Subject:
|
Re: MOC: Apocryphal Blacktron Freudenshadow Racer
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:40:57 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1327 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.space, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
In lugnet.space, Tom McDonald wrote:
| |
In lugnet.space, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
Tony Hafner has presented his very cool
Outcast Racer, for which much
praise is due. Very nice work, Tony!
Seeing this fine craft, I was inspired to try something similar, adding my
own (I hope) distinctive style.
Please let me know what you think of the
Apocryphal Blacktron Freudenshadow Racer.
Thanks for looking!
Dave!
FUT: OT-Clones
|
Thread advisory: newsgroups reset to only .space
I’m not the curator of this group, but I’m wondering about the decision to
post this craft to .space to begin with, even though the FUT was set only to
.off-topic.clones. While I recognize Tony’s craft as applicable to .space,
the post’s subject is about the Freudenshadow Racer craft. Was calling it
“apocryphal” at least partly meant to make its non-Lego nature more
acceptable to readers of the .space forum?
Perhaps these are the ramblings of a purist, but it doesn’t seem to fit
this: http://news.lugnet.com/space/?n=1
Just curious...
|
More acceptable? I don’t know--readers will accept it or they won’t,
regardless of the title. And from the deafening thread-silence that has
greeted my MOC, I’d say that they won’t.
In any case, I see what you’re getting at, but I could argue that any MOC
that’s an homage to a particular theme without being officially of that theme
is likewise a departure from “LEGO SYSTEM Space™ products” as prescribed in
the charter, and my particular departure is different primarily by degree
rather than kind. However, I’m not blind to the purists’ distaste for clone
bricks; let’s say that all the parts in the Freudenshadow that have true LEGO
counterparts are actual LEGO elements, meaning that the craft is more than
two-thirds LEGO.
|
Personally (not officially!) I think Dave found the right level of compromise.
The craft is clearly a spacecraft, not a tugboat so it’s a spacey topic, not a
castly or towny one. People talk about non LEGO but space related topics here
sometimes, c.f. the discussions about SpaceShipOne that sometimes are here and
sometimes elsewhere depending on their debate fodder quotient.
I think setting the FUT to clones was the right level of consideration for the
sensibilities of those of us (including myself) who will never (again?) buy MB.
So I don’t think I personally have an issue. If this truly is a question we need
to dig into officially, XFUT to admin somewhere and I’ll make sure other admins
are aware.
As to not posting on it, I can’t speak for others, but as for myself I didnt
post for two major reasons:
- I’m not that much of a spacer (although I am a little bit).
- I didn’t think it was Dave’s best work. It didn’t seem all that blacktronish to me. (compare with his IP2002 apocryphal, that seemed more “on theme” to me... YMMV). Hence, keeping Thumper’s father’s admonition in mind, I chose to not say anything.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: MOC: Apocryphal Blacktron Freudenshadow Racer
|
| (...) That was my hope. I don't build this stuff just to annoy (though, to be honest, I do derive a little satisfaction from that aspect of it, but it's a minor consideration at most), and although I enjoy sharing these MOC's, I know that the (...) (20 years ago, 29-Nov-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: MOC: Apocryphal Blacktron Freudenshadow Racer
|
| (...) More acceptable? I don't know--readers will accept it or they won't, regardless of the title. And from the deafening thread-silence that has greeted my MOC, I'd say that they won't. In any case, I see what you're getting at, but I could argue (...) (20 years ago, 29-Nov-04, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
7 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
