 | | IBLTC
|
|
International Brotherhood of LTC (or whatever) I think we should have a mailing list that includes a representative (or 2, or 3) from each LTC so that we can at least sync up wrt to GATS (honorariums) and creating a united LTC-ness. Perhaps this (...) (23 years ago, 26-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
Pair Networks (who hosts NCLUG.net for me) provides a mailing list service. I can set up a list without any problem. Lists are MailMan based and work well. Mike -- Mike Walsh - mike_walsh at mindspring dot com (URL) - North Carolina LEGO Users Group (...) (23 years ago, 26-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) Steve, I think this is a great idea and I volunteer my services as a NELUG rep. If you want more reps from NELUG I am sure I could get a volunteer or two. Now GATS doesn't come our way but several groups have done Greenberg shows and I am sure (...) (23 years ago, 26-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) I also think it's an excellent idea, and I sure someone (me or someone else) from NALUG would be interested in participating. The GATS/Greenburg thing doesn't do us much good, since all the shows up here seem to be independant, but I still (...) (23 years ago, 26-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
Great, Fire it up! First one done wins! I have no preferences. Add me to the list and anyone else chime in. We'll need some loose rules, like... 1 or 2 per club - huge groups are hard to come to concenses. It's more for announcements to be filtered (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) I think I would perfer IBLTC, because the train unions are typically "International Brotherhood of...". I know that the Live Steamers use IBLS (International Brotherhood of Live Steamers). It functions as a volentary overview of the hobby, (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
"sebarile-MOBL" <steve.e.barile@intel.com> wrote in message news:G9E2pn.748@lugnet.com... (...) icltc@pairlist.net has been created, I will follow up with more data regarding sign up once it filters through the system. Mike -- Mike Walsh - (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) James,as a proud member of a union (U.A. Local 704 Fire Sprinklers Detroit) international brotherhood sounds good.As a founding member of MILTC i would like to offer my services to this venture.CWLeach (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
"James Powell" <wx732@freenet.victoria.bc.ca> wrote in message news:G9E3B1.8H5@lugnet.com... (...) not a (...) Okay, I created ibltc@pairlist.net as well so now we can decide and I'll remove which ever we don't want. Mike -- Mike Walsh - mike_walsh (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) Well thats one of the great things about pairlist. You can add yourself and set your options as you wish. It's very easy and simple and its also easy to make sure only members post to it. I manage one and I like it a lot. (...) Definitly, (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
Sounds good to me, I've often wonder what other clubs are asking from the shows. And I agree that with the proven popularity of LTCs at shows that promoters are willing to pay reasonable amounts to have them there. Count me in. jt -- James J. (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
This is a great idea! Sign me up or tell me where to join... Robin Werner Greater Florida LEGO Train Club (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) Count me in, and I agree with James (and your original idea) that IBLTC is the way to go. Has the train nature. ++Lar (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) Wow, that's kind of surprising to hear. I've been meaning to ask, as this thread has unfolded... Are women allowed in LEGO train clubs, or is it a boys-only thing? --Todd (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: ICLTC
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message ... (...) What he said. The organisation is a great idea, but I'd rather see Congress than Brotherhood. Why be gratuitously exclusive when it's not necessary? Does this include clubs which don't call themselves LTC's but (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) I'd love to be the 2nd North Carolina rep (though if Cary or James want's the honor that would also work with me). I have made an effort to be in contact with other groups (just went up to Richmond on Saturday for the 2nd RichLUG meeting for (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) Yeah, I agree with Todd here. The word "brotherhood" is a little too exclusive (We actually have female members in the GMLTC). I realize it would be cool to follow along in the same vein as train unions, but I would suggest something like (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) I would love to be one of the reps from BayLUG! Russell (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
Hi all, if I did get it right you are planning, or allready set up a mailing list system for Lego Train Clubs? I would like to participate as a representative of the FGLTC (First German LEGO Train Club) which was founded by Ben. Perhaps he also (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) Oh, I like IOLTC myself. I also think that "Brotherhood" might not be the best way to go. I vote for IOLTC. Eric Kingsley (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) What do *you* think? (or was that a facetious question? :-) ) I would prefer not to belong to any club that excludes girls. (I *like* girls, just ask me, they're fun to have around) I can think of at least one girl member of most of the train (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: ICLTC
|
|
(...) He didn't say anything. (...) The BLE has female members. Further, clubs don't even HAVE a gender, it's a brotherhood of CLUBS not of club members. Why be gratuitiously PC when it's not necessary? ++Lar (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
To All, (...) meaning to ask, as this (...) Nope, we accept everyone, regardless of age, sex, color, political affiliations, etc. Scott S. -- (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
I'm in ours :) I would have said something about the "international brotherhood" but I pledged a fraternity freshman year, and even the girls were addressed as "brother so-and-so". (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
"Eric Kingsley" <kingsley@nelug.org> wrote in message news:G9EzqK.464@lugnet.com... [ ... snipped ... ] (...) best (...) Okay - we need to agree on a name. I have created four lists, and I can create more, but we do need some agreement here. To (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
Well sex, color and political affiliations, but age is a factor. At least for some including myself (NGLTC) jt (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: ICLTC
|
|
(...) If you read between the lines, I most certainly did. (...) Regardless of being or not being PC, I think it's a sexist, stupid name. --Todd (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) That thought train sounds like rationalization to me. But it's not my brotherhood so forget my two cents. --Todd [followups to .trains.org] (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) Not really, I don't think. Names get chosen for whimsical reasons or no reason at all, or to be like other names. (c.f. John Allen's famous Gorre & Dapheted RR, one of the most spectactular pre 1960 layouts, which was named to make a really (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: ICLTC
|
|
(...) I think this is one of those cases where the few outway the many... If some people think the name is sexist and stupid (I do as well) then I don't think we should use it. Being traditional doesn't make it right, besides to many people wouldn't (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: ICLTC
|
|
(...) Well said, Eric! And I couldn't agree more. I was written privately by someone who was concerned that I was butting into a conversation which I had no business butting into. But since it was taking place (in part) in lugnet.org.us.nelug and (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: ICLTC
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message ... (...) this (...) See Todd's reply. (...) I could have worded this better. I know no-one wants to exclude women from the organisation. What I meant was, why use exclusive language when it's not necessary. (...) (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org, lugnet.org.us.nelug)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
sebarile-MOBL wrote in message ... (...) (question that got lost in other discussion)... Can this include clubs which don't call themselves LTC's but exhibit layouts at train shows, like VLC? Kevin ---...--- Craftsman Lego Kits & Custom models: (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: ICLTC
|
|
(...) Well I think you have a right to "butt into" any conversation you want. LUGNET is your baby after all. I think anyone suggesting someone should butt out of a conversation on LUGNET is rude and uncalled for. (...) Well that was partially my (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) I don't see why not, NELUG, NALUG, and NCLUG members have all expressed interest and all do train shows. I don't see why "LTC" in your name would be a prerequisite of membership. Eric Kingsley (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) I would agree. LTC's are a subset of LUG's (or, rather, a special type of LUG -- rather than being a general LEGO users group, they're tailored toward train stuff and with a serious agenda). So it's a conventional label. --Todd (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: ICLTC
|
|
...snip... (...) ...more sinpage... Absolutely. Last time I checked this was your site. I guess I'm a little confused by this. Why is what we're getting paid from GATs a secret in the first place? I have to admit that I have no idea what we get from (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) I would tend to agree, I suspect Steve's intent was to be inclusionary not exclusionary. But if any of the following are true, I would think that the club may not have a compelling need to belong (other than for informational reasons): - The (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) That is a question that I've been wrestling with. Someone farther up the thread put forth the idea that the IOLTC would be used for contacts and negotiations with LEGO and LEGO Direct. What sort of negotiations? What would any potential IOLTC (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
I dont think the need for the IOLTC would be dealing with LEGO as a group, but more for dealing with show promoters as a group. I think once shows catch on that we are talking with each other and such, then we're in a better position to negotiate (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) If this gets off the ground, it seems fairly likely to me that it will either claim to be (or even more likely, be perceived as) speaking for all LEGO train displayers - at which point there is a certain responsibility for the org to give any (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) All good questions. I guess my answer would be that I "expect" nothing. If something is worked out so that we got some sort of discount then all the better but I expect nothing. (...) I think you answer yourself later on this but here are my (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) Hmm. Well, as a fellow NELUG member, I have to admit that I am rather counter to the idea of a "meta-group" representing NELUG when facing any other organisation, espeically TLC. I am certainly not opposed to seeing some kind of forum where (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
John Gerlach wrote in message ... (...) layouts (...) assistance? Maybe there are two things getting tangled up together here - the existence, membership and purpose of an IOLTC group, and assistance from Lego negotiated by such group. It seems to (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) It is to me. I guess I don't expect IOLTC to "represent" NELUG in any formal sense. What I expect IOLTC to be is a forum where we can share experiances, including honorarium fee's from show promoters as well as any "considerations" they have (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) Well, in sub-threads like this one: (URL) seems a lot like IOLTC, IBLTC, or ICLTC (whatever it ends up getting called) is going to be expected to "negotiate" with TLC, etc on behalf of its sub-groups. If that is going to be the case, NELUG (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IBLTC
|
|
(...) I would agree. I things are still in the planning stage so I want to wait it out but I don't think this new organization should or could negotiate flat deal that would satisfy all regional organizaions. I personally only want to do this for (...) (23 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 (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | 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 (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
