 | | Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | (...) Sorry I missed it. I have been working up the (small) space allotted to me to make a good looking display without regard to where the buildings came from. I think that's more important (to have it look cohesive and look like the buildings (...) (23 years ago, 30-Jun-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Building priorities (was Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS) —Peter Guenther
|
| | | | | (...) My point when we discussed it was that first and foremost, we do this for fun. We do it because we love building with LEGO. For that reason, our priority should be to give space to our members to display their own handiwork. If we've got stuff (...) (23 years ago, 30-Jun-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Building priorities (was Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) I understand and accept that viewpoint but I guess my goal is a little different in that I want to have the best display possible, one that wows the crowd, not necessarily one that includes only work of members, or one that is geared to be as (...) (23 years ago, 30-Jun-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Building priorities (was Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS) —Peter Guenther
|
| | | | | | | (...) I'm in agreement with you here--though I think Chris and Amy have some terrific large buildings that should definitely be part of the display. (...) I also agree with you that we shouldn't spend space on stock TLC buildings--maybe a couple (...) (23 years ago, 30-Jun-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Building priorities (was Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS) —Chris Leach
|
| | | | | | | (...) Larry ,Peter,Rick and all I am cutting down on more of my things to make room for more of your guys buildings etc.I want to see if i can get back enough water for Ricks sub for one thing.I want to make sure there is enough room etc.People want (...) (23 years ago, 30-Jun-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Building priorities (was Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS) —Peter Guenther
|
| | | | | | | | Definitely don't eliminate the airport. If you need to, cut it down, but I don't want to lose it--or your fire station. Peter (...) (23 years ago, 30-Jun-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Building priorities (was Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS) —Scott Sanburn
|
| | | | | | Larry & All, (...) Well, Larry, I am all for impressing the crowds, but this sounds like you would rather see a bunch of sets from people who aren't part of the group, whether they are Guilds of Bricksmiths or what, and I think that concept is (...) (23 years ago, 30-Jun-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Building priorities (was Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) You're correct. That concept is wrong, because it's not what I am saying. My goal for the very small portion of the total I was given is to make the best structural display I am capable of making. That's it. The entire rest of the layout can (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jul-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Building priorities (was Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS) —Chris Leach
|
| | | | | | | (...) If that is how you want to do it that's fine.That school would look good by my houses. (...) Umm are you saying you only build mediore buildings or just mediocre compared to someone like Kevin W. ?(of course most of us IMO build mediocre (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jul-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Building priorities (was Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Neither, exactly... just that given the time remaining and my own time budget per week (not very large) mediocre is the best I can do in a short span. (...) ++Lar (23 years ago, 1-Jul-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Building priorities (was Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS) —Scott Sanburn
|
| | | | | | | Larry, I wrote about three different responses to you about this, and I really don't feel like posting anymore about it. Do whatever you want with the space you have, if we have more space, I am sure you will get more, and I hope whatever you bring (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jul-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Building priorities (was Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | (...) This sarcasm on your part is totally uncalled for. Reread what I said, and don't twist my words around, please. (...) This sarcasm is beneath you, Scott. Again, reread what I said and don't twist my words around please. All I ever said was (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jul-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Building priorities (was Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS) —Scott Sanburn
|
| | | | | | | | Larry, Well, it looks like I misread your posts, Larry, but I did reread yours a number of times, and if I read them wrong, I apologize. (...) That's fine. Bring that you want in the space you have. (...) I have gone too far. All right. Well, Larry, (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jul-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | (canceled) —Amy Hughes
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Building priorities (was Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS) —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | (...) for (...) Feel free to ignore the following advice from an outsider... I reccomend against a policy which requires everything to be home brew. If that had been the rule in our recent show in Raleigh, I would have had just a handfull of things (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jul-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Building priorities (was Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS) —Scott Sanburn
|
| | | | | | | Frank, (...) Well, you don't really know the situation, and some other items involved with this, but anyway... (...) That is not the policy, nor were we thinking about it in that regards. Fair enough? Scott S. -- (23 years ago, 1-Jul-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Building priorities (was Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS) —Peter Guenther
|
| | | | | | (...) I don't think we'd have a real problem with a policy like this. If you look at out January display, we filled--what was it, 18x24?--a layout and had very few stock buildings. Lots of stock cars and train parts, but really not that many stock (...) (23 years ago, 1-Jul-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS —Lester Witter
|
| | | | (...) Maybe you could have more than one building for some of the locations and swap them in and out as the day proceeds. Then visitors could (potentially) see something new each time they came back. This is a big advantage for out baseplate (...) (23 years ago, 2-Jul-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS —Chris Leach
|
| | | | (...) Very good idea Lester! (23 years ago, 2-Jul-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) Works for me! ++Lar (who just got his brickfest air tickets so is now definitely going unless the biz trip bracketing it gets cancelled) (23 years ago, 3-Jul-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS —Lindsay Frederick Braun
|
| | | | (...) Heh. Well, the rogues' gallery will be well nigh complete. ;) best LFB (23 years ago, 3-Jul-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| | | | |
