Subject:
|
Re: The "geography" of local space
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Sat, 13 Nov 1999 17:51:38 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
372 times
|
| |
|
|
Hello all. This is the first time I've poked my head into lugnet.space. I'm
sure some of you are familiar with my site at http://www.zacktron.com. Its
got a space storyline and some models I've made as well...
In lugnet.space, Tom McDonald writes:
> Well, it became quickly apparent given the imagination of some that we needed
> some widely varying environments. It's not just a minifig-only universe out
> there. So bigger distances were needed. Also, at this point, it's not
> necessary that everyone's worlds be hard-mapped either; maybe only those
> nearby to Earth; or far away worlds that exist within a relatively short
> distance from each other but whose distance from Earth has never been
measured.
I have a question about this discussion. Is this to make an 'official' all-
encompassing required map of Lego Space? I'm not fully understanding where
this is going. It would be nice to have a star chart based on the actual
known universe (Zacktron uses it..). This isn't saying that we all have to
put our Lego space universes into one universe and co-exist, even where
storylines conflict, is it? Or is this just providing a map for individuals
to use. One of the things I'd be concerned with in this is someone telling me
I can't have my planet here, there, or that someone has taken this spot, etc.
This isn't the case, is it?
> Yes, it is the same. And I am aware it is incomplete. That's why I volunteered
> it. We don't have to have Lego space be identical to IRL space, not unless
> more folks want it that way. I proposed leaving it vague at the start to
> accomodate more lego worlds.
Though nice, it does sound here like you're getting into a 'One Lego Space'
thing where its all co-existing.
> Personally, I don't have a problem talking planets at all. But I think folks
> here mostly like just talking space lego.
Hee :)
> While intragalactic object speeds may be typically low, you did not mention
> another typical slow phenomenon known as the bureaucrats, who want to tell us
> everything is okay. So you've got to convince and pull people together to
> overthrow them and establish a new regime, which would be wobbly at best for a
> few hundred years until it gets serious and all the disgruntled used-to-be-
> dynasties fade away. Then maybe build a religion around it; build vessels; and
> eventually evacuate the masses to somewhere suitable (the exploration of which
> of course has been happening un/successfully for a few hundred years), cuz
> maybe a dozen of populated star systems lie in its path... and that could take
> a long time. (That's a part of the story I inadvertantly left out :-)
Tom, could you clarify (for a newbie like me to this group) what you mean by
this paragraph? I'm trying not to be snooty here [1], this sounds like a
great idea, but I'm concerned the concept is meant to step on others' toes.
To summarize what I'm trying to say: Its a great idea to make a star map based
on our actual universe, but its not a great idea to delegate territories to
non-consenting people within that map. If people want to get together and co-
exist, great, but if they don't, don't make them.
Then again, maybe I'm missing the whole point of this :)
> -Tom McD.
> when replying, spamcake given out during Halloween is now illegal in 31 of 50
> states.
This guy never runs out of them. Tom - are you keeping all of these spamcake
quotes in a log?? You should, and release a bunch periodically :)
[1] Tom I know *you* will know where I'm coming from (with our hours of
Zacktron planning discussions), but the others probably won't.
-Tim
http://www.zacktron.com
|
|
Message has 4 Replies:
 | | Re: The "geography" of local space
|
| (...) We won't hold it against you ;-) (...) No, you understand fine, though I'm not sure how 'official' it would have been. The idea was to have something functional like Town's Datsville in space. (...) Yes, but it can be real *work* depending on (...) (25 years ago, 14-Nov-99, to lugnet.space)
| | | Re: The "geography" of local space
|
| (...) Ok, cool. (...) Yeah. I'd just need maps of the Sol system, Alpha Centauri, and Barnard's Star and how they relate to each other as far as distances go for Zacktron. Most other stuff is unexplored space to the Z universe. But a useful tool. (...) (25 years ago, 14-Nov-99, to lugnet.space)
| | | Re: The "geography" of local space
|
| Hi, Tim, (...) Well, there was nothing "official" about the proposal. If you check over on the Town side of LUGNET and search for something called "Datsville," you'll find a virtual Lego town that was built collectively by a bunch of people, one (...) (25 years ago, 16-Nov-99, to lugnet.space)
| | | Re: The "geography" of local space
|
| (...) I am kind of familiar with the Town Datsville project (and want to find the time to contribute myself....). I think a space one would be great, but it could get a little weird given everyone's different design styles in a non-clearly defined (...) (25 years ago, 17-Nov-99, to lugnet.space)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: The "geography" of local space
|
| (...) Welcome! (...) Perhaps, but we can find out, so it's not impossible. I know I don't have a starmap in my head <:) Having a universe without going through a lot of research was what I was aiming at, and I didn't think anyone else would want (...) (25 years ago, 4-Nov-99, to lugnet.space)
|
34 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
|
|
|
|
