| |
In lugnet.org.us, Peter White writes:
> In lugnet.org.us, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> snippage of larry's well-made points.
> >
> > Finally, the people from "outside" who appear to be chiding and demanding
> > change... (not Frank, but the aussies in particular). It's not your club, not
> > your country even, the culture and mores are different. You've no basis, • unless
> > you think we yanks ought to be telling YOU how to run things as well, and you
> > know you don't think THAT.
>
> "Outside" and "aussies", why generalise Larry when it can only mean one
> person. Who is chiding and demanding now ?
You are. Although there have been more aussies than just you participating,
you've been the chider, that's my read of the thread.
> The whole issue is about access to 'LUG' events, which is a world-wide issue,
> surely of interest to anyone in a lego-fan group.
Well, no, the main issue is about access to NELUG. As I said, it's no one's
business who to let in except NELUG members unless somehow NELUG were granted a
monopoly on LEGO clubs in the area (who would do this? I dunno...) and no other
club could form in the area, in which case it would be appropriate for all LEGO
fans resident in the geography to comment on, since they would all then be
stakeholders. That still doesn't fit you (or me).
A side issue certainly is: "what is an appropriate rule for a club to have in
general" and on that I'd say world wide comment is welcome and appropriate. You
(and I) should stick to that issue, I'd say. And I'll repeat my comment so I'm
clear, exclusionary rules are not, in general, a good thing for clubs to have.
Now, a counter example would be that the GMLTC doesn't really do a lot of
Belville building and probably doesn't welcome prospective members who only
want to build Belville since it doesn't fit the scale that the GMLTC works to.
But to ban those who like 8wide (or those who like 6wide) trains would be
unnecessarily exclusionary.
Mature teens who like LEGO are more like adults who like LEGO than they are
like children who like LEGO.
To repeat myself yet again, that's my general feeling but NELUG should be free
to do as NELUG pleases. Outsiders can comment, but not chide and not demand.
> Larry you're quite welcome to express opinions wherever, as I am, so don't
> tell me what to comment or not comment on.
I just did. Deal.
To Shiri's latest: I'm reminded of an old Woody Allen one liner:
"I wouldn't want to belong to any club that would have me as a member".
In your case I think you've taken the very mature opposite stance, you'd rather
not belong to a club that you had to force your way into.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Age limitations
|
| 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)
|
258 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
