 | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) 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 (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) 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 (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) 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 (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) 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 (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) 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? (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | 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)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| 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 (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) 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 (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) 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 (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) Yep, I was. (...) Exactly. -Tim (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) 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) (...) (26 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
|
