 | | Re: The INRI Deep Space Starfighter: Salvation is at hand!
|
|
(...) First of all, being a Christian, I do object to the design. However, as a critique of the model, the structure is not very interesting. Your method of building requires virtually no SNOT at all. Most of it is in standard studs up configuration (...) (20 years ago, 2-Oct-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The INRI Deep Space Starfighter: Salvation is at hand!
|
|
(...) I see it as being almost entirely SNOT! I like that some people are building blocky and ungreebled ships. We have so many factions that they would be difficult to tell them apart if everyone used the same style. (When are we going to see the (...) (20 years ago, 2-Oct-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The INRI Deep Space Starfighter: Salvation is at hand!
|
|
(...) Why? I don't object to people wearing a crucifix as jewellry, how is this different? Your answer might possibly need to veer off into off-topic.debate, I leave it to you to decide. (...) Is one supposed to use SNOT merely for its own sake? I (...) (20 years ago, 2-Oct-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The INRI Deep Space Starfighter: Salvation is at hand!
|
|
(...) Why? (...) The only studs upward bits are the external structure (and the methods to the studs to secure it), and the pilot's seat & controls. It has studs forward, studs right, studs left and studs aft. The landing gear when extended is studs (...) (20 years ago, 3-Oct-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Oh relax, Peter!
|
|
(...) Can't you appreciate a little satire? After all, if you can't laugh at yourself, you're just leaving the job to others. Dave (20 years ago, 3-Oct-04, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Oh relax, Peter!
|
|
(...) I do appreciate an awful lot of satire. I spend a lot of time laughing at myself, and a lot of time listening to other people laugh at me. I can live with both. It's just that some things I don't laugh at. I was simply pointing this fact out (...) (20 years ago, 4-Oct-04, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: The INRI Deep Space Starfighter: Salvation is at hand!
|
|
(...) I object to both (...) Debates take too long. I'd like to leave it here (...) I have nothing against people not using SNOT, and on second thoughts, this model did use it anyway. I guess I meant to point at the fact that this model has a bit of (...) (20 years ago, 4-Oct-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The INRI Deep Space Starfighter: Salvation is at hand!
|
|
(...) I smell a challenge. Who can make the most boring ship? A (20 years ago, 4-Oct-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The INRI Deep Space Starfighter: Salvation is at hand!
|
|
(...) IIRC, that red 2x4 brick that was entered in the Galaxy Enforcer contest should definately take the title of Most Boring Ship - although at least it was not made with an all SNOT technique. ;-) Bob (20 years ago, 4-Oct-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The INRI Deep Space Starfighter: Salvation is at hand!
|
|
(...) Sure it was. The picture was just taken upside down :) Adrian (20 years ago, 5-Oct-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The INRI Deep Space Starfighter: Salvation is at hand!
|
|
(...) I may have something of an unfair advantage: I'm a trained and qualified (though, fortunately, not practising) accountant. ;-) Cheers Richie Dulin (URL) (20 years ago, 5-Oct-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
