 | | Re: IBLTC —James Powell
|
| | | (...) 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 —Chris Leach
|
| | | | | (...) 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 —Mike Walsh
|
| | | | | "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 —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | (...) 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 —Kevin Wilson
|
| | | | | 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: ICLTC —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) 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: ICLTC —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | (...) 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: ICLTC —Eric Kingsley
|
| | | | | | | | (...) 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 —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | | | (...) 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 —Eric Kingsley
|
| | | | | | | | (...) 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: ICLTC —John Kelly
|
| | | | | | | | ...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: ICLTC —Kevin Wilson
|
| | | | | | 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 —John Neal
|
| | | | | (...) 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 —Eric Kingsley
|
| | | | | | (...) 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 —Mike Walsh
|
| | | | | | "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 —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) 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: IBLTC —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) 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: IBLTC —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | (...) 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 —Jennifer L. Boger
|
| | | | 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 —Scott Sanburn
|
| | | | 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 —James Trobaugh
|
| | | | 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)
|
| | | | |
