Subject:
|
Re: The formation of an ILTCO
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains.org
|
Date:
|
Tue, 27 Feb 2001 22:29:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
384 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.trains.org, James Brown writes:
> In lugnet.trains.org, John Neal writes:
> > While it's true that we could carry on many of these types of
> > discussions in trains.org, I think that eventually we would need to
> > organize further to accomplish some of these goals. As for LUGs vs
> > LTCs, I see this venture as a purely *train layout* organization whose
> > members participate primarily in GATS and NMRA related events. I know
> > that there are LUGs who create other theme displays for show, but I
> > think we should narrow our focus on trains. So I would think that if a
> > LUG isn't *centered* on the trains theme, then they probably wouldn't be
> > interested in this org. OTOH, if there are LTDs in a LUG who want to
> > participate, then I think they should create a separate LTC and begin
> > showing at train show events.
>
> I don't think that the LUG vs LTC thing is really relevant. As a prime
> example, NALUG has done 2 trains shows, intends to do more in the future,
> but has no intention or desire to form a seperate LTC - we're stunningly
> informal as it is, and it would feel pretty silly to most of us, I think, to
> have 2 different names for the same bunch of people.
Same for NELUG.
>
> Even though our "focus" isn't necessarily trains, we do train shows, and
> IMHO, that's enough.
I agree with James and I would add "why GATS and NMRA"? Here in the New
England they don't even come around for us to display. Our main option is
Greenberg which is mostly up and down the East Coast. Plus others do
Independant shows, why should we exclude them?
Eric Kingsley
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: The formation of an ILTCO
|
| (...) Just using those as an example because I thought that they are the most common nationwide. Participating in *any* public train show is fine by me:-) -John (...) (23 years ago, 28-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: The formation of an ILTCO
|
| (...) I don't think that the LUG vs LTC thing is really relevant. As a prime example, NALUG has done 2 trains shows, intends to do more in the future, but has no intention or desire to form a seperate LTC - we're stunningly informal as it is, and it (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
13 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
|
|
|
|
