General Questions

  • Thread starter Thread starter Orion
  • 2,283 comments
  • 107,568 views
Status
Not open for further replies.
Get them some Lego. Eternal joy for the creative ones.


As for cameras - I worked for a while on the set, filming commercials. They shot at 4k, for some reason, even though they had a separate camera for the still shots.. Makes no sense to me, considering TVs are under VGA resolution here.
 
No need to spend on branded bits - they're really awfully expensive, and less fun, since they use specialized parts.

I always liked the "generic-parts" Legos - helicopters and that stuff. If the budget's large enough, get them the electric train - I've never seen a kid (including myself) that wasn't fascinated by it. I played it for years...
 
If a parent buys a kid 1-3 lego that's fine, they then have to take the respoinsibility of making sure this kid doesn't swallow any. But you can't buy a present that's a potential choking hazard and make it someone elses issue.
 
Choking schmoking... I've had legos since before I had teeth... Kids 2 years and up should know what's food and what's not... :lol:

I'd say 3 years old and up, Legos... younger kids won't know how to use them (2 year olds don't have the coordination yet).

I try, as much as possible, not to buy character stuff or pure play toys... creative toys like Legos are an excellent gift... and for those older still, the Lego robot sets are great.
 
3+ for the basic bricks, 5+ for simple contraptions, and 7+ for the difficult ones is what I'd recommend - but as for choking, he could just ask the parents if it's an ok gift..
 
Well, if the age and choking hazard is a concern then I suggest going for Duplo.
 
I messaged Reventón last night and found out that 1) It was for a charity drive, not for someone he knows 2) he already bought a toy lightsaber.

As for the discussion of what age for Lego's, I have recently come to the conclusion that ages on Lego's are based not on the size of the pieces (as evidenced by the fact that the 4+ set I just bought has Lego's smallest piece they make) but the complexity of the object being built.
 
Yup, I second the Duplo blocks. The same fun as regular Legos (for little kids), but in a larger, non-swallowable size.
 
Lego. Plural is Lego. End.

Au contrair Famine, I have a hard time saying "Look at all the Lego I have!" :lol:

TB
You'll never change me on that one, Famine. It'll always be Lego's. :lol:

Famine is as always correct.

Lego Fair Play Policy
Taken from http://www.lego.com/eng/info/fairplay.asp

Proper Use of the LEGO Trademark
If the LEGO trademark is used at all, it should always be used as an adjective, not as a noun. For example, say "MODELS BUILT OF LEGO BRICKS". Never say "MODELS BUILT OF LEGOs".

The improper use of a trademark can ultimately lead to the loss of that trademark. Just look at Xerox, Kleenex and Asparin. How would you feel if any maker of plastic building blocks could call their product Lego?
 
Well, if it's not a noun, it can't be plural, can it?

Even if it could, and the pural did have an s, it would not have an apostrophe. :p

And those others are still trademarks. Canon can't call their copiers Xerox machines.
 
It tends to happen with acronyms and brand names. On the topic of "Legos" versus "LEGO™ blocks," I usually err on the side of colloquial usage rather than the wishes of a company or corporation. Same reason I still use "photoshop" as a verb.
 
^^^^^ Exactly.

As for apostrophes, there's not an appropriate usage to represent plurals.

The apostrophe is for possesives (as in 's on a noun) or contractions (to mark the place of missing letters.) But a plural noun gets an apostrophe, not an apostrophe-s to be marked possessive, e.g. lady's bag vs. ladies' bags.

That said, for some reason I can't help myself and find myself using it with acronyms or similar non-word letter sequences. I ride a Yamaha FJR. A bunch of them keeps coming out as FJR's, which is wrong. I still do it all the time.
 
And those others are still trademarks. Canon can't call their copiers Xerox machines.

I remember seeing one of our British friends here referring to their vacuum cleaner, which they described as "a Dyson hoover". I didn't have the heart to point out just how stupid that sounded. I was too busy drinking my Pepsi coke.
 
I think the whole thing comes about from being the most popular, or only recognizeable item on the market for its particular segment. Think about it, "LEGO blocks" are pretty much the only item like it on the market, other than Megablocks, so of course everyone just calls them LEGOs. Same with Photoshop, it's probably the most popular software of its kind, so people simply say that they're photoshopping a picture. Kleenex, Carmex, and Chapstick are the same way. Of course that's my take on it all.
 
It appears that implementing subtle puns is a requirement from the mods around here. :P
And much appreciated, in my opinion. Surely better than the alternative.
 
It's always Legos, just as it is mouses. Or sheeps. ;)
 
What I wonder is since they say to use LEGO like an adjective, could you say "Man that is one LEGO woman!" or "Why does the tv look so LEGO?" :p
 
I remember seeing one of our British friends here referring to their vacuum cleaner, which they described as "a Dyson hoover". I didn't have the heart to point out just how stupid that sounded. I was too busy drinking my Pepsi coke.

If I'd been drinking at the time, I would have spit up my Coke... :lol:

---

I have to consciously call photocopies photocopies... everyone here calls them Xerox...es. And soft-drinks are "Cokes". I don't know why yon Nor'Americans call them "Pops", since almost nobody buys Pop-Cola, anymore.

Oh, and it's meeses. And sheeps are sheepses. As geese are geeseses.

I've been calling my building bricks "Legos" for thirty years. I'm not going to change now, damnit! :lol:
 
I don't know why yon Nor'Americans call them "Pops", since almost nobody buys Pop-Cola, anymore.
smalldrawn.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Posts

Back