 | | Re: Building a gravel silo
|
|
I'm not quite sure I follow your ASCII art. Can you post a picture some place (either a picture of what you got or a drawing in paint)? Frank Buiting <frank.buiting@infopulse.nl> wrote in message news:G9F0Kw.5Ms@lugnet.com... (...) with (...) into (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.build)
|
| |
| | Re: The formation of an ILTCO
|
|
If you are going to form IOLTC please--PLEASE have no age restrictions as the TEEN LEGO TRAIN CLUB may be forming and would like to have deligates in the IOLTC. thanks kai (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: The formation of an ILTCO
|
|
"James Brown" <galliard@shades-of-night.com> wrote in message news:G9FsvA.47n@lugnet.com... (...) [ ... snipped ... ] . (...) to (...) NCLUG is a similar situation - NCLUG/NCLTC would essentially be one in the same. That may not always be the case (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: What's in a name? (I*LTC)
|
|
"James Brown" <galliard@shades-of-night.com> wrote in message news:G9FtHA.68o@lugnet.com... (...) anyway. (...) IOLTC it is, as soon as I get the confirmation back from Pairlist it will go live. I had come to the same conclusion this morning but am (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | What's in a name? (I*LTC)
|
|
Ok, we've had proposals for Brotherhood, Organization, Congress and Association to replace the star. Several people have expessed a mild preference for Organization. If no one has any strenuous objections, I suggest that IOLTC it is. Unless I hear (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: The formation of an ILTCO
|
|
(...) Same for NELUG. (...) I agree with James and I would add "why GATS and NMRA"? Here in the New England they don't even come around for us to display. Our main option is Greenberg which is mostly up and down the East Coast. Plus others do (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: The formation of an ILTCO
|
|
John Neal wrote in message <3A9C257F.C626578B@u...st.net>... (...) Just a bit of a nit, John... VLC isn't centered on trains, but our only public display (so far) has been a train layout and we plan to exhibit at train shows again, 2-3 times this (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: I*LTC charter
|
|
International Association of Lego Train Clubs? if you are going to have induvidual clubs join. (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: The formation of an ILTCO
|
|
(...) I don't think that the LUG vs LTC thing is really relevant. As a prime example, NALUG has done 2 trains shows, intends to do more in the future, but has no intention or desire to form a seperate LTC - we're stunningly informal as it is, and it (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: I*LTC charter
|
|
A number of us must have all independently decided that a little facilitation/summarization would be a good idea. I think this is an excellent statement of purpose. In lugnet.trains.org, James Brown writes: <snip> (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: I<whatever>LTC summary
|
|
(...) Right. And to make it work, it's not required that every group conform to some rigid standard (ala N-trak), although that gives you the most flexibility. *all* that is required is that a few modules from each layout can somehow interface, not (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: I<whatever>LTC summary
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) Sounds good to me. You must have posted this while I was working on my own (somewhat more formally worded version) of the same. Pretty fast - do you do this for a living or something? ;) (...) Pick a name, start a mailing list. (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: I<whatever>LTC summary
|
|
(...) That was one of the topics we talked and dreamed about at the 'summit' in New York - how "awesome" it would be to have a show where two or three (or more!) different LTCs could display. (Either separately or as one huge combined layout.) Can (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | The formation of an ILTCO
|
|
There has been much discussion by groups wondering whether or not affiliation to this org would be beneficial or not. So I think that it would be helpful to discuss such a group's charter. I see 2 benefits: The first would relate directly to train (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | I*LTC charter
|
|
A lot of the bouncing around has been of what I*LTC would be/do/want/need/whatever. Here's a proposal, in an attempt to move things forward a bit more quickly. Obviously, this should/will need tweaking; it's based on what I've seen bandied about, (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: I<whatever>LTC summary
|
|
(...) Larry, Thanks for the summary this is basically just as I see it at the moment. <snip summary> (...) Yes. (...) Good point. Trains are definitly the most likely thing to be displayed at the moment so it is probably not going to be a common (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | I<whatever>LTC summary
|
|
Here's a summary as I see it so far - The organizational goals aren't 100% clear yet but are getting clearer. - more of a sharing of experiences and ideas and resources (like the handout to pick a small example, but other stuff too) - less of a (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: MICHLUG Statements WAS (Re: TeenLTC)
|
|
Ok sorry I did not realize it would get to this point. I was having a bad day and to find the post by John and Larry just made it worse. After some St. Johns Wort pill I realize how much of a !#@ i was. I apologize to everyone on LUGNET for the (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.michlug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) I think we can wait and see on that. If every other group has 2 reps then we should probably have 2 but if one is all that is needed then I am happy to be that one. Eric Kingsley (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) Oh no, I know everything is still in the planning stages and just by talking about it NELUG isn't getting tied to anything further down the road... I just meant that *if* this is the way things are going to go, NELUG should discuss it in depth (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
