 | | The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
I think that the train registry for the 10020 is a great idea! When I got my first three sets, I quickly opened all of the sets to see the numbers, but then after posting the sets numbers, on the Internet (URL), I quickly realized that I decreased (...) (22 years ago, 4-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) I guess this begs the question. Did you buy them to enjoy them or to make money from them? I'm not judging, I'm just saying that if you bought them for yourself, to build and enjoy, then I think it's fantastic that you've opened them. I think (...) (22 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) I hope you don't take my response as snotty either. It's meant to illustrate a point... (...) It's way easy to have fun with a MISB set. I have a MISB 4558. I have lots of other 4558s... so many that I can build whatever I might want to build, (...) (22 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
<snipping most of the article, sorry allan> I guess you are right in what you are saying about lego being a participating hobby. However. I really don't think there is anything wrong with "collecting Lego" so I do have several unopened sets...but (...) (22 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) Well, I should have waited for you to post yours, because I just wrote the same basic message. I agree completely with this sentiment, even though I only have 2.5 4558's, and none of them are MISB, and a mostly "complete" 6399 (...) (22 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) Hey, cool, my number is between your two! (...) I got the call and... *sigh*... it's a losing battle.... (...) This too may sound a bit snotty, but when I first got into LEGO I couldn't afford to even buy a single copy of every set I would (...) (22 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
I have an unopened Technic Space Shuttle. I've never seen one opened. And it kills me that I have not opened this one, but one day in a 100 years, my kids (not even close to reality yet) will have something fun from my generation to play with still (...) (22 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) I must be missing some inside joke. Anyone care to fill me in? (...) I'm also enjoying some of the perks of adulthood. But I'm still in the dark about not opening LEGO sets. The curiousity would drive me crazy. I've bought multiple copies of (...) (22 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) Neither do I. I didn't suggest it was wrong, only that I was curious why some folks like to keep sets unopened. It's a really hard concept for me to get my little brain around. :) (...) 100% for me, but then who's counting? (...) I suppose (...) (22 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) I hear you say that and see that now. But when I read your original (requoting) (...) I seriously took your words to mean "this is wrong". The "may sound a bit snotty" is often a giveaway to that sort of "wrongness" sentiment. Had you said "I (...) (22 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
In lugnet.trains, Larry Pieniazek writes: <snip> c /Scroedinger's/Schroedinger's/ (22 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) Different interpretations of what it means to 'be snotty' I guess. I see snotty as taunting, presumptuous, know-it-all. I was trying to preface my comments (which *could* have sounded snotty) and let people know that I wasn't just flinging out (...) (22 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) After I checked both dictionaries by my computer and then hiked down to the basement to the OED, all without results, I looked up "festouche" on Google-- now THAT certainly calls to mind an image. (...) So Lar, you have one listed in the (...) (22 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) [snip] (...) But you've gotta[1] keep fighting the good fight anyway 8?) [1] That's gotta[1] be in a dictionary somewhere[2] [2] I just lerv[1] recursive footnotes 8?) ROSCO (who's noticed at least 5 spelling / grammatical errors in his recent (...) (22 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
"Allan Bedford" <apotomeREMOVE-THIS@...vista.net> wrote in message news:GsHAKM.F9w@lugnet.com... (...) participating (...) "collecting Lego" (...) to (...) [ ... snipped ... ] Four years ago when I first re-discovered this hobby the thought of not (...) (22 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Trains sets are just not meant to be parted out... (was re parting/collectability was SF F unit set
|
|
(...) You ask this question in .trains ??? Infidel. The answer is obvious. Go to the wasteland that is .starwars and repent. :-) (although at one dark point pre BrickLink(bay) I was contemplating raiding a built 4551 for its red corros... ) (22 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
| |
| | Re: The "Unknown" Santa Fe
|
|
(...) <snip> I hate to be the grammar police, but this is one of my new pet peeves. I believe you mean that Allan's comments -prompt- your question. To beg the question means to -avoid- the question, or else to use your own conclusion as the basis (...) (22 years ago, 5-Mar-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
