|
|
 | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) It is also unfair to claim to be the New England Lego User Group, when they deny talented people access simply because they are underage. it should be renamed "New England Adult Lego User Group" or something then. (...) Again, see above. The (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) Then I must be mistaken. I based that comment off of some stuff I read today before posting my first reply, set 8 months ago, with a reference to this decision being made 4 months earlier, so roughly a year. (...) Yes, I understand that, and I (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) with (...) I haven't joined, and in all seriousness, probably would not join because of this rule (and note that my main vested interest in a New England/Boston based LUG would be to point my nephew, who is under 18, to). (...) to (...) Well, (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) Now, you're bringing in an even more ludicrous argument, 'we','community', 'fit'. (...) NELUG's (...) So who put it forward ? (...) You mean attack a ridiculous reason for exclusion. If anyone thinks they can form an organisation with (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
| | | | | Re: Age limitations
|
| (...) Ok, let's consider them then: ] Why do you cater only to adults? ] ] The primary reason is that children already have their own "User Groups" ] called their classmates. On average a child building with LEGO® has a ] large number of friends (...) (24 years ago, 4-Jul-00, to lugnet.org.us, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
|
