Subject:
|
Re: MoTeC rule question.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.technic
|
Date:
|
Sun, 12 May 2002 14:51:42 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1007 times
|
| |
|
|
> As I see it, the "voting" was for a future rule change, so the break-up has
> no relevance to the May contest.
>
> ROSCO
There were personal e-mails between me and Tobbe. In an e-mail to me, Tobbe
tells me, I have been found breaking the rules. He also goes on to say how
he does not know a punishment, and he will ask the group.
My understanding, from his letters, he would ask the group what to do with
my entry. This is not what he had asked of the people in Lugnet.
Being this is what he told me personally, I would like to see how he came up
with the 'votes' to eliminate my entry.
Another note, no where in the rules is a punishment stated. There are other
ways to work this without disqualification. Regardless of those pieces the
MOC still functions the same, nor do I believe it would change the outcome
of voting.
-Brian
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: MoTeC rule question.
|
| (...) What I meant was to ask the group if modifications should be allowed or not. Sorry if my English made you think otherwise. It's not always easy to write in English when my mind keep thinking in Swedish. Here's my text I wrote to you: "I'm (...) (22 years ago, 12-May-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: MoTeC rule question.
|
| In lugnet.technic, Brian Sadowski writes: [Additional stuff added from Tobbe's post] (...) [snip] (...) I agree, and I don't see any problem specifically allowing non-LEGO elements such as yours in future MoTeCs, however the current rules (as (...) (22 years ago, 12-May-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
40 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
|
|
|
|
