Subject:
|
Re: The rules is the rules is the rules
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Tue, 12 Jan 1999 16:54:17 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
880 times
|
| |
|
|
Janet and Carl McIver wrote
> Alright, lets confront the Lego purists! I really doubt that on this
> list there are enough purists to do any damage to those of us interested in
> learning about robots, and I don't think they number enough to do this list
> any damage.
> So, so as to not stifle the free flow of free thinking, I propose we
> dispense with the obligitory disclaimers and not confuse the lurkers with
> robots of mixed breed. After all, if we have used non-Lego software in our
> robots, that must be a first commandment sin.
I know that it is not necessary to confront the Purists, since they are a
tolerant bunch and do not propose to force anyone to build or talk about
only Lego. If you do not like a particular vegetable you do not need to
confront those who do? Purists do not wish to stifle or damage the list,
and any feeling that they advocate the use of only Lego is not correct. The
feeling that they themselves use only Lego is correct.
I agree a _great_ deal with the need to remove the disclaimers of "apologies
to the Lego purist"; it is a joke that has run its course. I agree that is
a waste of bandwidth, time, and will likely confuse new lurkers. I
personalliy ask for NO apoligies, for none are nessesary.
All that said however, I think that it is important to keep some aspect of
Lego (or use with Lego products) in the subject matter, as there are other
groups that discuss completely non-Lego robotics.
Lugnet's Lugnet.robotics description of the group is:
Building, creating, and developing with added technologies: the LEGO
MINDSTORMS™ RIS, other programmable bricks, vision systems, bar-code
readers, radio controlled units, research sites, microcode / embedded
programming, etc.
I suspect that the mail list has something similar to this. I think that all
our real conversations to date easily fall into this description.
> Lets hear about how Lego can learn from the overaged kids with fast
> computers and degrees!
Agreed!
> I know, I wrote 'em! The reason I wrote them is to poke fun at the
> supposed purists, whoever they are.
You will have to poke at my feet, because I am above you :)
LINC
ldsmith@pfc.forestry.ca
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | The rules is the rules is the rules
|
| Alright, lets confront the Lego purists! I really doubt that on this list there are enough purists to do any damage to those of us interested in learning about robots, and I don't think they number enough to do this list any damage. So, so as to (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
