| |
"Todd & Suz" <admin@lugnet.com> wrote in message
news:G0wo9C.B4I@lugnet.com...
> LUGNET is pleased to announce a new and improved LEGO set database:
>
> http://guide.lugnet.com/set/
>
> Improvements over the previous database include:
>
> New Display Options
> Chose compact lists, thumbnails, or fully-detailed pages to browse • through.
>
> Smarter Searches
> Display any range of set numbers, or use product category names to • get
> better results returned to you.
>
> Integrated Shopping
> See a set you like? If it's available for sale online, check the • LUGNET
> BrickwiseT[1] mini-report righ there on the set page.
>
> Set Tracking
> If you're a LUGNET Member[2], you can add your own notes right on the • set
> pages. You can also mark a set as owned, want-to-buy, or • want-to-sell.
> This can help you find the sets you need to be complete.
>
> Members' Choice
> LUGNET Members[2] can also rank the best (and worst) sets of all time • by
> casting votes with a new Rating System appearing with each set's • page.
>
Todd,
The new stuff is great! How about a ranking system similar to
Fibblesnork? Except mayby a ranking for part selection rather than
alternate models. I've always found the multi-dimensional ranking on
Fibblesnork very helpfull in choosing what sets to pursue.
-John Van
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.database, John VanZwieten writes:
<snip>
> Todd,
>
> The new stuff is great! How about a ranking system similar to
> Fibblesnork? Except mayby a ranking for part selection rather than
> alternate models. I've always found the multi-dimensional ranking on
> Fibblesnork very helpfull in choosing what sets to pursue.
I agree with John on this one. Both a ranking for the Set and for the Part
Selection would be nice. The biggest example of this would be 7151-Sith
Infiltraitor http://guide.lugnet.com/set/7151 . Poor Set in terms of the Model
but a great Parts set.
Eric Kingsley
The New England LEGO Users Group
http://www.nelug.org/
|
|
|
