Subject:
|
Re: Parts for Meijers in GATS
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.us.michlug
|
Date:
|
Sun, 19 Aug 2001 16:47:58 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
462 times
|
| |
|
|
> Actually, the GATS people said we can have as much as we want. So there goes
> that.
No, actually, they didn't quite say that. I was there; they said we could
certainly have more. And Chris made a tentative request for an amount of
space, which is what I was going on with my comment.
But if we're going to expand significantly, even if GATS isn't our
constraint, we have others. We're going to need more roadplates and
baseplates, more trees and other landscaping elements... Having a larger
layout isn't as simple as getting the space and bringing some extra
buildings. It's going to need either more donation from TLC or an
investment from the club. We need to think carefully about it before we
decide to do it.
>
> Now, Peter, that's not a little bit of an exaggeration, it is an insulting
> exaggeration, frankly. We don't have a scale standard, nor should we have
> one.
If you chose to be insulted by it, that was your choice, not my intention.
I have expressed my admiration publicly and privately for your Shell
station, and Amy's church, and any number of other projects. I'm not
criticizing any building or any individual--just a trend in our LTC that I
see as dangerous.
And I disagree with you that we shouldn't have a scale standard. I don't
think we should have a lot of hard and fast rules and be inflexible; there
are always exceptions. I do think we should set a maximum size for new
buildings; going bigger would be quite possible, but would need discussion
and consensus from the group.
> If Rick sets his standards high, let him, and see if he can actually build
> it.
I'm not asking him to set his standards lower. I'm suggesting that size
isn't the most important thing, and a smaller building that expresses
Meijer-ness can be even more of a challenge, and even more impressive a
final product, than some oversize thing.
> If he can't then he can scale it back or whatever. Shooting down
> anyone's idea just because of non-existant space contraints is not needed,
> and counter-productive.
I beg your pardon. I did not shoot anyone down; I expressed an opinion I
suggested Rick think about as an alternative approach. I don't want to
start a flame war--MichLUG has had enough of those--but I humbly submit that
you have misrepresented and exaggerated my opinion.
> I think the GATS show in GR was a great example of both a train and a town
> display, and I think we are headed for greater shows down the road.
I agree completely--but we're not going to get there without some discussion
of approaches, and there are wrong turns on that road that the Club could
potentially get turned down.
Peter
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Parts for Meijers in GATS
|
| Peter & All, (...) you (...) Actually, the GATS people said we can have as much as we want. So there goes that. (...) Now, Peter, that's not a little bit of an exaggeration, it is an insulting exaggeration, frankly. We don't have a scale standard, (...) (23 years ago, 19-Aug-01, to lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
15 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
