Subject:
|
Re: LTMA vs NMRA
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Thu, 25 Nov 1999 01:09:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1293 times
|
| |
|
|
On Wed, 24 Nov 1999, Frank Filz (<383BEDF8.4E1@mindspring.com>) wrote at
13:54:00
> Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> >
> >
> > Yet there is value to the LTMA idea as well. Can't we do it as a SIG?
>
> I think we should have both an NMRA SIG,
'scuse me, can someone say what a SIG is, for someone into LEGO trains,
but not other sorts, and not in N. America?
--
Tony Priestman
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: LTMA vs NMRA
|
| (...) Sure Tony, a SIG is a Special Interest Group. It is how the NMRA (which is actually quite international) describes subgroups within the NMRA. For example, there is a DCC SIG, the Layout Design SIG, and the Narrow Gauge SIG ect... James (25 years ago, 25-Nov-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LTMA vs NMRA
|
| (...) I think we should have both an NMRA SIG, and an independant LTMA. There will be some duplication of energies, but an LTMA would probably be more capable of making itself visible outside the hobby (article in Mania Magazine, representation at (...) (25 years ago, 24-Nov-99, to lugnet.trains)
|
22 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
|
|
|
|
