MAB

I don't know. Making a mistake, then constantly ignoring people when they tell you that you've made a mistake because you think you know better than everyone else is a good indication of human behaviour. Especially for a person that is focussed so highly on one thing that they define themselves by it.

And then all the other metrics that might matter to other people. The entire box would be full up with disclaimers. For anyone that really cares about it, surely they can do a few minutes research if having stickers in it is going to stop them buying a set.

I agree there have been complaints about the item upload page, but many larger or experienced sellers use brickstore anyway for inventory purposes so won't be affected by the change for uploading. As for auto-search, go beyond using easy buy if you want to apply constraints to your search.

I find this one of the strangest suggestions ever. You have chosen the design based on your bias against stickers. You've used green and a tick for 100% prints, yellow/amber for mixture and red with a warning sign for 100% stickers. LEGO are never going to implement a not exactly subliminal system showing that the inclusion of stickers is bad. The biggest problem though is that your system is completely useless. Pretty much every set will be amber unless it is fully printed (probably Creator where there is often minimal decoration as parts are reused) or no decoration to the parts. Any set with a minifigure in is not 100% stickered if it contains a minifigure with a face and so the traffic light system is useless. A set with a huge sticker sheet and a single plain minifigure with a classic smiley face is "both" as it has a printed element. You would not know how much of the set is stickered or printed. It could be a single part printed and a huge sticker sheet, or a single part with a sticker and loads of printed parts. They are both amber. Unless they do a metric such as 37% of the decorated parts in this set have stickers, then the amber box on most sets won't tell you anything. If a set has a sticker sheet, LEGO only needs to put in one printed element such as a minfiigure head or a 1x1 round tile with a single printed dot on it and the red image with a warning sign can be removed from the box. And from a consumer point of view, they would be leaving themselves open to complaints putting terms like "100% prints", as this will mean different things to different people. One person might read it as all decorated parts are printed, whereas others will read it as 100% parts are printed. As noted above, it also doesn't indicate how many prints you get. A set with 1000 pieces with 1 printed part and no stickers is 100% printed so gets a green tick. A 1000 piece set with 100 printed parts and a sticker sheet for one part is not so doesn't get a green tick, just the amber box. Yet which is likely to be popular is you like printed parts? It might also be that if people start using warnings against stickers as a way of deciding which set they buy, then LEGO just does away with sticker sheets AND decorated elements. So a Friends set where they have a sticker set to show a bathroom background, they just leave the decoration out. It is still obviously a bathroom as it has a toilet and a shower and loads of brick built accessories, but the kid loses the decorative sticker in case some adult whines about it. Is that really a win for consumers? I don't think so. This is 100% printed, as there are two printed elements. This is "none". But if they stuck in a printed eye element, it gets the green tick. This one is 100% printed and gets a green tick , as it has a printed 1x1 round tile element in it (the coins). I'd be really annoyed if a box told me something was 100% printed if there was one or two tiny elements in it that have a print.

Is Shadowfax the same white horse as in the Marvel set? If so, it is Aragorn with his wings pulled off.

It looks fine, and what I'd hope most GWP should look like. There doesn't appear to be anything unique or important that is not readily available so anyone can build something similar easily enough while it comes with the box that shall not be opened for those that need something exclusive.

The last point is equally true of unlicensed sets. Although I disagree with their POV. I frequently take sets apart and redesign sections to be what I want rather than follow instructions, as do others. That is why we have the term MOD as opposed to MOC. I wonder if people that write stuff like this have ever visited forums like the Star Wars forum here or elsewhere or ever look at licensed MOCs online or at conventions. There are loads of creative people building what they want and not just following instructions. They seem to have their own definition of what creativity is and deny anything and anyone that doesn't fit their definition.

For me, there is no point when the claim that LEGO only produces two unlicensed themes keeps getting repeated. Part reuse also doesn't matter to me, as a specialised part is still a specialised part. The Roman shield is a specialised part. That was introduced in 2012, repeated a few years later in a licensed set, then reused in an unlicensed set as late as 2025. It has longevity in use and breadth as it has been used in four themes (in four sets in total). But is no less a specialised design than a snitch or Vader's helmet.

They will probably aim to adjust the design a little and submit as a new project. Publishing instructions kills a submission in future.

It depends what they are but when it comes to new parts designed for licensed themes, I sometimes prefer them to be detailed to really represent the thing they are meant to be and have them license-locked ather than for LEGO to generalise the part so it doesn't necessarily represent exactly what it is meant to be as well as it could just so it can be used in other themes. There are so many new parts made these days, especially for minifigure hair, headgear and accessories that having some of them licensed-locked when detail is important doesn't matter. I'm not a big Doctor Who fan, for example, but I'm glad they did the sonic screwdriver to look like it should and only used it in Doctor Who sets rather than make a new unidentifiable long thing just so it could be used as some other long thing in another theme. Whereas something like Hobbit hair or Luke's hair and of course the lightsaber hilt, they look good enough in a form that can be used for other themes. But if they had done C-3PO as a standard printed head or Chewbacca as a printed standard head with long hair, they'd look terrible. Fake stats. And yes, I do now enjoy that you cannot enjoy LEGO.

I don't mind about minifig numbers for these. In fact, I think I prefer the sets having fewer figures and cheaper prices. The figures are all PAB parts so can be added a few at a time to hit GWP thresholds when placing other orders in the meantime.

No! If a licensed part cannot be used in another theme because it is locked to the license, it cannot be used in another theme because it is locked to the license. That does not mean that it is not used in another theme because of its design, it is the license stopping it being used and not because the part is not versatile to use elsewhere. There are parts that were introduced in a licensed theme but not locked to that license and have been used in other themes. The lightsaber hilt is one such piece, and has now been used in 67 themes. Then there are parts like this, now appeared in 95 sets, despite being designed for Star Wars but not licensed locked. Yes, it is very clear that you do not like licenses that use a very small number of parts that are licensed locked. Although I cannot understand why, because the licensed parts that are locked are locked because they are from that license, and you don't like the license. That old universe still exists. LEGO can make any mixed up theme and put in characters and use parts from another of their unlicensed properties. The vast majority of parts from licensed and unlicensed sets are versatile in that they can be used to build whatever EGO can image, but some are licensed locked and cannot be used outside that theme. However, all parts from licensed and unlicensed sets are versatile in that they can be used to build whatever a person can imagine as a license block does not apply to individual builders that own the parts. There are parts such as windshields from Space themes that cannot be used in Castle, and there are parts such as castle doors and dragons from Castle themes that cannot be used in Space. That doesn't mean they are not versatile, they just don't fit every possible theme. It is the same with licensed parts. It is fairly clear that you just don't like licensed themes and also that you don't like that other people enjoy licensed themes. That is your problem, not their problem and definitely not LEGO's problem. You have to accept that LEGO make products for other people to enjoy and that, in doing so, they might make products that you don't enjoy. If you cannot find something that you enjoy out of their now vast product range then that is your problem, not theirs. Because there are plenty of people that are buying their modern sets. Some because they enjoy one or more of the licensed themes, some because they enjoy one or more of the unlicensed themes, and some because they enjoy both unlicensed and licensed. LEGO can easily afford to lose stubborn past consumers that don't like their current sets and insist on them being the same as they were decades ago and refuse to buy if they are not.

So what you are really saying is that unlicensed parts can be used in other themes, whereas licensed parts locked to a particular theme cannot be used by LEGO in other themes. But of course the good thing is that if you don't like the license and never buy the sets as then you won't have any of those licensed parts that you feel cannot be used in other contexts and it won't affect you. The fact that they are licensed locked means they won't appear in any unlicensed sets. Where it is 1 part in 1000, I'd prefer they get the detail right (especially for a minifigure or accessory) rather than compromise the detail of a design so it is generic enough it can be used elsewhere. It would be different if every piece in a Star Wars (or other licensed) set was a specialised part and could not be used with other LEGO parts. But that is far from the case. I've got quite a few LOTR Rohan helmets, and I think they are great for both LOTR and also other MOC armies outside of Middle Earth. Similarly for wargs, they are license locked but great for other MOCs. They could have used a generic castle helmet instead or done a generic wolf but that have been too much of a compromise and ruined the official sets.

HS is Hidden Side. MF is Monster Fighters. This is a specialist site and so specialist language is used. There is a balance between using jargon and spelling out everything every time it is used so someone without any knowledge of the subject can understand. Hidden Side was a new theme in 2019 when the post was written and HS was a common abbreviation used for it. Knowledge of LEGO themes of the previous few years at the time means MF is Monster Fighters. Anyone reading other posts on this site at the time should have been able to understand it fine. But jumping in without context years later could be a problem. But that is the problem with a forum with conservational type posts and when people can read and reply to things written five or ten years before.

But then a canoe can only be used as a canoe, a forestman's hat can only be used as a hat, a sword can only be used as a sword. Of course a part made according to a licensed design and agreed to be exclusive to that license will only appear in official LEGO sets for that license. But that does not mean other people (or, at least, people with an imagination) can use that part in other ways in MOCs. If the World Cup part is cheap to buy multiples, then I'd use it in a City stadium for people in a crowd holding it up, I'd also use it in a pub window advertising they show live football, and I'd also use it in a man-cave style room. My son has a nice MOC of his bedroom, and he uses the Darth Vader minifig helmet, a Boba Fett helmet and a Luke Sywalker Pilot helmet on shelves, representing the Helmet Series of sets. I've seen other people using those and things like The Simpsons heads in City MOCs as masks or full figures in Modular fancy dress shop windows. Similarly some people use movie characters as advertising mannequins for the Palace Cinema, or replace heads with generic ones to look like cos-players at a convention. The famous SW weapon, the lightsaber hilt, has been used in 1091 sets across 67 different themes according to BL. Not at all bad for versatility. There are other things like the Classic Dragon that LEGO has only used as a dragon in Castle sets, but others have used it in other ways.