 | | (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)
| | | | | | |
