 | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) 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 (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) 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 (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) 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 (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) What's the diff? Chris (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | 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 (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) 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 (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | 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 (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| 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 (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug) !
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| 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 (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) 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 (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
|
