Subject:
|
Re: MoTeC rule question.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.technic
|
Date:
|
Sun, 12 May 2002 16:36:01 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1209 times
|
| |
|
|
On Sun, 12 May 2002 14:51:42 GMT, "Brian Sadowski"
<twodijits@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > 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.
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 perfectly awear of the slack int he wormgears and I know a number
of ways to fix it, all including modified LEGO or non-LEGO pieces.
Personally I also feel that this sort of thing should be allowed.
I'll ask the group."
Turns out I never said what I'd ask the group. Sorry.
> 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.
So, what do the lugnet.technic readers think? My post is a suggestion
not a fact.
> 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.
Let me know the other ways would you?
And why did you use them if they had no function?
No hard feelings.
Of course there must be a punishment if the rules are broken, it never
crossed my mind they would be broken in the first place so I never
wrote about it.
Like I wrote to you, I feel it's unfair to the other entries in May if
you'd be allowed the step outside the rules when the other MOC's
follow them - it's a question about principles not how small and
irrelevant the unlegal [1] the MOC was.
I hope to see the shrimp in the next MoTeC though, should the
modifications be allowed. I still lack thoughts on my suggestion
except your's.
1. In lack of a better word.
/Tobbe
http://www.arnesson.nu/lotek/
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: MoTeC rule question.
|
| (...) The only reason I brought it up was because of the another paragraph and the subsequent e-mail. "Personally I don't mind modifications as long as, say, 90% is LEGO. But the rules are there and if your entry does not qualify I might have to (...) (23 years ago, 14-May-02, to lugnet.technic)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: MoTeC rule question.
|
| (...) 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 (...) (23 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
|
|
|
|
