 | | Re: IBLTC —Eric Kingsley
| | | | (...) 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 (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: IBLTC —Todd Lehman
| | | | | | (...) 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 (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: IBLTC —Larry Pieniazek
| | | | | (...) 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 (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: IBLTC —James Brown
| | | | | (...) 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 (...) (24 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
| | | | | | |
