Subject:
|
Re: the evolution of lego sorting
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.storage
|
Date:
|
Mon, 8 Jan 2001 05:38:02 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
7682 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.storage, Remy Evard writes:
> 4. You begin to sort your Lego by category: normal-looking bricks in one
> set box, other pieces in another box.
I think I started doing that when I was 9 years old. May be earlier
> 5. Ok, you realize you actually have to sort it. You decide to sort the
> obvious way: by color.
Never done that since it was obviously wrong.
> 7. You cave in and actually get a storage system. Maybe it's rubbermaid
> bins, or piles of blue buckets, or fishing tackle boxes, or ziplocks. But
> now you've got a system.
I used big plastic ice cream boxs. Those cheap plastic boxs are all broken
now, while the ABS LEGO pieces are still in good conditions.
> 9. Sorting becomes difficult enough that you decide, in some cases, not to
> break some sets down and put them in your main pile of lego...
I made a rule, before dark age, that all broken down sets must be sorted right
away even if it means I need to split up a full box. I am still using that
rule, and that is why I got too many assembled set sitting around since sorting
a 600 pieces set is a pain...
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | the evolution of lego sorting
|
| Here's a description of an evolution of lego collection sorting. It might be yours, at least in parts. It's certainly been mine. I might turn this into an essay some day, but for now it will have to begin life as a series of unsupported claims. If (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jan-01, to lugnet.storage) !!
|
42 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
