 | | Re: The formation of an ILTCO —John Neal
|
| | | (...) Well, let's talk about this, because there are some gray areas here. If a club/group are committed to showing at train shows, then why the reticence using the LTC name form? I don't think it's silly to use both, because perhaps there are or (...) (24 years ago, 28-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: The formation of an ILTCO —James Brown
|
| | | | | (...) In a nutshell, because while we do trains, it's not *all* we do. (It's just all we've done lately...) And we don't (disclaimer: I'm making an assumption here - I haven't checked with NALUG lately, these are things we bantered around last (...) (24 years ago, 28-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: The formation of an ILTCO —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | | (...) That's a great way of phrasing it. Absolutely -- LTC's are a special case of LUGs. --Todd (24 years ago, 28-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: The formation of an ILTCO —Eric Kingsley
|
| | | | (...) Well I can talk from a NELUG perspective. Personally I see no need for both an LTC and LUG in the area. We get along great just as we are, heck I don't think we have a single "Hard Core" Train head in the group. Actually I see the train shows (...) (24 years ago, 28-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| | | | |
