 | | Re: Stop the madness...
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:G9H6Ju.Aty@lugnet.com... (...) [ ... snipped ... ] (...) I'm not Steve either but I did meet him (and three other members of PNLTC - Dwayne, Kim, Dave) last night here in Portland. (...) (24 years ago, 28-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: Stop the madness...
|
|
(...) What if TLC *wants* a single group to which it can more conveniently communicate, instead of dealing with 10-12+ different groups? (...) ?? What if TLC or LD wants to support LTCs doing train shows by providing catalogs, K8s, signs, whatever. (...) (24 years ago, 28-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: Stop the madness...
|
|
(...) Buh. Brain lockup. Too many things at once. To finish my own thought (even though it's obvious): I *do* think that the meta-group should freely share and compare notes about the results of dealing with TLC and other organisations with one (...) (24 years ago, 28-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: Stop the madness...
|
|
(...) I think that each club should definitely handle speaking to TLC and other organisations on their own. I do not think that this meta-group should *ever* speak to TLC, or give TLC the impression that they (TLC) should address the meta-group (...) (24 years ago, 28-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: Stop the madness...
|
|
(...) I'm not Steve. But I think the idea was that the mailing list would be private... and when LD was to be notified of something, someone would tell them but say they were speaking with the consensus of the group. If LD wanted to say something, (...) (24 years ago, 28-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: I<whatever>LTC summary
|
|
(...) Personally I don't really feel like we are "solving any problems". The part of Steve B's. origional post that I really liked was the part about sharing information on Honorariums. This is something I have struggled with for a while with (...) (24 years ago, 28-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: Stop the madness...
|
|
Steve, I agree with all of this except maybe... (...) How do you see this working? I thought that one of the main ideas behind this was so that we could talk off-line without anyone looking over our shoulder. Do you see LD being perminantly on the (...) (24 years ago, 28-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: I<whatever>LTC summary
|
|
(...) Good point. (I ask it myself in design reviews when people are putting technology in to something because the tech's cool rather than because it's needed) It's a question I haven't 100% sussed myself. There's the sharing of information (...) (24 years ago, 28-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: I<whatever>LTC summary
|
|
(...) Great summary! I really feel this helped me a lot to understand more of the issues. One thing I'm not clear on yet, though, with regard to the purpose of the organization, is what current problems it would solve? Or would it just make more new (...) (24 years ago, 28-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: I<whatever>LTC summary
|
|
(...) I hope you will stay involved :-) I think you've got the widest experience with LTCs (how many are you a member of?). (...) I'd love to see some work on module standards. It would be nice to head towards a standard height for the table (...) (24 years ago, 28-Feb-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
