Ok so this argument from what i can tell is between “all or nothing” and “we cant have prototypes and exclusives” now my position on this is about half way i do believe that any piece distributed should be allowed however any prototype that doesn’t use the officially realsed mold should be banned. Complaining about exclusives is kinda silly because you could buy plenty online is not a rare occurrence.
1 Like
I think you replied to the wrong post
Someday I should enter a LEGO contest.
Using anything thats not an official LEGO part or was not official released at the time of the contest still active should be banned. Anything besides that is fair game unless additional rules apply something new to the restriction part.
Also, parts that were not released by the due date of the contest should be banned.
As in if the next bionicle wave drops in may, contest ends in April, but you have parts from the wave that’s supposed to drop in may
and @Forest_westly, the original post had me asking where the BFTGM contest was.
3 Likes
It’s an extreme example but also just a joke on the subject as some people would agree on it if they were obtained legally.
1 Like
But guys. Prototypes and exclusives/rares are not the same thing.
I think I’m siding with Eljay on this one. No matter what, it is impossible to make a moc contest completely fair. People will already be more creative. That’s probably the most deciding factor, and there’s no good way to limit that.
6 Likes
I actually saw the Moc that won the Skull spider mask competition in person at brickcon
1 Like
You can’t make anything completely fair. The point I and many others have had is that you can make it at least more fair, because currently it isn’t fair at all.
Painting and cutting pieces are banned because it’s uncreative, not because it’s unfair.
Using a super extra rare piece isn’t creative either.
A creative piece usage is https://c3.staticflickr.com/8/7720/27161954170_2c4c5dc3d3_z.jpg
2 Likes
But why not. if you have the piece you should be able to use it
Okay, so I’ve been reading a few of the posts in this debacle.
The way I view it, modified pieces and prototype parts shouldn’t be allowed.
However, sets leak onto shelves all the time, which is out of Lego’s control.
I think that all official pieces produced and distributed officially should be allowed, even if they may be early released.
Some places get new sets when they are released, and some get them months later. There will never be a way to make a playing field fair in part usage, since location has a lot to do with it. For parts, I think the only restrictions should be placed on prototypes, third party, bootlegs, and modified pieces.
And to limit the age group allowed is impossible to judge. People can lie, people can cheat. And even if you can successfully restrict the age, you are cutting off an entire demographic you want to cator to.
And restricting exclusives? People should have the right to use pieces they fairly won in a contest by Lego.
TL;DR
While pieces not released by Lego shouldn’t be allowed, it is still unfair if you limit the ones that were, since no matter what people will still be more and less restricted than each other. Restricting ages, while I understand the benefit, is impractical to judge.
The fact that it is super rare changes nothing.
It’s just another color of a generic piece, and availability doesn’t change that.
4 Likes
Fun fact, Lego approved the painting of pieces for the Mask Contest.
I think the phrasing in that post shines a light on Lego’s goal for all contests; creativity is what they aim to promote. I don’t think the team managing these contests care all that much about placing arbitrary limitations on the contest just to please a minority group of people who may feel like they have been given the short end of the stick.
Let’s be real. The presence of a trans-neon green Skull Scorpio mask or a trans-red Mask of Fire, for example, likely wouldn’t be the DEFINING FACTOR that would elevate an entry above all others and propel them to victory. It’s just one piece of a larger puzzle. That being said, actively going out of your way to remove specific pieces from the pool seems unnecessary and restrictive, ESPECIALLY in the case of the 2015 pieces being available to a limited group of people ahead of release. Situations like that never happen on a regular basis, so it would be unnecessarily restrictive, in my opinion, to go out of your way to block things like that, especially considering how sets tend to leak out into various different retailers and countries on an inconsistent basis.
At the end of the day, Lego runs these contests. Lego is also in charge of releasing sets, prototypes, and special collectibles whenever they choose, so to be honest, they hold all the power. It’s pointless to concern yourselves with what seems “fair” or not because we’re operating from a different perspective than the people who actually manage the contests.
-Mesonak
14 Likes
Wait, what? How is painting and cutting pieces uncreative? If anything, I’d say its MORE creative than just using normal parts. They would be banned because it’s unfair, not because it’s uncreative.
1 Like
Yeah, and they totally should be fine with that because
The “not okay” part is the stealing, not the using parts that other people don’t have in your MOC in the contest. That’s perfectly fine.
You basically were like, “Oh, you think using prototype parts is okay? So you’re saying you also think it’s okay if I break into a LEGO Designers house, shoot up his family, burn his house down and then steal a couple prototype parts, huh? That’s what you’re saying?”
No. That’s not what we’re saying at all.
4 Likes
Lego are incredibly inconsistent and unclear with the rules they make for contests. Several contest winners we’ve had for Bionicle and other themes would be outright disqualified based on certain rules, if not for Lego changing the rules midway through the contest or after the user has won the contest.
One rule for example during the ‘Mask Hunt’ originally prevented someone from winning multiple prizes. However this rule was changed after Lego ignored its own rules and awarded the same person, a twitter user whose account was filled with contests they were entering, the prize of a bunch of the sets along with providing them with one of the Golden Masks.
At the end of the day, these are Lego’s contests, they can set the rules how they like. However there are rules in place that contests such as those run by Lego must abide to - and changing the rules of a contest midway through or directly contradicting rules established at the beginning of the contest is violation of the FCC’s Rules
Edit;
As clarified by Eljay, the FCC do not have jurisdiction over Lego due to the companies location. While Lego would not be abiding by the rules of FCC, as mentioned, it is not under any laws to do so. There may be a Denmark contest ruling, however we’ve been unable to locate it.
I didn’t, i just don’t count that one as being a legitimate contest given the rules kept changing and the winning entry was one which had pieces used which were unavailable to others, therefore providing them with an advantage over other users.
2 Likes
You know the FCC is a United States agency, right? And Lego is a Danish company?
2 Likes
I think that you should be able to use anything manufactured by Lego, in the state that it was manufactured in. Distribution shouldn’t matter.
1 Like
I’m pretty sure there must be a Danish version. UK has Watchdog which essentially does the same thing as FCC - so likely there is a agency similar to those which monitors the rules regarding contest entry for Denmark?
Yeah, but that makes that whole deal about it violating the FCC rules kind of a moot point, now, doesn’t it?