Subject:
|
The real February 2003 IndyLUG meeting minutes.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.us.indylug
|
Date:
|
Thu, 13 Feb 2003 02:27:03 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1162 times
|
| |
|
|
IndyLUG meeting minutes.
February 9th, 2003
Hosted by Eric Smith and family
Official meeting time was 2:00 to 6:00 P.M.
At 3:24 P.M. we sat in Eric's living room (and dining room and entryway) for a
formal-type meeting.
Steve Martin (Steve M.) called the meeting to order. I will attempt to organize
the roundtable discussion that followed topically, not cronologically. Feel free
to correct me if I missed a point you made. I will also be editorializing were I
think it will be helpful. My editorial comments will be enclosed in square
brackets. ("[" and "]"). I left at 5:45 P.M., so others will have to fill in what
happened after that.
Prior to the formal meeting, we mixed and looked at MOCs. I don't know who
brought what, but they included 2 lighthouses, 2 monorail stations and a matching
airport terminal, 18 wheeler, truck trailer-carrying train car, level crossing
with signals, a motorized point. [Any take and/or post pics?]
Brian Darrow distributed the Harry Potter sets he picked up for folks.
After the formal meeting several engaged in catalog trading.
RESOLUTIONS
Appropriations:
* Our 2nd place award at the January 2003 Indianapolis GATS earned the club $300.
We have no process in place to determine what to do with the money. Steve M.
suggested we use all $300 to buy parts for 12 more tables for the layout. (Steve
currently has 8.) The suggestion was approved by show of hands.
Constitutional democracy:
* Robert's rules of order were adopted by consensus for making decisions, even
though not all of us were sure what that meant. It was later suggested that we
use Robert's rules, at a minimum, for making decisions to spend club money.
* Meeting dates, time and place. We meet on the 2nd Sunday of each month. We
established a new meeting time and added some structure. Unless an exception is
made, the club meets on the second Sunday of each month beginning at 2:00 P.M. in
Steve M.'s barn. You can arrive any time from 2:00 P.M. on. From 2:00 P.M. to
5:00 P.M. is unstructured time for project work and enjoyment. At 5:00 P.M. we
dine and make decisions. Following this is more unstructured time until about
9:00 P. M. [Steve's bedtime ;-)].
Elected and Appointed Officials:
* Steve Martin was nominated club president and subsequently voted in. No term
was set and no duties were assigned. [It can be safely assumed that he will, at a
minimum, preside over meetings, as has been his habit.]
* Brian Alano was confirmed as secretary. No term was set and no duties were
immediately assigned. [It can be safely assumed that he will, at a minimum, take
and post meeting minutes, as has been his habit.]
* Jeramy Spurgeon was confirmed as webmaster. No term was set and no duties were
assigned. [It can be safely assumed that he will, at a minimum, develop and
maintain www.indylug.org, as has been his habit.]
[* After the formal meeting ended, Eric Smith agreed to continue as IndyLUG
representative to GATS.]
LOGISTICS
* Club communication. The primary means of communication is the newsgroup
org.us.indylug at indylug.com. This can be accessed via the Web, newsreader or
E-mail. We also have a website at www.indylug.org. Finally, the webmaster
maintains a list of member names, snail-mail addresses, phone numbers, and
private e-mail addresses. Eric Smith may set up a private mailing list for
privacy-sensitive communication. At least two of our members (Jesse Critchfield
and Thomas Coleman) are not Internet connected. Telephoning nearby members was
suggested as the best way to keep informed in this case. Tom C. has an
alphanumeric pager would could be used in the event of late-breaking news.
* Menus. For this meeting, Eric purchased a 6' sub and attendees compensated him
for their consumption. In March we will order Pizza and likewise each pay for our
part.
* Meeting agenda.
March meeting: build tables, discuss layout, discuss skirts, eat pizza, discuss
zoning. Someone is to bring a new roadplate.
May meeting: since the 2nd Sunday of May is Mother's Day, we will be meeting the
3rd Sunday of May instead.
One summer meeting: have a gathering to include families and significant others
of members.
* Resource inventory. To help us determine what is feasible for us to build, the
secretary, Brian A. was asked to maintain an inventory of how much of certain
parts people have (specifically track and baseplates.
PROJECTS:
* Tables. We will be building 12 new tables. We discussed
a) The table size and height and construction,
b) storing tables, and
c) transporting tables, and
d) skirts a.k.a. security fabric.
a) 1. Do we have a standard table specification? We do. The tables Steve M. made
for the layout are our de facto standard. [I believe they are 4 32x32 baseplates
wide and 9 baseplates long.]
2. How will we address the need to have lower tabletops (e.g. for water) and
higher tabletops (e.g. for hills and mountains)? Ideas for lower tables: a.
shorter legs, b. no legs, just stack the tabletop on blocks or boxes, c. hang the
table top from adjacent tabletops using brackets. The consensus seemed to be
against shorter legs for cost reasons. We decided in the end to make all 12
tables like Steve M.'s existing tables and address the issue again when the need
arose.
3. Should we make some of the 12 tables into 1/2 tables (i.e. tables that are
1/2 the length of a standard layout) to increase our layout flexibility? The
consensus was that we would like this, but we didn't want to deal with the
complication at this time. What complications? Primarily how to support it--the
legs we currently use wouldn't fold under a 1/2 table.
b) Where can we store the tables (and by extension, the whole layout)? In Steve
M.'s barn.
c) How will we transport them? Jeramy's trailer may not be enough. Some thought
transportation for the October show would be no more difficult than
transportation for the January show. Others weren't so sure.
d) Obtaining and mounting security fabric. Security fabric would hang from the
outer edge of the outer tables of the layout (i.e. a skirt). This conceals the
stuff we have stored under the tables and imMcDonough proves the overall look of
the layout. 1. Where will we get it and what kind of fabric will it be? Steve
McDonough is working with a fabric store to get clearance fabric in earth tones,
and was anticipating receiving swatches soon. Ballpark price was $1.50/sq. yard.
Someone suggested Wal-Mart fabric might run only $1/sq. yard. Andrew Matlock
suggested using drop cloth from Lowes, though it would have to be dyed or
painted. Steve asked that interested persons get swatches and prices. 2. How will
we mount it to the tables? Suggestions were: tacks, velcro, eyelets, and others.
We have to be sure we don't mount it in such as way as to lock us into a
particular table configuration. Care will have to be taken so that anything
attached to the edge of a table be removeable or not interfere with adjoining
that edge against another table in a future layout.
* October GATS.
A long and winding discussion threaded around the October layout. Thomas has an
extensive post on this subject at http://news.lugnet.com/org/us/indylug/?n=399
[might serve as a good starting point for discussion]. Some of the threads [using
categories created by me]:
a) what, when, and where.
b) size and dimensions
c) audience participation ideas
d) visibility ideas
e) modularity of construction/ownership
f) zoning laws
g) themes for sections
h) donations and collections
i) parts estimate
a) We are planning to present a train layout at the GATS at the Indianapolis
State Fair Grounds, Saturday and Sunday, October 18th and 19th. [http://www.gats.com]
b) Size. The overall size and table configuration of the layout is constrained by
1. The interior dimensions of Steve M.'s barn, 2. the visibility of items on the
center tables, 3. the space available at the show.
1. [Steve will have to elaborate on the dimensions of his barn, but it's not
square.]
2. Most train layouts are very elongated, but this is because they showcase
the trains. Lego layouts have much more going on than just trains and track. We
can easily go two tables deep, three with careful planning.
3. Space was not a problem in the January 2003 GATS, but this may change with
time and venue.
c) Audience participation.
1. Someone suggested providing a list of things to look for in the layout, a
la "Where's Waldo" [OK, I just realized IndyLUG needs a mascot.].
2. Brian suggested a play table for toddlers and volunteered his Duplo train
and blocks [1 oval, 2 level crossings, 1 engine, lots of stock] and blocks [over
400, including Action Wheelers. Anybody have a preschool water table we could use?]
3. A drawing for a prize, charging a small fee for each entry.
4. "Guess the number of parts in the MOC" contest.
d) Visibility ideas at the train show. 1. Leah suggested including the IndyLUG
logo on a minifig sculpture. 2. Andrew offered to build a life-sized minifig out
of wood [perhaps even as part of a gate?] 3. non-train models and MOCs on tables
separate from the layout (Eric will check with GATS about acceptability of this.)
e) modularity, or "How will we know who is responsible for what parts of the
layout?" Some Lego users groups (LUGs) assign a person a whole table. This makes
putting it all together very simple. The downside is that the result tends to be
discontinuous. Numerous examples of this were at the January GATS. For example a
desert scene would abruptly transition into a mountain scene. Our method in
January had no relationship to the underlying tables. We divided the layout
loosely into sections. We decided a theme for each section (e.g. trailer park,
industrial) and people contributed MOCs mounted on one or more 32 x 32
baseplates. We called this "baseplate modularity". It took more coordination, but
the result was well-integrated.
The track was decidedly non modular. It all belonged to Steve M., and it was
completely disassembled at the barn and re-assembled at the show. This seemed to
work.
f) zoning laws or "How can we make it easier to make different peoples MOC fit
and work together?". We discussed the need for zoning to cover
1. sidewalk width and setback,
2. elevated track/walkway height,
3. road width (road plate type),
4. max train height and width and length. We proposed a max width of 8 studs,
max length of 32 studs. We suggested building a test car [to test both trains and
the track environment for compatibility].
g) Themes for sections. Suggestions included space theme, monorail (Brian D. and
Eric Smith both have large monorail sets) (is the elevated train loop necessary
if we have a monorail?), airport, mobile home park, dwellings, movie theater
(Jeramy offered to make a computer-animated flick from member's LDraw contributions),
h) donations and collections. Can we put out a donation box at GATS to offset
costs? Another item for Eric to look into. We want to put up a sign at GATS
saying we will buy people's Lego collections.
i) Can we get a reasonable estimate of the parts in the layout? Some thought this
impossible, others not. Steve M. suggested translating a weight estimate into a
parts estimate.
FUTURE PROJECTS
* Beyond GATS. Other potential venues were discussed: store window displays,
malls. Most venues will not have the space that is available at GATS. Some might
pay us to be there, others will not.
* Beyond trains. Because many of us have interests beyond trains, it was
suggested we could do some other project type in the future. After all, we are a
LUG, not a LTC (Lego train club). Finding a venue will require work and
creativity. Suggested themes included moonbase and medieval.
Respectfully submitted,
Brian Alano
IndyLUG secretary.
|
|
1 Message in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
