 | | Re: IOLTC Update
|
|
John Neal wrote in message <3AA1CB7A.833172CD@u...st.net>... (...) assume (...) it. This is why (quoting from teh first message in this thread, by Mike Walsh): (...) This statement needs to be either stated to be wrong (please!) or explained (...) (24 years ago, 4-Mar-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IOLTC Update
|
|
(...) I'm sure LD is aware of it (they *do* read LUGNet), but why would anyone assume that they would have anything to do with it? They have nothing to do with it. The IOLTC will approach LD as an org to discuss ways that TLC can support LTCs doing (...) (24 years ago, 4-Mar-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IOLTC Update
|
|
(...) I'm almost as confused as everyone else by what has got to be an offhand remark, or even a misstatement, that is getting blown out of proportion (or else I am worried too). (...) I thought that the answer is "none, except that if LD wants to (...) (24 years ago, 4-Mar-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IOLTC Update
|
|
(...) Well the one thing I would like to know is how much other clubs (especially those that participate in Greenberg) get for honorariums. We (NELUG) have also been begged to do these shows and I seriously wonder if we are getting an honorarium (...) (24 years ago, 4-Mar-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IOLTC Update
|
|
I'm not sure why forming a mailing list to all the LTCs (in North America or world, whatever) is such a big deal. People, relax a bit! This list provides a mechanism for LEGO Train Club representatives (that's us!)to discuss topics, in a non-public (...) (24 years ago, 3-Mar-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IOLTC Update
|
|
(...) Huh? You have to be kidding. In every train show that WAMALUG has participated in, the promoter *begged* us to put up a display. There have never been any issues that I am aware of. Is such a group necessary? Is it even desiarable, considering (...) (24 years ago, 3-Mar-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IOLTC Update
|
|
(...) OK. What kind of "involvement" would there be from LD then? (...) I can totally understand and respect that. That just makes sense too. --Todd (24 years ago, 3-Mar-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IOLTC Update
|
|
(...) Steve? Can you answer them for us? (...) Personally, I don't think it's getting blown out of proportion. I think it's incredibly important. I am pretty shocked to learn in such a sideways manner that LEGO Direct has some kind of hand in the (...) (24 years ago, 3-Mar-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IOLTC Update
|
|
"Todd Lehman" <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:3aa14ca7.508392...net.com... [ ... snipped ... ] (...) Steve mentioned that NA was how it should start, it would/will not be a permanent state. (...) reason, (...) I don't know, Steve will (...) (24 years ago, 3-Mar-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
| |
| | Re: IOLTC Update
|
|
"Kevin Wilson" <kwilson_tccs@compuserve.com> wrote in message news:G9MwBG.7yE@lugnet.com... (...) other (...) Based on my conversation with Steve, it is some of both. I will have to defer the answers to some of these questions to Steve. LD does NOT (...) (24 years ago, 3-Mar-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
