin                   (...) Well, this is two seperate things, really. Obviously, the thread could have done without name-calling or bickering. I *do* think that discussion is a good thing, and suggestions are always welcome. However, it can be difficult for someone (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                            Re: Age limitations —Richard Franks                     (...) That is NELUGs right. However, by discussing it here, you might get to hear opinions from other people who have run organisations and gain from their experience too. I'm not criticising your decision, but I do think that all LUGs stand to (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                Re: Age limitations —Richard W. Schamus                       (...) If I'm flamed for fanning the flames, this is what I'd like to be flamed for. I'm gonna psuedo "Me too" on Richard's comments, (though that may hurt you [Eric], as well. You, (NELUG,) are not the only LUG in the country. Shiri asked if we, (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                    Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller                         (...) Open discussion is one thing, and I don't think that would have bothered Eric. It's the general aggressive tone people have taken with us that he takes issue with. How closely have you been following this? (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                           (...) I agree, the overly aggressive discussion is close to purposeless (other than allowing people to blow off steam). One thing which was definitely a problem was the small number of contributors originally. I'm glad to see that there is some more (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Richard W. Schamus                         (...) Fairly closely. I agreee, the aggressive name-calling is always unjust and without merit. What I find distasteful is, every close of a post from Eric is, (please don't knitpick my quote, as it is an amalgam of many of his posts) "We should (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin                         (...) Because I think it's an important issue, and NELUG should hash it out in person, with the interested parties (ie, people who are actually in the club and attend meetings) having a say. (...) Great. You can have all the open discussion you (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                    Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin                       (...) Can you back this assertion up with a quotation from me showing that I feel this way? I don't think you'll find you can. eric (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                    Re: Age limitations —Richard W. Schamus                       (...) No Eric, I don't think that I should go back and root out everything you said and compile it here for you (out of context mind you, for which you would assuridly find fault with). Perhaps you don't uncomfortable. Perhaps you just don't feel (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                    Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin                         (...) So, in other words, you can't support it. That's fine. I just want you to be aware of it. (...) Can you show me a quote where I told anyone not to talk about it? I don't think so, again. I have never said that people shouldn't talk about it. I (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Richard W. Schamus                         (...) <snip> I will stress again, however, that the opinions of non-NELUG members (...) nor (...) Ok. Let's go back to the original poster. SHE, (not you, or anyone else) solicited the opinions of others. I by no means meant to actually solicit your (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Jeff Johnston                         (...) When people start responding to NELUG in the way that they have - calling the group 'exclusionary', 'arrogant jerks', and all of the other insults that have been flung at the group - how could he *not* feel attacked? (...) That's easy, and (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Richard W. Schamus                         (...) your (...) do (...) The last time I checked a dictionary, the definition of exclutionary was something or some one that excludes something from its boundaries or grouping. I'm not saying anyone is arrogant. I actually respect NELUG's right to (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Richard Franks                           (...) Because 'judging' people on a case-by-case basis is not only unequal treatment, but it is open to abuse. Perhaps NELUG will consider another system, but until they do have their meeting, your question can only be rhetorical. If any LUG started (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                            Re: Age limitations —Tom Duggan                           (...) treatment, (...) being (...) But isn't it unfair to keep someone out, who most every one agrees is a mature person just so in the future we don't have to "deal" with the issue later? Shiri should be judged by her merits as a person alone, and (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                          Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin                         (...) But when we say we will discuss it at a meeting, you say we are attempting to stop people from talking about it. I really can't understand what it is you're trying to say. I am trying very hard because, believe it or not, I do want to. But you (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Richard W. Schamus                         (...) because (...) I (...) a (...) This is all well and good. Your decicions, at your meet, at your club. I do not contridict myself. You keep asking to let it lie, (which you can ASK all you want,) but the ORIGINAL poster(Shiri) asked for a public (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller                           (...) This is off-topic in this group -- it would be better to move it to lugnet.org.us. This is, after all, the newsgroup/mailing list *for* NELUG. If you mean it to be a discussion for people other than NELUG, it's better placed somewhere else. (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                        Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin                         (...) Ah, I see. It's a simple misunderstanding. I don't care if you discuss this all over Lugnet, by all means, Shiri asked you to, go ahead. But when you post things like this statement: (...) to lugnet.org.us.nelug (in (URL) with no crossposting, (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                    Re: Age limitations —Jeff Johnston                       (...) If I were him, I wouldn't want to discuss it in this forum either. We've already seen the results of that with people's responses to Matt Miller. The responses ranged from incredulous to abusive, but nobody seemed willing to try to listen and (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz                       (...) I have to say that as someone who is involved in starting a LUG which currently will be open to non-adults, I am strongly interested in the reasoning. Perhaps I am missing something terribly important. Even if I'm not missing something (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug, lugnet.org.us)                                                Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin                     (...) No, it's my right. I see little need to solicit the opinions of non-NELUG members on this. We can choose to run our club however we like. Moreover, I'm not going to post to a public forum things that could possibly be taken as an insult or a (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                Re: Age limitations —Richard Franks                     (...) Fine, that is NELUGs right, which I support btw. (...) I'm not arrogant enough to suggest that my opinion should matter to you, but I am interested in hearing yours. You've discounted two positive suggestions, both of which sounded reasonable (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                                Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin                     (...) Heh. I've discounted so many options in the past 12 hours, I'm afraid you'll have to remind me which two you're talking about. However, I am always open for meaningful, productive discussion (within some boundaries). Let me know what you mean (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                            Re: Age limitations —Chris Maddison                   <snip> (...) in (...) Eric, I find that last comment very rude and insulting. Think about it; how would you like to leave everything you know and love across an ocean, and have very few friends in this new place? It would be horrible. Now, you find (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                        Re: Age limitations - please take the discussion out of .nelug —Frank Filz                   (...) Absolutely and totally agreed. I am trying to direct conversation out of .nelug for this reason. (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                                        Re: Age limitations —Larry Pieniazek                   In lugnet.org.us, Richard Franks writes: <snip> I just read this whole subtree and I would like to reiterate Frank's call for setting followups on posts carefully. If what you are discussing is generic to all LUGs, it ought to be to org.us NOT to (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug, lugnet.org.us)                                        Re: Age limitations —Richard Franks                 (...) Yup, in hindsight, setting the followups to lugnet.org.us.nelug on this topic is likely to cause an ugly subtree, my bad. (...) I wondered about this before - why lugnet.org.us rather than lugnet.org? For reasons of law and liability I can (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                                        Re: Age limitations —Larry Pieniazek                 (...) You know what? You're right. I hate that! FUT lugnet.org, who so far have missed out on the blast. Take your general questions there. (or maybe to lugnet.loc.it, I hear they're itching for some long post chains so they can pass lugnet.loc.uk (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org)                                    Re: Age limitations —Jeff Johnston               (...) I honestly get the impression that this is what is really at the core of the desires of the folks who agree with the age restriction. "We are a bunch of adults who all share an interest in LEGO, and we want to do activities that adults do (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                    Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin               (...) I would like to start by saying that I do not speak for all the members of NELUG in any way on this, but: Yes, this is why I feel the way I do. I make no bones about it, nor do I attempt to hide behind other things. I have never said that the (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                Re: Age limitations —Todd Lehman               (...) What else is she going to do? Wait 2 years? You have to put yourself in her shoes to understand why she did what she did. I understand her frustration and I think that the NELUG rule is (at least in her case) broken. Just because everyone (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                    Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin               (...) No, but I think contacting us directly would have been the way to go. I know that in many cases I seem to stand for hashing things out in public, but I feel that things only need to be as public as they absolutely must. I wouldn't care at all (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                    Re: Age limitations —Todd Lehman               (...) Nobody's perfect, we're all human, and it's a very human reaction to reach out in desperation sometimes. Let's not worry how it was brought up, but why. --Todd (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                    Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin               (...) You are right, of course. I am far less concerned with how it was brought up - or even *why* it was brought up - than I am with discussing it as a group (that is, NELUG). I would very much like to see this issue discussed at the next NELUG (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                Re: Age limitations —Shiri Dori             (...) Extremely understandable. (...) Well, that's too bad. I only posted about 5 posts in this thread of 150(right now), but if that's all that is required for you to form an opinion on someone, I guess that's up to you. I think that possibly you (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin             (...) It is far from the only way I am forming an opinion on you. I might not participate in Castle World, but that doesn't mean I don't read the posts. I do remember very well having Ice Cream with you at Lizzy's. I have an opinion formed of you (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                Re: Age limitations —Shiri Dori             In lugnet.org.us, Eric Joslin writes: <snip> (...) OK, sorry, I misread your post. I'm glad you didn't form an opinion on me based on those few posts. :-) <snip> (...) Yes, true. But the original post wasn't posted as a "blowing off steam" post. It (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz             (...) NELUG's (...) Perhaps it is arrogant for outsiders to suggest a change (however, I would also point out that I actually have a minor vested interest in that I have family in the area, so would consider becoming a member of NELUG, and I have a (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                Re: Age limitations —Todd Lehman             (...) It's interesting to note that the age range of the people attending the first two meetings was, IIRC, approximately 22 to 34. I think this may have had a lot to do with the way things got rolling initially. I can only wonder where things would (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                                Re: Age limitations —Jude Beaudin             In lugnet.org.us, Todd Lehman writes: <snip> (...) Perhaps about 200 posts less than you have now!:-) Jude I am sorry, I couldn't help it. <grin> (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            Re: Age limitations —Peter White           (...) Now, you're bringing in an even more ludicrous argument, 'we','community', 'fit'. (...) NELUG's (...) So who put it forward ? (...) You mean attack a ridiculous reason for exclusion. If anyone thinks they can form an organisation with (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz             (...) One thing which it may be getting time to do is to remove lugnet.org.us.nelug from the list since it is not as public a forum as lugnet.org.us (and note that NONE of the Lugnet groups are truly public). Frank (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller           (...) I believe it was at Shiri's request. (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            Re: Age limitations —Peter White           (...) Was that Shiri the potplant or Shiri the mosquito, bit hard for someone who is not present to put something forward. (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller           (...) It may not have been Shiri at all. It was someone under 18 from LUGnet who wished to join. This person asked Eric -- who runs the web site and does some organizational stuff for the group -- and perhaps some other members if we would put it on (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin           (...) And I'm relatively sure it was Shiri. The 18 limit was arbitrarily drawn up at one of the first meetings, as a way of keeping the organisation as one for adults. When it actually excluded someone, we had a long debate over whether or not to (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Christopher L. Weeks         (...) We who? Who needs to be satisfied? (...) You might wish to try and support this claim. Go back and read. Matt has in no way acted immature about this. Chris (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin         (...) And conversely, I would argue that by posting her initial post to such a wide number of groups, rather than contacting NELUG directly with her problems, Shiri has acted very immaturely. eric (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Shiri Dori         (...) Possibly. But I have contacted NELUG in the past about this - in the discussion you mentioned. It might've been me, I can't say for sure, after all I wasn't at the meeting. New things came up now, for me, and I was feeling more and more (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin         (...) And we know how that decision went. And since that didn't work, upping the ante is the way to go? What happened to your very sincere comments about how you didn't want to bug us about the issue? (...) I'm sorry that I'm going to have to be the (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz       (...) A few thoughts strike me on this whole issue, and Mike's response: - There is always a possibility of someone being immature or otherwise innapropriate for a group. The issues of telling them they are no longer welcome is no easier if they are (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Eric Kingsley         (...) For what its worth Shiri asked me if she could put something in the window at TCS. I told Shiri in person prior to the TCS display going up that if she came to TCS when we were setting up with her Inn we would include it. If someone countered (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz         (...) a (...) came (...) I don't know if that was a personal communication, or if I missed something (there was a short spell where I wasn't reading all the posts about the TCS display). I did get an impression that Shiri was told she couldn't (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Shiri Dori         (...) Yeah, Eric's right, I just wasn't able to come to the TCS meeting at the time. -Shiri (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz         (...) Ok, either I read something into the discussion that wasn't there, or I picked up on someone elses misreading. I just hope our organization gets to the point where we can make some public displays. Frank (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    (canceled) —Eric Kingsley                Re: Age limitations —Jeff Stembel       (...) I am glad to see you took that advice, Shiri. I have been in opposition of this from the start, unfortunately, as an outsider, I've felt my statements were little more than smoke in the wind to NELUG... (...) As you should. After conversing (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                Re: Age limitations —Craig Hamilton       (...) there's _always_ an exception to prove the rule. rules are'nt bad things, but in _this case_ they are hurtful. shiri dori is an exceptional young woman. her thoughts and desires expressed so well here are proof. credit is due to shiri for the (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Chris Maddison         (...) My sentiments exactly Craig! I've been telling her this forever, maybe now that you did too she'll listen...she's one of the cornerstones of .castle, as far as I'm concerned. And no one would know what a BURPMAN or SPUD is without her...;-) (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Richard Marchetti       (...) I have never met either Craigo or Shiri, but the above statement is factual even on its face. A lego club that doesn't want Shiri as a member, whatever their charter position as to the age of members, has lost its soul in my opinion. I am West (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                Re: Age limitations —Richard Franks       As the saying almost goes: "If you can't join them, beat them?" If you organised your own LEGO meeting in the New England area that did allow under 18s then I'm sure the Cult-Of-Shiri would make sure it was a success. :) I'm not suggesting a (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Tom Duggan       (...) That's easier said then done!!! As I stated in an earlier post, people her age (say between 14-17) are not generally "out of the closet" so to speak about their hobby. Try asking just about anyone in that age group what they think og LEGO, and (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Jeff Johnston       (...) Actually, I *think* what he was suggesting was a LEGO society for all ages, not just one for under-17s. I'm kind of curious...are there other under-18 LEGO fans in the Boston area? Speak up now, please. If there's enough, then two things (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug, lugnet.loc.us.ma.bos)                    Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller       (...) For the record, we HAVE talked about doing NELUG (and unofficial, like Todd's proposed 4th-of-July thing) things that would include all ages. I think a lot of people from NELUG would be interested in participating in such a group. (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug, lugnet.loc.us.ma.bos)                Re: Age limitations —Tamyra Teed       I think Shiri is getting a raw deal here, and I think the ONLY way you are going to solve this is by opening up the NELUG group. Let the "Adult" members create a new group. That way you can keep your exclusive "adults" group and make a "public" (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                      Re: Age limitations —Jeff Johnston         (...) Well, I think *that's* being a little unfair. Eric and the others did the hard work to get NELUG started, to get the name publicized, shelled out the money for the domain naime, made the web page, etc. I think it's *really* unfair to suggest (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Jeff Stembel           (...) It is also unfair to claim to be the New England Lego User Group, when they deny talented people access simply because they are underage. it should be renamed "New England Adult Lego User Group" or something then. (...) Again, see above. The (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Todd Lehman         (...) Hmm, is that what Tamy was suggesting? I thought she was suggesting that NELUG lower its age range from 18+ to 16+ (or whatever, maybe even abolishing the age limitation completely) and that adults start a new group (either separate or as a (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Jeff Johnston           (...) In other words, she's saying that the people who are currently in the group and who like it as it is should go and form their own group, and the current group changes. I think that's a bit backwards, personally. (...) Well, I wouldn't. Not (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Eric Kingsley           (...) Well I think that would not be fair to the current membership. NELUG was started with a purpose and we defined that pretty well I think. I think to force us to change the rule for NELUG and force adults to start another group is unfair to (...) (24 years ago, 8-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Tamyra Teed         (...) there (...) You guys just aren't getting it are you??? Here, I'll spell it out! The thought of the adults starting another group is just as stupid as the thought of the Jr.Afol's starting another group.. It just won't happen will it? (...) (24 years ago, 8-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller           (...) Not in Massachusetts. (...) Which group of people is that? We were being completely peaceful. Even Shiri was being peaceful, and then all of the sudden a bunch of non-NELUG people showed up and started yelling at us. I see how that damages (...) (24 years ago, 8-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            Re: Age limitations —Josiah Nicely           After reading all 299 some odd posts, my head hurts. I do have one request: Eric, I know I have briefly discussed this age issue with you ( mostly just getting backgorund ), and since I am coming into the area the week after next anyway, would you (...) (24 years ago, 9-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            For People new to NELUG (was: Re: Age limitations) —Eric Kingsley           (...) Joe you are more than welcome to come to our meeting on the 12th. First I would like to say that I know there are going to be a lot of new faces at the meeting which is exciting and shows there is a lot of passion for the subject matter being (...) (24 years ago, 9-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            Re: For People new to NELUG (was: Re: Age limitations) —Todd Lehman           (...) Hey, they have the new giant soft LEGO bricks there (the ones DACTA makes) and maybe we can all chip in to buy some and hit each other with them if we get into arguments. :) :) :) --Todd (24 years ago, 9-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            Re: For People new to NELUG (was: Re: Age limitations) —Tim Courtney           (...) LOL :) Broadcast the meet in realtime online and I'll pick it up at Legoland. I might feel like hurling a few ICBB [1]'s myself. ;) ...j/k [1] Inter-Continental Ballistic Bricks XFUT: off-topic.fun -Tim (24 years ago, 9-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug, lugnet.off-topic.fun)                        Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin         (...) We have. No matter what decision is reached, don't think it will be reached lightly. Also be aware that the last time this issue was brought up, it was discussed seriously. (...) How is NELUG responsible for any of this? Our policy is not (...) (24 years ago, 10-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin       (...) We did. We called it NELUG. If you feel the name is inappropriate, I am sorry, but I feel it is and I would not support changing it. (...) I support it fully. I am in complete agreement with everything Matt Miller has said, and have seen no (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                Re: Age limitations —Kevin Wilson       (...) NELUG can, of course, make any rule they like, and they will. Having said that, I pretty much agree with Shiri. VLC set a lower age limit of 15: below that, kids can visit if supervised by an adult. (And I mean, *supervised*!). I have brought (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller       (...) This supervision is something that we really don't want -- we don't want anyone not interested in Lego at our meetings. (...) Again, this is a good point. A line had to be drawn somewhere, and the legal age of majority seemed like a sensible (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz       (...) I don't think it's unreasonable to expect many (or even most) meetings to not allow kids who need supervision. I think it is somewhat unreasonable for the organization to flat out exclude the possibility. (...) But perhaps in the end, it isn't (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                Re: Age limitations —Selçuk Göre       Shiri Dori wrote: I don't think that ý have any right to say something about it, but anyway, here is my 2 Turkish Liras: (...) Actually, being a Lego fan is much more difficult for a teen (I mean 15-17) than the real adults like us. They are more (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                Re: Age limitations —Larry Pieniazek       In lugnet.org.us, Shiri Dori writes: <snip> Here are my opinions, in case anyone cares. I admit I haven't read the whole discussion yet (theres a lot to read and I will but wanted to "fire" first and ask questions later so to speak) (OK, I went back (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Peter White         In lugnet.org.us, Larry Pieniazek writes: snippage of larry's well-made points. (...) unless (...) "Outside" and "aussies", why generalise Larry when it can only mean one person. Who is chiding and demanding now ? The whole issue is about access to (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Larry Pieniazek         (...) You are. Although there have been more aussies than just you participating, you've been the chider, that's my read of the thread. (...) Well, no, the main issue is about access to NELUG. As I said, it's no one's business who to let in except (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Peter White           (...) Luckily you know all, or is that you are a know-all. Actually you were demanding, as per usual. (...) a (...) other (...) LEGO (...) There are no geographic restrictions on membership, read the thread. (...) You (...) Glad we have agreed on (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            Re: Age limitations —Larry Pieniazek             (...) No, that's the *minor* or secondary point. The major point is what NELUG should do, and I continue to assert "none of your (and my) business" is the correct answer. Worldwide membership or no, what really matters is the realistic membership (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            Re: Age limitations —Sheree Rosenkrantz           Peter White <aztekium@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message news:Fx62FG.42q@lugnet.com... (...) . (...) . (...) Oxford Dictionary of Modern Quotations gives credit to Groucho Marx (1959), the original line being: "I sent the club a wire stating, PLEASE (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Christopher L. Weeks           (...) What's the diff? Chris (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            Re: Age limitations —Larry Pieniazek           (...) Well, there's rather less between comment and chide than there is between comment and demand, I guess. I'd say "NELUG may find that their policy may be detrimental in the long run" is a comment, "NELUG are very wrong to not immediately change (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz             (...) That's a good way to put it. I've probably stepped over the line some in this discussion, unfortunately the discussion has become somewhat heated. I think we need to step back a bit, and make sure we're not calling each other names for the (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                                Re: Age limitations —Christopher L. Weeks             (...) For what it's worth, I do think that you've been annoying about your notes, but no one of them was bad...it's just that you're harping on the issue. :-) (...) Is that true? I suspect that if the NELUG members really approach unanimity on this, (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                                Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz             (...) but (...) Well, I am trying to steer the discussion to something more constructive, but perhaps it's a lost cause. (...) on (...) From the outside it's hard to say. It is something I feel strongly about. I also earlier this year started down a (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                            Re: Age limitations —Christopher L. Weeks           (...) I would. But I wasn't really getting at a technical definition issue. From the perspective of posting to a newsgroup they're all functionally the same. They're just various opinions and regardless of how they're phrased, the NELUG readers will (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            Re: Age limitations —Larry Pieniazek           (...) Oh, you mean like "let's all join NELUG even though we have no interest in it and don't live anywhere near the US NE, so that we can disrupt the consensus the membership arrived at and change things to suit our opinions of how things ought to (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                            Re: Age limitations —Christopher L. Weeks           (...) Yes. I agree that that is force. (...) I don't believe it was a joke. I agree. Hopefully the poster will mature beyond that stage. Chris (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin         (...) I'm relatively sure that was Groucho Marx. eric (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Larry Pieniazek         (...) I'm now pretty sure you're right. I have it associated with Allen because he was quoting Marx in one of his standup asides he does in some of his movies. IMDB was no help. Enshuldingen! ++Lar (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —John Radtke         (...) Pretty sure it's in Annie Hall (though he could have used the quote in more than one film...) John (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin         (...) I agree with this completely. I was interested in NELUG because it was an organisation for ADULTS. However, I certainly would harbor no animosity toward a second (or thrid, or fourth, or so on) Lego club in the area, and would probably even (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Larry Pieniazek         (...) Disagree. Lorbaat is wrong again. As he is so very often ;-). I speak from experience in keeping a 300 person PC club alive for several years. It *is* "special or magic" to find a person in an area to form a nucleus and be a catalyst. Starting (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin         (...) Jeez. I in no way meant to belittle or demean the great work that Eric K did to get NELUG going. By saying that "all it took" was a lot of time and effort, I meant to recognise that he did invest quite a bit of effort into it. On the other (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        (canceled) —Frank Filz                        Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz         (...) I can assure you that the capabilities to start an organization are rather unique. Interestingly, the capabilities to maintain and grow an organization are different, and frequently are not found in the same individual. I'm certainly not an (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                    Re: Age limitations —Tom Duggan       (...) explaining the (...) I am also a NELUG member, (have been from around the time the club started), and although I have yet been able to attend a meeting (I work a strange schedule) I will most definatly be attending the next one (even if I (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                Re: Age limitations —Shiri Dori       All right, After watching this evolve for a few hours from the (mostly silent) sidelines, and getting a general idea about opinions, I'll post another one. As much as I want the NELUG members to include me, I certainly do NOT want to corner them (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug) !                     Re: Age limitations —Jude Beaudin       After reading Shiri's eloquent posts, I figured out a possible solution to the age problem. Not really anybody can be unsympathetic to Shiri's cause, but there is the other side of the coin. The concerns about the maturity of members is legitimate. (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Jeff Johnston         (...) Thank you, Jude. This is *exactly* what this discussion needs: people willing to look at the opposing side's viewpoint, willing to try to understand it, and willing to work *with* that viewpoint to get things done. Fact: People in NELUG have (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin         (...) It was done at a meeting, and I would like to make sure that any *further* votes and discussion of this sort are held at meetings. For one thing, NELUG does extend membership to anyone, regardless of physical location (yes, yes, anyone over (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Jeff Johnston         (...) I think if this is the case, then NELUG is far more BostonLUG than anything else. I live in Lowell, I work in Andover. Getting into Boston is both difficult and time-consuming for me, especially on a weekday evening. I can only imagine that (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                        Re: Age limitations —Eric Joslin         (...) I would (depending on other factors). I had a girlfriend who lived in Lowell at one point; it's really not a very long drive at all, especially for a once-in-a-while thing like NELUG meetings. eric (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Matthew Miller       (...) [actual proposal snipped] This sounds reasonable, but I have two crucial problems with it. First, as I've said before, I really do not want to be in the position of judging people. That's not a fun task for anyone -- easier when you accept, of (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                  Re: Age limitations —Richard W. Schamus       (...) I've read about half of the posts and I can see this is turning/has turned ugly. I'm not gonna get into, 1) Opinion, 2) Justice/fairness, 3) Legalities. I'll just say how I feel about it. I never had a dark age, much like Shiri. I know what it (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz       (...) I don't think it is at all unreasonable for a groups policies or whatever to specify how membership is attained, and how and why it can be revoked. This is crucial to maintaining the stability of the organization should a problem arise. Frank (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                    Re: Age limitations —Richard W. Schamus       (...) it's "Constitution" (...) as (...) Exactly my point in referencing the specific neccessary evil. It IS crucial to maintaining the stability of an organization to rectify things that go wrong when they ARISE. I'm sure exclusion to prevent (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                    Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz       (...) I guess my point is that I don't see it as a necessary _evil_. I think it is just plain necessary. Frank (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                    Re: Age limitations —Richard W. Schamus       (...) Ok, We'll leave the "moral" implaction off, (though I just used it as a figure of speech, and not a moralistic POV). It IS neccessary. But, it is NELUG's necessity, and not mine. Nor could, I'm sure, it be others. THAT is my point. Let NELUG (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                Re: Age limitations —Eric Kingsley       Shiri & all, First I am responding to the initial message because this thread is new from the last time I was on and now there are 100+ messages in the tread and I am on vacation and am not about to take more time from it than I am writing this (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations —Tim Courtney       (...) For whatever damage my comments have done, I apologize. I reread my few posts, and though I may have attacked people or the group in a slight way, I feel that I was in no way the main contributor, and cannot apologize for them, for I am not (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                Re: Age limitations —Todd Lehman       (...) As a NELUG member, I'd love to hear stories/experiences specificially from 16-17 year olds (or 18-year-olds if you were once 16-17 as part of a LUG) who are members of other LUGs in the U.S....this might help me form a more solid opinion if (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.baylug, lugnet.org.us.dixielug, lugnet.org.us.gmlug, lugnet.org.us.lugola, lugnet.org.us.nclug, lugnet.org.us.nelug, lugnet.org.us.wafol, lugnet.org.us.wamalug) !                     Re: Age limitations —Richard W. Schamus         (...) Ok Todd, I'll give you my story. My son, who is 14, is a full member of the club (WAMALUG). I don't babysit him and neither do any of the other members of club. He is as concientious as a 14 year old can be. How does he enrich WAMALUG? He runs (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                        Re: Age limitations —Richard W. Schamus         (...) This is an errant post. I wish I could have cancelled it before it went out. (stupid me and E.I. interface.... ) Rich -- Have Fun! C-Ya! Legoman34 ***** Legoman34 (Richard W. Schamus)... (No, I don't work for TLC, but I want to...) BRICKFEST (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                    Re: Age limitations —Richard W. Schamus         (...) Ok Todd, I'll give you my story. My son, who is 14, is a full member of the club (WAMALUG). I don't babysit him and neither do any of the other members of club. He is as concientious as a 14 year old can be. How does he enrich WAMALUG? He runs (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                    Re: Age limitations —Greg Majewski         In lugnet.org.us, Todd Lehman writes: Well, I'm not 16 or 17 (I'm 15), but I don't think anyone would mind if I replied to this anyway. Though I'm not in a local LUG yet, I am very seriously considering GMLUG or I may even go out on a limb soon and (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                        Re: Age limitations —Chris Maddison         (...) Well Greg, you've got nothing to worry about. I joined GMLUG when I was 17; they have no age restriction. Hope to have you as part of the bunch! -Chris (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                    Re: Age limitations —Craig Hamilton         (...) todd ~ although i don't fall into the age category for these questions, i would like to share some relevant experienciences. first off, this timely post from steve jackson: (URL) ~ just in case you missed it. now, i've had my say in this (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                          Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz         I'd like to add to Craig's thoughts with my own experiences. I was deep in my dark ages at age 16, but I became involved with the MIT gaming club at that point in my life. My introduction to the club was attending one of their game cons. I had been (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                    Re: Age limitations —Chris Maddison         (...) Joining GMLUG at 17, I had yet to learn of age limits in NELUG, so I wasn't suprised to be accepted. Grateful yes, I was glad to be part of something. (...) GMLUG does very little, at least since I've been there, but if I was told I couldn't (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                    Re: Age limitations —Andy Lynch         Todd, If I may be so bold, I would like to recommend an additional question that may be relevant to your poll. * If you are an adult and you belong to a club/group with younger ( e.g. 16-17 ) members, do you feel that their presence in the (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.baylug, lugnet.org.us.dixielug, lugnet.org.us.gmlug, lugnet.org.us.lugola, lugnet.org.us.nclug, lugnet.org.us.nelug, lugnet.org.us.wafol, lugnet.org.us.wamalug)                          Re: Age limitations —Shaun Sullivan         (...) Excellent point, Andy ... I had been a fan of Bram Lembrecht's work for a long time prior to MIT Mindfest '99, and I always thought he was in his thirties. Imagine my shock when I met him, and learned he was on track to graduate high school (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.baylug, lugnet.org.us.dixielug, lugnet.org.us.gmlug, lugnet.org.us.lugola, lugnet.org.us.nclug, lugnet.org.us.nelug, lugnet.org.us.wafol, lugnet.org.us.wamalug)                    Re: Age limitations —Gary Gerdes       (...) This thread's probably gone cold and stale by now, but for what it's worth.... I've been a closeted lurker on Lugnet for some months now; but as this issue is close to my heart, I had to brave the posting interface. And a reply to Todd's (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                    Re: Age limitations —Frank Filz       (...) What does one get by being a full member of PNLTC? (24 years ago, 6-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                    Re: Age limitations —Gary Gerdes       (...) restriction (...) Frank, for Ian (my 15 yr old son), I think it's pretty much of sense of "belonging" rather than feeling like a "second-class citizen" (whatever that tired cliche means). Other than that - maybe your name, info, links on their (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                    Re: Age limitations —Larry Pieniazek       (...) Don't feel totally left out... they discriminate against out of area members too. :-) I've tried to become a member for years but there's this "you have to live in the pacific northwest" secret clause. ++Lar (24 years ago, 7-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                Re: Age limitations —James Brown       In lugnet.org.us, Shiri Dori writes: <snip - anyone who hasn't noticed the debate is under a rock or not on-line> FWIW: I agree with Shiri's (and others, apparantly) opinion that an age cut-off is unnecessary for a club aimed at Lego enthusiasts. My (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug) !                     Re: Age limitations —Shiri Dori       Hey James, Thanks for a fabulous sum-up. (...) This is a good line of reasoning - I hope NELUG takes that in mind. (...) Definitely. Too bad many people rushed into the debate hot-headed - I personally steered away for the first few hours because I (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                Re: Age limitations —Jonathan Lill       I'm all for the age rule. I keep thinking that I wouldn't want to hang out with the teenage me. But it doesn't mean we have to be strict. I mean, if Shiri really wants to hang ou with a bunch of elderly people, perhaps we should allow it. Its not an (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                Re: Age limitations —Gary Istok       (...) babysit, that should be sufficient. Shiri has demonstrated a maturity level that I feel would put some of the rest of us to shame (at age 16 that is). And if her family offered to sign a waver, that would be ideal. Just keep her away from the (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)                Re: Age limitations - my two cents —Mike Zinkowsky       Shiri Dori wrote: <snip> Hello all, It's always interesting to see what goes on here while I'm away. Well after reading the insane amounts of posts from yesterday, I couldn't help but post one myself. I guess I am what could be termed a lurking (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations - my two cents —Matthew Miller       (...) I'm not sure that's completely true -- Karen and I are both also 25. (...) People who take part but not much should have a voice. People who don't take part at all is different, don't you think? (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations - my two cents —Mike Zinkowsky       (...) Ok..I'll apologize for this one, as I said, I haven't met anyone, and spoken with much of anyone, so am unsure of everyone's ages. (...) True enough, though I'm unsure about people like me, people in contact with the group, but not in (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations - my two cents —Jeff Johnston       (...) That brings up an interesting point... Suppose there were a group of NELUGgers in, say, Hartford, CT. If all of them were comfortable with having a 15 year old member, or judging on a case-by-case basis, should the opinions of the core Boston (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug)                    Re: Age limitations - my two cents —Frank Filz       (...) take (...) the (...) case (...) groups (...) logical (...) Jumping in from outside again (please note - follow-ups to lugnet.org), please take the following as a suggestion (and other LUGs who are grappling with membership policies should also (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us.nelug, lugnet.org)                Re: Age limitations —Mike Zinkowsky       Shiri Dori wrote: <snip> Hello all, It's always interesting to see what goes on here while I'm away. Well after reading the insane amounts of posts from yesterday, I couldn't help but post one myself. I guess I am what could be termed a lurking (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)                Re: Age limitations —Jeremy Rear     Shiri- Sorry I cannot help you much, as I do not have much of a voice in this discussion. However, take a look at our website under membership: (URL) have a similar clause - It's nothing against those who are under 18, it's just a standard (...) (24 years ago, 7-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)

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