Subject:
|
Re: Stop the 8 Wide Insanity!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Mon, 11 Dec 2000 20:19:27 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
[johnneal@uswest.]AvoidSpam[net]
|
Viewed:
|
3014 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
> > Okay, I am going to cease and desist on the topic of 8 wide, maybe
> > forever, if all you naysayers would just consider this:
> >
> > -8 wide is no different in scale than 6 wide-- same minifig, same track.
>
> Correction, 8 wide is the same gauge but either represents stock
> proportionally larger to the gauge or is a different "scale". However there
> is no "LEGO scale" so your assertion is technically of null semantic
> content.
I would argue that they are the same scale, based on the minifig. It's just
that 6 wide is compressed widthwise, which is different than it being a
different scale.
> But, as this imprecision from you is normal (c.f. .debate) <grin>,
> we know what you MEANT even if you couldn't state it clearly.
>
> > -8 wide is plain and simply 6 wide plus a row of 1xs on either side of
> > whatever you are building. That's all. No mystery. No need to move
> > into a larger house.
> >
> > -All 8 wide does is give you 2 more studs worth of interior design space
> > and provide a more prototypical look on the outside. Does not induce
> > bankruptcy.
>
> Except for the "does not induce bankrupcy" (which isn't true, even for 6
> wide trains, as we all know)
I stand corrected:-)
> none of these assertions are in dispute. What I
> dispute is whether lobbying for a change in Official TLG sets to 8 wide as
> the primary, or even *a* main focus of lobbying efforts is reasonable,
> prudent, and necessary.
I never said I was trying to lobby TLC-- maybe the troops of LTDs....
> It's not. It's not reasonable, it's not prudent, and it's not necessary.
>
> I can, at the same time, marvel at what people can create in 8 wide (and 6
> wide and 4 wide and 2 wide and 14 wide, etc.) and still think that there are
> much much much more important things to try to convince the Powers That Be
> at TLG of.
>
> Things we've named off such as fixing the track geometry, getting DCC
> *right*, moving to run of the mill cars and accessories instead of just
> bizarre things like trainwash, getting a good line of powered accessories,
> etc, etc, etc...
>
> And more generic things too, like improving the bulk offerings and pricing,
> implementing the "custom" set thingie (whatever it is) properly,
> discontinuing the practice of symmetric parts that lock you into a width,
> etc, etc, etc...
>
> These are ALL more important than your pet hobby horse.
BION, 8 wide isn't my chief concern. I have other issues which I care much
more deeply about. As far as 8 wide goes, I just don't want TLC to design 6
wide specific parts which categorically limits builders to toywide.
> And the more you
> push that hobby horse the sillier it makes you look and the more credibility
> you lose with some. Including me.
Maybe I get a little passionate <shrug>
-J-2
>
>
> ++Lar
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Stop the 8 Wide Insanity!
|
| (...) Correction, 8 wide is the same gauge but either represents stock proportionally larger to the gauge or is a different "scale". However there is no "LEGO scale" so your assertion is technically of null semantic content. But, as this imprecision (...) (26 years ago, 11-Dec-00, to lugnet.trains)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
