 | | Re: Lego at Gerf.Org
|
| (...) Sure, an "Internet Address" consists of a number. So that's pretty meaningless. Or, if you want to interpret more broadly, than maybe they mean URL. Uh-oh then: <URL:(URL) or <URL:(URL) or even <URL:(URL) are against the rules. I don't think (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.publish)
| | | | | Re: Lego at Gerf.Org
|
| (...) Techinically. But I think it's safe to say that TLG was not aiming their fair play document at internet design experts. They were aiming it at laymen. I suspect (but can't prove) that if you ask the average joe in the street what at internet (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.publish)
| | | | | Re: Lego at Gerf.Org
|
| (...) Really? That's pretty sad. (...) I assume that Blacktron is a trademark of TLG. (It's definitely "their" word, in any case.) So yeah, assuming that lego.blacktron.org belongs to TLG makes sense. But (and I mean this in all the best way) if you (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.publish)
| | | | | Re: Lego at Gerf.Org
|
| (...) That possibility, or that I >think< that? ;-) (...) When I read a URL that conists primarily of words, I instinctively try to read it as a sentence instead of as placeholders for a string of numbers. <shrug> That's the language I grew up with. (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.publish)
| | | | | Re: Lego at Gerf.Org
|
| (...) The possibility of course! (...) Well, the site content is an entirely different issue. I'm entirely understanding of the need for obvious "This is not an official Lego site" disclaimers. But anyway, it's not a matter of translating to (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.publish)
| |
