April 1, 2005 at 2:28 pm #95077
You’re right ladon.
I’m sorry if i offended you RevMen
But this is al a bit
RubenApril 1, 2005 at 2:29 pm #95078
“Ladon” wrote: Haven’t you noticed that the only proof anyone has that its a joke is a few posts that have been deleted to keep the chaos to a minimun.
Oh YEAH. The chaos is at a minimum alright. :roll
– Andrew Who is busting up laughing if your are falling for thisApril 1, 2005 at 2:47 pm #95081
Please, people, only send a PM if it’s important that you talk to me directly. I woke up this morning to an inbox filled to capacity.
aubergenie, the Spartacus post made my morning.
AMT, we know you think it’s a joke. Good for you, you’re skeptical and you’re so smart. Now let those of us who are taking it seriously have our discussion. I’ve given the mods authorization to delete posts in this thread that disrupt from the decision-making ahead.
The letter was sent to me electronically. You’ll notice the date is the day before yesterday, do you think a letter arrived from the UK in one day? I anticipate a paper copy arriving sometime in the near future.
If you do not feel the letter is authentic, that’s fine. Considering the circumstances I guess that’s understandable, but please keep your theories and skepticisms out of this thread. Perhaps we should start another thread for the skeptics.
I think some sort of communication to LEGO might be the way to go. I wonder if, instead of everyone writing separate letters, we should all get on the same letter together. I’ve always thought internet petitions were stupid, but this may actually be a case where I’d stand behind one. I’m mad enough that I’d be willing to try just about anything.April 1, 2005 at 3:00 pm #95084
Now wait a minute..this letter is authentic?
I thought this was a joke.
Could you confirm this please?April 1, 2005 at 3:06 pm #95085
“Ladon” wrote: “the LEGO® trademark should not be incorporated into other endeavors.” is nowhere on the Fairplay page where it is stated to be?
Also, the statement “So called “clone bricks” are permitted; and encouraged” is not ended with a period. It is also a contradiction to what is written on LEGO.com “We do not like all the pirate copies of LEGO® elements which we have seen, especially during the past 25 years. We would like to explain why.”
if it’s authentic, then what’s with all these errors that Ladon pointed out?
is Lego trying to make a joke? I hope this gets resolved. i had a great HaV idea…April 1, 2005 at 3:08 pm #95086
I think RevMen could get into a lot of trouble if he made such a thing up. For one thing, the LEGO legal people wouldn’t be happy with an impersonation such as this.
Now that I think about it, it’s probably not a good idea to have the letter up, whether authentic or fake. I’m going to take it down and I ask that anyone who saved a copy of it to either delete it or make sure to not distribute it. For now, anyway.April 1, 2005 at 3:13 pm #95087
I’d be willing to participate in a letter to TLC.April 1, 2005 at 3:15 pm #95088
Crap in a sack.
Either this has got to be the best April Fools Joke ever or (in the immortal words of Jarjar binks) weeza in big trouble.April 1, 2005 at 3:26 pm #95089
As much as I would like to believe it is a joke, it is now April 2nd here.
April Fools jokes are not allowed to go past midday April 1st, and I am guessing its past that where Josh lives.
Despite what I may have written about the flaws in the letter, I am starting to believe that we may have a massive problem here.
Conspiracy theorists, (as that is what you will become in a few hours) quiet down and lets think logically.
I’ll sign a petition, if its the least I can do. This site keeps me sane [literally], so I still owe it a debt.
-Ladon I’m still a bit iffy…April 1, 2005 at 3:36 pm #95091
It actually is still 8:35 AM Mountain Time, on April 1st, so Its not past that yet.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.