Well we've had this conversation before. People want Western back, it's not going to happen. The Native Americans in this theme are a big homogeneous blob of four or five different tribes and a gross stereotype of these people. It's just not going to happen today unless sets were specifically designed to reflect the varied cultures accurately.

@MCLegoboy said: "Well we've had this conversation before. People want Western back, it's not going to happen."

I don't necessarily think that's the end of the story, though.

Yes, this kind of set could exist in the 90s and not today, for all the reasons you said. But a quarter of "The Lego Movie" went spent in a Wild West environment, and what, that only came out a couple of years ago.

There was also a huge Western-themed chapter in one of those recent DK Lego ideas books (I can't remember which one, off-hand. "The Lego Play Book" maybe?).

Lego understands the appeal of the Wild West and clearly it's something they haven't forgotten about. I don't remember any pushback from those two things. It's just the stereotyping of indigenous cultures that's the issue, and Western themes can exist, happily, independently of those.

Seeing the rocks/baseplate in this set, even a Creator 3in1 or City outdoors type of set could be fun, something like 31025 : Mountain Hut but desert/river themed instead of the usual grass + red roof.

2021 had a Safari themed treehouse, City had safari rescue, sets, so Desert doesn't seem that unlikely now , City also had desert rally car with a scorpion a while ago.

The more problematic, the better. +1 for Western revival.

It's a historically inaccurate mismash, but it's still a beautiful conglomerate of pieces. LEGO did not skimp on the printing for the 1997 Wild West theme (or the 1996 one, for that matter).

The actual build is nothing stunning, since it's largely landscaping, but the printed parts are delightful: that desert river baseplate is delicious. And as brick-built landscaping goes, this might've actually been the best you'd see in an official set at this time: even in Castle or Pirates, the emphasis was on the buildings. Even the Islanders had the great statues--and LEGO's favourite prop of the mid-90s, my beloved raised baseplates.

This and Fort Legoredo... I want them so much, but there aren't many MISB on the aftermarket. I think there's only like one or two listed in the US as it is

*on Bricklink I mean

I had a coworker who saw me browsing Brickset a few months ago and was absolutely outraged that LEGO made these sets in Western with these characters and the names, saying it was wrong for BRICKSET to refer to the official LEGO sets of 2845 Indian Chief and 2846 Indian Kayak as the names they were called when LEGO released them.

Sure, calling the groups "Indian" now may be seen as problematic, but back in the 1990s that was totally ok. I don't think he even registered this set as problematic though, funny enough.

Another beautiful set. Looks like a painting with the background with it. Bring back your great box backgrounds Lego!

I never quite understood the "political incorrectness" of Western themes. In essentially all those movies/stories/themes, the whites are overall terrible, stupid, and kill each other faster than babies are born. I'd be proud to belong to any of the other groups, even if they aren't historically accurate. Just like the dumb cowboys.

I hope one day we pass through this woke culture and people just become proud that their culture left a mark, however stereotypical it is.

Did the horse climb up that ladder?

Another A+ set.

The only negative is I don't own it and it's not cheap. (okay, that's two negatives).

The horses are awesome and the set doesn't have any obvious conflict. That's a good thing considering it's a bit problematic what with all the wars between the US government and various Indian tribes.

But wait! There's more! It has a BASEPLATE!

Did I mention this is an A+ set?

I was never around for these sets, but they look pretty cool. I love the overall color choices and theme. Its a shame Lego will never make anything like this again, lest it be cULturALly InSenSItiVe. All Lego would need to do is be more western focused and pick one Native American tribe to respectfully portray. But people like to get upset about things because its the "cool thing to do" so Im confident we will never see cool themes like this anymore.

I don’t think we’ll see Native Americans portrayed in Lego again (Lone Ranger was probably the last gasp), but I could see them doing a Western theme at some point with just cowboys, sheriffs and bandits.

Sets with fabric pieces are always welcome at my house. This one has two!

Playmobil still covers this theme, with Native Americans. Yes, blasphemy, I am a fan of both Playmobil and LEGO! =P

@Zordboy:
While they co-own TLM with WB, they probably had less say in the final result than you seem to think. Based on comments about TLBM, it sounds like their involvement mostly had to do with approving the design of the models and minifigs (WB had to really press for Batgirl and Robin to have shiny capes). Regardless, I do remember a lot of cowboy/settler types, but not any natives.

@KotZ:
The troublesome thing there is that, at least from what I’ve seen, it tends to be mostly white people who have set themselves as gatekeepers to the terminology of other cultures. From what I’ve heard, there is broad disagreement within that s cultural group as to what their preferred term should be. Depending on exactly who you ask, they might prefer Indian, Amerindian, Native American, First Nations, or that you not lump them together as one people but only use their tribal names.

@chrisaw:
It gets tricky, though, because the Western genre is so thoroughly tied to the Western Expansion and the conflict of cultures that resulted. You can divorce a Space theme from aliens by simply stating that they don’t exist in that particular representation. That doesn’t work for a Western theme unless you pointedly remove it from the western US region, like shifting to the Caballero culture in Argentina, or if you shift it in time to a modern ranching theme. They got sheep now, so relocating to the Australian Outback is another possibility, but I suspect you’d run into a similar problem if you tried to handwave away any conflict between the European and native cultures.

@MVives:
Last I checked Playmobil is not and has never been the largest toy manufacturer in the world. They’re barely on anyone’s radar in this part of the world, so they’re not held to the same standards (and I don’t believe they hold themselves to the same standards as The LEGO Company).

Is it a problematic subject matter? Yes, of course it is.
But is it still an awesome set? Yes, of course it is.

However, pretending the problem doesn’t exist is rarely ever a good solution. If you could find a way to portray the inherent conflict and represented people in a respectful, accurate and just manner, then that could be very awesome—both educational and entertaining. However, I realize that is a HUGE “if” and a task so monumental in order to do it well, that it is not something TLG would deem worth even exploring.

And so, as @MCLegoboy initially said, this theme is not coming back.

Oh look, another set that got canceled by the PC Police Brigade. Buncha snowflakes with their “history,” and “facts” and “reasoned arguments.” Look bro, my feelings don’t respect your *facts* and if I don’t listen to you then that meants I’m never wrong. 3-D chess, bro.

Anyways, the set is overpriced and the build stinks. First wave of Western is classic, Offensive Stereotype Wave is junk all around.

@PurpleDave said:
"Regardless, I do remember a lot of cowboy/settler types, but not any natives."

Actually, a Native American (In much the same garb as this crowd) briefly chases Emmet with a hatchet in the saloon.

Overall, it seems to me that the company was trying to put native american culture in a positive light at some level, even if they didn't do it well or researched. I don't think any of the sets have them as bad guys or anything, that role always belongs to westerners (bank robbers and outlaws) although correct me if I'm wrong.

Wouldn't it be easily possible for Lego to do something like this again, provided they worked with members of an actual tribe in order to make it culturally accurate and honoring? I'm thinking of the "traditional" Chinese sets...

I would gladly buy sets like this today, because they look cool and are fun to interact with.
I don't care about the hypersensitive overreacting that this kind of set would cause in some people. It's not meant to be realistic, it's a toy. If you want realism, go to a museum, because that's where you'll find it.
Not in movies, and not in toys. If Lego wants to be realistic, they'd better be adding a lot of stairs to all their buildings, for example.
Everybody who paid half a second of attention in history classes knows that native americans are not depicted realistically in this manner, but that's ok, because it's a TOY.

@KotZ said:
"Sure, calling the groups "Indian" now may be seen as problematic, but back in the 1990s that was totally ok. I don't think he even registered this set as problematic though, funny enough."

In the US at least there is a connotation that many tribes actually prefer Indian, because its a term that has been engrained in their culture. I.E. the 1960's-70's "Indian Rights" movement stuff being an example where they view it positively. They view the term "Native American" as the more awkward term.

Of course there are plenty of tribes that will ALSO tell you they prefer Native American over Indian. Go figure. It just depends who you are talking to and which they more strongly prefer. CPG Grey has a whole video on the subject if you are curious.

As for doing American Indians in Lego... if Lego were to do it again it should be well researched with the tribe's blessing; they should probably remember the lessons learned from interacting with the Maori Tribe in New Zealand following the whole BIONICLE "Tohunga" controversy, and use that as guideline on how to best broach the idea of Native American sets again in Lego.

OR... do the western theme but just focus on the elements of "Cowboys vs. Robbers," and focus instead on the whole "showdown at High Noon" type story of a lone gunslinger saving a town from an evil gang financed by a greedy robber baron. Train robberies, cattle rustling, cave hideouts, stage coach chases, etc.

Careful what you wish for, or western will return as a ninjago season, like islanders did this year. Which would, admittedly, solve tue issues by planting it firmly into fantasy territory

@PurpleDave : Argentina, and pretty much everywhere else in the Americas, has its own fraught history with conflict between settlers and indigenous peoples. If your goal is to make a Western style movie about cowboys on the frontier without Indian conflict, I can hardly think of a worse place to do that than Argentina, besides the United States of course. Look up "Martin Fierro", then look up Julio Roca and the Conquista del Desierto / Conquest of the Wilderness. Cross reference Andrew Jackson and the Trail of Tears, cross reference US Army frontier posts after the Civil War ....

@MCLegoboy said:
"People want Western back, it's not going to happen."

They recently made some Indians as collectable minifigures, so I don't see why they wouldn't make some western sets in future

@Rimefang said:
"Everyone forgot about 2013's The Lone Ranger theme?

https://brickset.com/sets/theme-The-Lone-Ranger

btw, today's featured RSOTD was on sale in 1998 at KB Toys and Big Lots in the USA for $30."

It was a licensed theme and they got everything from the movie. A normal Lego theme has to be very careful with actually everything. I know this is sad but what can we do about it? We are living in a world when almost everyone is offended because of something.

LOVE that printed river baseplate

This (again) shows the destructive force of American cancel culture. Instead of giving children a look into the past that might encourage them to read a book about that time and the (horrible) things happened everything related to the topic is hidden, destroyed or worse.

If you take this seriously, it would also not be possible to have any Lego set about pyramids, pharaos (*the poor slaves*), not a single play set about the jungle (*they killed the indigenous*), no cars anymore (*more than 100 mio ppl got killed by a car*) and so on.

History is full of horrible disgusting events wherever you look. You will have a boring life if everything that is remotely linked to such events will be forbidden and hidden from peoples view.

Especially the Wild West theme is interesting here: In Germany kids love to play "Cowboys and Indians" and guess who is the good party? Of course the Indians are the good people and every kid wants to represent them when creating the play groups. Naturally they want to relive this play experience also in the Lego world and of course the roles of the involved party are the same here.

I see absolutely no issue in giving them sets that would allow them to recreate the day-to-day life of Native Americans. That would raise their interest in the real history and would give them a chance to learn how racism and plain greed destroyed almost an entire culture.

At the end of June, I bought MiSB 6762 from Poland for PLN 2200 (about $ 560). I think it's a good price for this set as the set was still sealed.

To bad the bison animal mould made for this wave never made it into sets :S

We got Lone ranger not so long ago, but to me that is like POTC instead of Pirates, it is not the same and I prefer the original themes over licensed ones that I rarely have any interest in.
We have also gotten 4 CMF figs in this theme so it is not impossible to get sets, but since we do not have any normal Castle or Pirates waves for over 5 years I think the chances are slim for this to return anytime soon :/

@PurpleDave said:
"Last I checked Playmobil is not and has never been the largest toy manufacturer in the world. They’re barely on anyone’s radar in this part of the world, so they’re not held to the same standards."

Euhm? What?
Lego isn't the biggest either, that would be HASBRO, then MATTEL and then LEGO, and you know what, Playmobil comes in fourth!

@ALEGOMan said:
"It's...... a toy... who cares? why do we have to make everything political? People who bought these had fun, the kids had fun because they wanted to play as cowboys or Indians that's it. So we shouldn't be cancelling these out, not to mention that it's historical, Lego has been about learning too."
Absolutely. Kids love playing cowboys and indians, I see it all the time. They don't think in those political correctness categories, they just want to have fun playing.

All this forced political correctness nowadays is making me sick. I am so happy I was able to grow up during a time when the situation wasn't as tense and unrelaxed as it is nowadays, where you have to measure every word you say for fear of annoying at least one person.
I love the episode of TBBT when Sheldon's mum comes to visit, and Leonard constantly tries to tell her what she shouldn't be saying because her expressions are potentially offensive, to which she at one point replies "My goodness, it’s a wonder you people in California can talk at all."
Love her attitude. Or that of John Cleese and Monty Python in general, in that everyone has the same right to be offended or made fun of.

But seriously, how could anyone be offended by the contents of this RSOTD? Any native Americans here who can enlighten me about what makes this set so offensive that a modern remake is out of the question?
I mean, if this is offensive, then we would need to ban Playmobil sets as well, just like all the kids' carnival costumes of cowboys and indians.

It is absolutely legitimate to make sure that cultures are treated with respect and there are things that not too long ago were considered okay where nowadays you'd realize that, one way or another, the required respect was somewhat lacking, even if perhaps there was no bad intention behind it.

At the same time, I'm convinced that there are many people who don't earnestly care about these things, they feign outrage to signal a supposed moral superiority (that, of course, they're absolutely certain of) and to signal belonging to a like-minded peer group and seek approval from it. And I find that attitude unproductive and quite frankly disgusting.

@KotZ said:
"I had a coworker who saw me browsing Brickset a few months ago and was absolutely outraged that LEGO made these sets in Western with these characters and the names, saying it was wrong for BRICKSET to refer to the official LEGO sets of 2845 Indian Chief and 2846 Indian Kayak as the names they were called when LEGO released them.

Sure, calling the groups "Indian" now may be seen as problematic, but back in the 1990s that was totally ok. I don't think he even registered this set as problematic though, funny enough."

That seems like just such an example of it, that fake "absolute" outrage. Because there can be no middle ground anymore, and outrage is sports. If you aren't absolutely outraged, if you aren't as radically woke as possible, then you're morally inferior, and you don't belong to the powerful group of morally superior people. I'm not even someone who likes to use "woke" as an insult and I used to think "social justice warrior" should be a compliment, but some people have blown this attitude way out of proportion. I don't think it's about social justice for some people anymore, it's become about exercising power. And I can't respect that anymore.

@LegoDavid said:
"Ok, here is a serious question. If the depiction of Native Americans is so offensive, and it would never happen today, then how did they manage to get away with it during the 90's in the first place? LEGO faced a big lawsuit for inaccurately using Maori language in Bionicle not long after the release of those Western Indians sets, so you would think they could have easily gotten in trouble for it even during that time. So, what's the deal here? "
Just to put this out, I'm white kid from Florida, and I am not an expert, so anyone reading this and my first comment should take what I say with a grain of salt.
My guess is that after all the years and different media depicting a more homogenized culture across all the tribes, they see it as a losing battle or they simply do not care because it isn't representative of them because it is so confused with other cultures. You mention that the Maori sued LEGO, and we can say that it is that distinct group that didn't appreciate the use of their culture. When it comes to the tribes of North America, there's 100s of different types, many don't see themselves as Indians or Native Americans, that's still a big collective, they very much are about their own respective cultures. Navajo is very is different from Chinook, which is different from Cheyenne, which is different from Iroquois, which is different from Seminole, etc. There was a point in time when all the people living on the east were forced west by colonists, and then as time went on and expansion happened, those west were pushed east, and they were all forced into the center of what is now the State of Oklahoma, and that was taken over. Eventually, through various laws, there are a number of regions across the country that are dedicated zones, reservations, owned by the descendants of indigenous tribes, they act in a way as their own countries, but do still fall under the banner of the United States. These reservations are given a kind of autonomy, they aren't forced to adhere to all the rules and they are free to follow their own customs, but federally, they still are under the banner of the United States. In a way, it could be a mentality of take what you can get when its given, let everyone else do what they want so long as they don't interfere with what is actually mine.
Some representation is better than no representation, but not all representation is good representation either. There are still plenty of sports teams and colleges that have names and mascots that appropriate the cultures, broad and specific, and they make tons of money off doing so. Many are changing their names, the issue now are copyrights and what's available. The Cleveland Indians, a baseball team, finally agreed to become the Cleveland Guardians, somebody didn't check to see if the name was even available, and it turns out, a Roller Derby team owns the rights to that name. Last year or so, a football team, the Washington Redskins, couldn't come up with a name because people bought a bunch of the rights to alternative names, so they just changed their name to the Washington Football Team. It only took 300 years to abolish slavery and then another 100 before segregation and there's still fallout and racism and bigotry. Even recently with the pandemic, all of the sudden Asian and Pacific Island Americans are the new focus of hate. The act of change is a very slow process in the United States. I know LEGO is a Danish company, but the Western theme is a very American subject and it pulled from old movies and shows that romanticized it, much like the pirate themes were also based off old media. There is plenty of media that depicts people in ways that then become the norm and it becomes socially accepted when it really shouldn't, and eventually you end up with a set like this where arid dwelling people live in teepees and have totem poles. It's the most iconic stuff from separate tribes being combined.
Continued...

Continued...
I've seen some people mention that they would love to have this set and other sets like it, but then also with the caveat that things be more respectful, and that's all that I was really trying to say. As a kid, I never would have seen this set as problematic, I played the Chief in the Thanksgiving play in Kindergarten in 1999, I didn't even know about racism and stereotypes at the time, but that's kind of a thing here in the US. Stuff gets distilled and warped and socially accepted through multiple exposure. It's not about trying to be Politically Correct for political correctness' sake, I'm not saying remove the idea of having sets with Native American tribes represented. Someone also mentioned that these sets all show the people as a just people living in their society, there's no conflict shown whatsoever between them and the cowboys, just that more homework needs to be done in how they are represented given the surrounding imagery and their attire. I saw someone mention that if they could get the blessings of the tribes being represented and these sets being used as educational tools as well as toys, there is no harm in sets existing. There have been a few minifigures over the years in the Collectible Minifigures line, I don't know what to make with them because it's a sole minifigure and not a set with more context. At best, they are representatives of specific tribes, at worst they are generalizations and what comes to mind when someone tells you to think of an American Indian.
So why didn't the tribes get more involved when the sets were released? I don't really know, it's really only stuff we can guess about. A number of the reservations I mentioned also somewhat cut themselves off from the rest of the world, like I said, they kind of operate with their own autonomy, so they may not have even known about the sets. That doesn't mean they are oblivious, they still interact with the world, but their focuses of what are important to them could be different because of their circumstances and experiences throughout America's history. What are the Maori's experiences with colonization and representation and the world economy? I don't know, but apparently they wanted to take action. There are definitely activists from tribes here in the US, too, they just aren't heard about as much for whatever reason. The best we can really do is just hypothesize unless we have some LEGO fans that can give us more insight as representatives of specific tribes and their takes on these sets, and how their communities would respond to them, too.

@captcrouton said:
"Had this set but the nephews demolished it. No idea what happened to the teepees but I have located a few of the special pieces. Weren't these the first minifigures to have noses?"

Timmy from freestyle and time cruisers had a nose first before the Indians I think.

@MCLegoboy said:
"Continued...
I've seen some people mention that they would love to have this set and other sets like it, but then also with the caveat that things be more respectful, and that's all that I was really trying to say. As a kid, I never would have seen this set as problematic, I played the Chief in the Thanksgiving play in Kindergarten in 1999, I didn't even know about racism and stereotypes at the time, but that's kind of a thing here in the US. Stuff gets distilled and warped and socially accepted through multiple exposure. It's not about trying to be Politically Correct for political correctness' sake, I'm not saying remove the idea of having sets with Native American tribes represented. Someone also mentioned that these sets all show the people as a just people living in their society, there's no conflict shown whatsoever between them and the cowboys, just that more homework needs to be done in how they are represented given the surrounding imagery and their attire. I saw someone mention that if they could get the blessings of the tribes being represented and these sets being used as educational tools as well as toys, there is no harm in sets existing. There have been a few minifigures over the years in the Collectible Minifigures line, I don't know what to make with them because it's a sole minifigure and not a set with more context. At best, they are representatives of specific tribes, at worst they are generalizations and what comes to mind when someone tells you to think of an American Indian.
So why didn't the tribes get more involved when the sets were released? I don't really know, it's really only stuff we can guess about. A number of the reservations I mentioned also somewhat cut themselves off from the rest of the world, like I said, they kind of operate with their own autonomy, so they may not have even known about the sets. That doesn't mean they are oblivious, they still interact with the world, but their focuses of what are important to them could be different because of their circumstances and experiences throughout America's history. What are the Maori's experiences with colonization and representation and the world economy? I don't know, but apparently they wanted to take action. There are definitely activists from tribes here in the US, too, they just aren't heard about as much for whatever reason. The best we can really do is just hypothesize unless we have some LEGO fans that can give us more insight as representatives of specific tribes and their takes on these sets, and how their communities would respond to them, too."

You do have some good points.

@Legobrickerfan said:
"You guys are starting a lot of drama over a toy. I don’t see anything wrong with this."

Well it can offensive to others

@Legobrickerfan said:
"You guys are starting a lot of drama over a toy. I don’t see anything wrong with this."

The drama was started by several complaining about current political correctness culture essentially preventing LEGO from releasing a similar set today. I don't think anyone that has commented thus far is actually greatly offended by this set (though some have expressed thoughts about how it could be seen as offensive); some do seem to be overreacting to the thought that others might be offended by it.

@LegoDavid:
As @MCLegoboy has mentioned, one difference between the Maori and the Native Americans is that the Maori are a fairly culturally homogenous group that represents a significant portion of New Zealand's demographics (~16.5%) while Native Americans are a general grouping of multiple culturally diverse tribes (e.g., not all tribes lived in tepees (especially not in the desert!)) that currently demographically only account for ~1% of the entire US population. This small proportion (at least in the US), combined with the general absence of cultural unity, essentially means that their voice is much smaller and less unified than the voice of the Maori in New Zealand.

I don't know how I can avoid sounding inconsiderate when I say I love these sets. I think with their colorful prints and minifigures these sets looked marvelous. If anything, the minifigures in this set looks wiser than the comical cowboys in other sets. Then again we are living in an age that even Will Smith is criticized for his lighter skin color in a certain movie.

Honestly, as someone with Native American heritage, these sets never bothered me or my family and I do not find them insensitive. If anything I am sick of people telling me what I should be offended by.

I do find the faces odd and wish they had gone with ones without printed noses for consistency but that is merely an aesthetic criticism. Still wish I had this and the fort.

Lotta ignorant, reactionary takes here :/

These toys don’t exist in a vacuum and there’s a historical context steeped in racism and genocide when it comes to representing this period of American history. That doesn’t mean TLG can never or should never produce another American Indian figure/set, but the “just good enough” representation based on centuries old stereotypes doesn’t fly anymore. And certainly the “cowboys vs. Indians” archetype should be laid to rest, as it’s often romanticized and probably isn’t appropriate subject matter for TLG anyways; they don’t cover warfare, why genocide?

@AustinPowers said:
" @ALEGOMan said:
"It's...... a toy... who cares? why do we have to make everything political? People who bought these had fun, the kids had fun because they wanted to play as cowboys or Indians that's it. So we shouldn't be cancelling these out, not to mention that it's historical, Lego has been about learning too."
Absolutely. Kids love playing cowboys and indians, I see it all the time. They don't think in those political correctness categories, they just want to have fun playing.

All this forced political correctness nowadays is making me sick. I am so happy I was able to grow up during a time when the situation wasn't as tense and unrelaxed as it is nowadays, where you have to measure every word you say for fear of annoying at least one person.
I love the episode of TBBT when Sheldon's mum comes to visit, and Leonard constantly tries to tell her what she shouldn't be saying because her expressions are potentially offensive, to which she at one point replies "My goodness, it’s a wonder you people in California can talk at all."
Love her attitude. Or that of John Cleese and Monty Python in general, in that everyone has the same right to be offended or made fun of.

But seriously, how could anyone be offended by the contents of this RSOTD? Any native Americans here who can enlighten me about what makes this set so offensive that a modern remake is out of the question?
I mean, if this is offensive, then we would need to ban Playmobil sets as well, just like all the kids' carnival costumes of cowboys and indians. "

I'm not a Native American but my adopted brother is and my father worked for several tribes for 20+ years. My sister-in-law gave me all her 90's sets and this set was included. I struggled with keeping it for several reasons.

1. It's a mashup of several different tribes. It is primarily a plains tribe set but has features of other tribes as well such as the the totem pole which is only found in Pacific Northwest tribes. This is the equivalent of making a "European Soccer Team" set and then combine the logos and players from Manchester United, Atletico Mineiro, and Seattle Sounders.

2. It's a classic example of cultural appropriation. If Lego had consulted and worked with a tribe in the design process then it would have been ok (and we wouldn't have gotten the mashup). If you want to know more about cultural appropriation here is a great article written by a Tsimshian anthropologist: https://www.sfu.ca/ipinch/outputs/blog/appropriation-month-first-nation-totem-poles/

3. Aside from the cultural butchering it's one of the most beautiful sets Lego has ever made. The minifigs alone are amazing and hold their own against todays Collectible Minifigs. The teepees used real cloth (canvas?) instead of plastic. The horses and the river baseplate are gorgeous. The hollowed out tree stumps are a really fun play function.

I think that Lego could rerelease this set if they picked a tribe to work with in the design process. They could fix the inaccuracies and cultural appropriations. It probably wouldn't look anything like the original but would good on its own.

@Darth_Dee said:
"1. It's a mashup of several different tribes. It is primarily a plains tribe set but has features of other tribes as well such as the the totem pole which is only found in Pacific Northwest tribes. This is the equivalent of making a "European Soccer Team" set and then combine the logos and players from Manchester United, Atletico Mineiro, and Seattle Sounders.
"

This is the point I don't get. So what if it's a mashup? Do westerns put a lot of emphasis on where those "whites" come from? The Irish? English? French? Canadians? Italians? Spanish? And yet the "whites" are always a big mashup and it doesn't really matter, despite all of those being wildly different cultures (same as those plains, mountains, NW Pacific, southern natives). And you can say the same about all the "blacks" (Africa is a damn big continent with tons of different cultures as well, plus the whole slave/americanized stuff that was going on) and "yellows" (they're not only from China...).

And so being outraged at what is an overall huge mashup of cultures is really weird to me. It's a toy, and it's just a generalization of history. It doesn't need to be super precise and historically correct. There are hundreds of distinct tribes whose names and cultures are known, you can't expect all of them to be depicted precisely.

Now maybe there could be a smart way to reintroduce them by dividing them per region. Here's a set on plains natives, here's another with those totems from the Pacific, and here's the mexican version. I'd be really into that, it would make for a grand western scene. But if it reaches this level of precision... Well you know what I'd expect from those other minorities, and then tons of people would complain. History's ugly. And yet it still captivates the imagination when you ignore just the right amount of details.

@pumaman said:
"Honestly, as someone with Native American heritage, these sets never bothered me or my family and I do not find them insensitive. If anything I am sick of people telling me what I should be offended by."
+1000

This is what I mean.
There are so many people who are not of Native American heritage but who know or think they know why something like this set set SHOULD be offensive, and go to great lengths to describe all the possible ways of things being potentially offensive.
Why not see this as what it is? A harmless playset that doesn't want to do anything but provide enjoyment for kids.
Sure, the imagery provided might be stereotypical, but it's also good-natured. There is no hostile intent, no propaganda or agenda.
Quite contrary to what all those semi-militant wannabe do-gooders nowadays have in mind.
Why try to incite hate where none would be called for? Reminds me of Life of Brian and the useless squabbles between the People's Front of Judea and all the other various fronts...

@AustinPowers said:
" @pumaman said:
"Honestly, as someone with Native American heritage, these sets never bothered me or my family and I do not find them insensitive. If anything I am sick of people telling me what I should be offended by."
+1000

This is what I mean.
There are so many people who are not of Native American heritage but who know or think they know why something like this set set SHOULD be offensive, and go to great lengths to describe all the possible ways of things being potentially offensive.
Why not see this as what it is? A harmless playset that doesn't want to do anything but provide enjoyment for kids.
Sure, the imagery provided might be stereotypical, but it's also good-natured. There is no hostile intent, no propaganda or agenda.
Quite contrary to what all those semi-militant wannabe do-gooders nowadays have in mind.
Why try to incite hate where none would be called for? Reminds me of Life of Brian and the useless squabbles between the People's Front of Judea and all the other various fronts... "

I agree with the both of you

@Legobrickerfan said:
" @CCC said:
"I don't think it is the scenes that are necessarily offensive, but the stereotyping of all native tribes as one and the same. For example, in this IDEAS submission

https://ideas.lego.com/projects/db438516-e1b1-49b6-bcd4-d8f6b600e744

there are totem poles next to wigwams next to teepees next to cacti next to pueblos. There is the suggestion that they might go fishing then later go horse riding across the plains. Moving from the Pacific NW, to the American or Canadian plains then back down to the SW in a few steps."

That’s another example of something that’s racist how did that get on ideas?

"

This ideas project is not intended to be one scene. It looks to me like a series of individual representations of five different Native areas. So it is trying to show the diversity that people are complaining about the set not having.

@pumaman said:
"Honestly, as someone with Native American heritage, these sets never bothered me or my family and I do not find them insensitive. If anything I am sick of people telling me what I should be offended by.

I do find the faces odd and wish they had gone with ones without printed noses for consistency but that is merely an aesthetic criticism. Still wish I had this and the fort."
Okay, this is very interesting to me. It's not my goal to say that you can't enjoy these types of sets or that you should be upset by them, my initial statement and all the other times the Western sets have popped up in RSotD is that in today's political environment, sets like this one would not be made unless it was much more specific and respectful. If LEGO came out with a set like this today, there would be articles everywhere saying how horrible they are for even entertaining the idea of a set like it, and then you have people that dig into the past and find these sets, which becomes even more troublesome. I never once said that I was offended or that nobody could enjoy these sets, but that they do have issues in terms of historical accuracy and the portrayal cultures.
When I see people saying they want Western back, I find it odd because Westerns were popular from the 40s to the 60s, I don't see too many people being interested in the setting of the Wild West today, and then when I saw they want the Indian sets, then I looked at it more closely and noticed the mixing of cultures and how that was not really a thing you could do today. The set itself looks like a bunch of fun, it's colorful, there's a number of functions, the minifgures are actually quite beautiful with the exception of the noses, there's a lot to like, it just feels kind of wrong when it's combined the way it is. @Darth_Dee shares a good example of what I'm talking about.
Is it wrong to live in a world where we've come to question some of the things we just accepted in the past? Are we certain that despite being made with good intentions that there is not still misrepresentation? Feel about the set the way you want, but this was also one of the goals of Random Set of the Day when Huw created it; conversation, and that's all I was trying to do.

@thefirst said:
" @Lego_mini_fan said:
" @Legobrickerfan said:
"You guys are starting a lot of drama over a toy. I don’t see anything wrong with this."

Well it can offensive to others"

How ... ??"

Read some of the comments

Okay things are getting out of hand. Rsotd is about discussing older sets not politics.

@Phoenixio said:
" @Darth_Dee said:
"1. It's a mashup of several different tribes. It is primarily a plains tribe set but has features of other tribes as well such as the the totem pole which is only found in Pacific Northwest tribes. This is the equivalent of making a "European Soccer Team" set and then combine the logos and players from Manchester United, Atletico Mineiro, and Seattle Sounders.
"

This is the point I don't get. So what if it's a mashup? Do westerns put a lot of emphasis on where those "whites" come from? The Irish? English? French? Canadians? Italians? Spanish? And yet the "whites" are always a big mashup and it doesn't really matter, despite all of those being wildly different cultures (same as those plains, mountains, NW Pacific, southern natives). And you can say the same about all the "blacks" (Africa is a damn big continent with tons of different cultures as well, plus the whole slave/americanized stuff that was going on) and "yellows" (they're not only from China...).

And so being outraged at what is an overall huge mashup of cultures is really weird to me. It's a toy, and it's just a generalization of history. It doesn't need to be super precise and historically correct. There are hundreds of distinct tribes whose names and cultures are known, you can't expect all of them to be depicted precisely.

Now maybe there could be a smart way to reintroduce them by dividing them per region. Here's a set on plains natives, here's another with those totems from the Pacific, and here's the mexican version. I'd be really into that, it would make for a grand western scene. But if it reaches this level of precision... Well you know what I'd expect from those other minorities, and then tons of people would complain. History's ugly. And yet it still captivates the imagination when you ignore just the right amount of details."

I wanted to make this point, so I'm glad you brought this up, but I'm going to expand upon it.
Let's take Castle, which is clearly based on medieval Europe. Has anyone ever complained that Castle is a mashup of European ethnicities? Why hasn't it had a clear distinction between Celts, Germans, Franks, Slavs, etc.? Only Scandinavians received their own Vikings theme.
That's because Europeans don't care - we know it's just a toy and there's no one to be outraged in our name because no one cares whether or not something is offensive to a European.

@Arnoldos said:
"That's because Europeans don't care - we know it's just a toy and there's no one to be outraged in our name because no one cares whether or not something is offensive to a European."

Yes, but Europeans have generally been the side that has benefited in much of world history, not the colonized, murdered and oppressed.
But anyway, when is it time for the next RSotD? I think we could all use a bit of Classic Space right now. I could even go from some Scala or Galidor at this point...

Here's a generic funny comment, separated from any controversy, like on most random sets:
Is that guy going to cook the snake?

@Norikins said:
"Here's a generic funny comment, separated from any controversy, like on most random sets:
Is that guy going to cook the snake?"

I think so lol

@AustinPowers said:
" @pumaman said:
"Honestly, as someone with Native American heritage, these sets never bothered me or my family and I do not find them insensitive. If anything I am sick of people telling me what I should be offended by."
+1000

This is what I mean.
There are so many people who are not of Native American heritage but who know or think they know why something like this set set SHOULD be offensive, and go to great lengths to describe all the possible ways of things being potentially offensive.
Why not see this as what it is? A harmless playset that doesn't want to do anything but provide enjoyment for kids.
Sure, the imagery provided might be stereotypical, but it's also good-natured. There is no hostile intent, no propaganda or agenda.
Quite contrary to what all those semi-militant wannabe do-gooders nowadays have in mind.
Why try to incite hate where none would be called for? Reminds me of Life of Brian and the useless squabbles between the People's Front of Judea and all the other various fronts... "

I don’t know what good it does to try to do right by oppressed groups and teach proper history nowadays if we’re just going to turn around and produce toys based off outmoded stereotypes, especially when persecution of those groups have historically been rooted in many of those same stereotypes.

To me, “just good enough” shouldn’t cut it no matter how good the “intent,” especially with this subject matter; neither should TLG profit off of those ignorant stereotypes centuries later. Those harmful or unknowing images continue to pervade American society — just look at the Washington Redskins controversy — TLG should be a leader in shirking them, not regress to the “cowboys and Indians” days.

@Norikins said:
"Here's a generic funny comment, separated from any controversy, like on most random sets:
Is that guy going to cook the snake?"

Honestly I didn’t even notice the snake but now that I have, every fibre of my being is just consumed with rage. THAT is not a realistic representation of the snakes in that region! There must be characteristics of at least seven different species of snake and I’m absolutely appalled. I don’t even have any snake heritage but I’m disgusssted. I probably won’t ssssleep tonight. Oh wait, maybe I am part sssnake.

I just rebuilt 6746 from the used lot I got and no aspect of it is racist

@thefirst said:
" @Norikins said:
"Here's a generic funny comment, separated from any controversy, like on most random sets:
Is that guy going to cook the snake?"

Honestly I didn’t even notice the snake but now that I have, every fibre of my being is just consumed with rage. THAT is not a realistic representation of the snakes in that region! There must be characteristics of at least seven different species of snake and I’m absolutely appalled. I don’t even have any snake heritage but I’m disgusssted. I probably won’t ssssleep tonight. Oh wait, maybe I am part sssnake."

I get that this is “satire,” but don’t you think you’re drawing a false equivocation between an oppressed group of humans pushed to the edge extinction on their own homeland and snakes?

@Prof_Physika said:
" @thefirst said:
" @Norikins said:
"Here's a generic funny comment, separated from any controversy, like on most random sets:
Is that guy going to cook the snake?"

Honestly I didn’t even notice the snake but now that I have, every fibre of my being is just consumed with rage. THAT is not a realistic representation of the snakes in that region! There must be characteristics of at least seven different species of snake and I’m absolutely appalled. I don’t even have any snake heritage but I’m disgusssted. I probably won’t ssssleep tonight. Oh wait, maybe I am part sssnake."

I get that this is “satire,” but don’t you think you’re drawing a false equivocation between an oppressed group of humans pushed to the edge extinction on their own homeland and snakes?"

Oh no, I’m deadly Sssserious.

@ALEGOMan said:
"It's...... a toy... who cares? why do we have to make everything political? People who bought these had fun, the kids had fun because they wanted to play as cowboys or Indians that's it. So we shouldn't be cancelling these out, not to mention that it's historical, Lego has been about learning too."

But the issue is that this isn’t a historically accurate representation. As others have pointed out, it’s an amalgamation of various cultures into one, which is reductive and generally considered harmful. It’s essentially the same as someone lumping together every Scandinavian country, or every part of the United Kingdom. Even though they occupy the same area and are ethnically similar, they have distinct cultural identities which should be treated respectfully.

To wade into the swirling waters just a bit, I think the biggest reason we wouldn't see an Indian set today isn't either political correctness OR a fear of it. Granted, I absolutely think LEGO should treat such a hypothetical line with sensitivity (and I am generally of the belief/hope that they WOULD), and I think that respectful representation would be welcomed.

However, I think the real reason they wouldn't do it is far more likely economic: they don't think it would sell. Whether LEGO is right about that is another matter, but it certainly isn't the case that the kids of today have same obvious passion for westerns as they did in the 50s and 60s. I'm speaking of North America, and it may well not be true of Germany, but something that is pretty much explicitly set in America is probably going to hie to the American market more than otherwise (similarly, I imagine Monkee Kid's success in China matters more to LEGO). I think the disappearance of Castle and Pirates is similar, and the best hope for either a cowboys OR Indians set is going to be along the same lines as those themes: awesome Ideas sets, Creator sets, and Collectible minifigs. I'd love to see something like this, with the tribal mishmash ironed out make it through Ideas. I know I'd buy it. Like a lot of the nostalgic posts on this thread, I wanted the big Western sets back in the day and missed out on them. And that resale market... Ouch!

For what it's worth, I loved this set as a kid. Sadly, I never got it, but I remember drooling over the catalogue pages for hours. It's colorful, it's inspiring and growing up in a small white town it broadened my mind. How fascinating that such cultures might exist or have existed somewhere on Earth. No kid cares about accuracy, they care about play value and inspiration. When you're older you can check the facts (and learn about the ugly past). I struggle to understand why this set is anything but a tribute to the group of cultures it represents, much like Castle is a mash-up tribute to the wide range of European cultures (excellent point @Arnoldos). It saddens me greatly that anyone would take offense to this (although on this forum it seems most 'offended' people are not actually from such culture, but seem to think they can represent how they should feel).

@monkyby87 said:
"Ad others have said, aside from it being a generic tribe and having designs that are rather random, it’s not really offensive in any way. I don’t believe (correct me if I’m wrong) that they were ever depicted in combat or as hostile in the theme. They have axes and spears, but I don’t remember seeing any sets showing them fighting or engaging with the cowboys even. While they obviously came out at the same time, they were their own theme of the western line really.

But I wouldn’t ever expect a true series to return, and while many love the theme, it probably wouldn’t have success even if it came back. Lone Ranger actually had some amazing western sets, regardless of how the film was. "

A generic vs. specific tribal depiction isn’t actually offensive either (or at least shouldn’t be).

To those overly concerned: It’s worth noting that the ENTIRE Ninjago theme is exactly the same thing with regard to Asian cultures — a mashup of many cultural influences into a singular fictional one. It’s done for the purpose of fictional storytelling and creative play, not to be an accurate representation of historical peoples. In other words, it would be different if TLG were to make a theme called “The Navajo”, claiming it to be historically accurate to the real tribe, and then go on to throw in all kinds of stereotypes from various tribes, making them villains, etc. But much of what is done in this theme — and perhaps every other theme in LEGO — is that the mainly superficial and aesthetic elements are incorporated to portray a simple representation of the idea and characters. The deeper elements of character, history, traditions, etc. can then be expanded upon throughout the course of play and storytelling — again, entirely within the realm of fiction.

Star Wars is another example…something that couldn’t remotely exist without the ever-expanding incorporation of influences from a multitude of cultures, histories, peoples.

But the same logic can be applied to very standard themes as well. 60291 is a City set called “Family House”. The aesthetics and features portray a probably-white mid-upper class “traditional” family — husband, wife, boy & girl & a dog. Is this portrayal typical of all families? Or the quintessential family? Is the full and accurate history of western culture being faithfully represented?

Ultimately, answers to such questions make no meaningful difference to the point of the set or of LEGO at large, i.e.: To provide raw materials and inspiration as a starting place for a child’s (or childlike) imagination. To answer them, in other words, can scarcely be done by trying to discern the intentions of the designers or how accurately or inaccurately they have portrayed reality; the specifics are kept to a certain level of nebulosity, whimsy, and fantasy by design, as this nature is essential to their purpose. The exercises in meaning, interpretation, exploration and teaching/learning which can come from this are all things which come as a result throughout the course of building and play; they are the consequent, not the antecedent.

Lastly, the world of LEGO people exists within its own LEGO universe, built from a wide diversity of cross-cultural and trans-global influences from throughout our own world. There is seldom little, if any, art, food, music, etc. — particularly in western culture — that does otherwise, and nor should there be. Human beings take in the raw materials given them, become inspired, and make new things to offer back into the human collective. This is a basic definition of creativity. To misunderstand this, or how it applies to the design and function of LEGO, is to fundamentally misunderstand the medium. But to recognize it and embrace it is to allow inspiration and work to flourish, along with cultural curiosity and understanding, and the creative power that that brings.

I believe it’s entirely possible to view the set in question, along with any Ninjago set or those of many other themes, in this light. And because I don’t believe in stifling creativity or curiosity in

@ArmoredBricks:
It’s been a while since I watched TLM, so I don’t remember that character at the moment. Regardless, Western included both Union soldiers and native tribes. It wasn’t until during and after the Civil War that the US really started building a military presence out west, and there was a lot of conflict with the plains tribes, with some degree of aggression on both sides. It’s pretty much impossible to represent those two groups in a single theme without at least implying conflict.

Given cooperation with and guidance from tribal authorities, I could totally see a theme representing an array of different native cultural groups with what is now the US, with minimal risk of being accused of cultural appropriation (and an easy means to shut that down should it happen). I don’t know how successful it would be, but there’s enough variety of cultures to fill out a full 3-year run.

@xboxtravis7992:
I suspect that even within an individual family there could be disagreement over which term is preferred.

@Vaeroun:
I know temperate North America is represented by a S1 hunter, S3 chief, S10 warrior, a mother w/baby from a post-S10 wave that I didn’t collect. The polar region only has the S5 Eskimo/Inuit (depending on whether it represents a member of the Inuit cultural groups found in Canada/Greenland, or the not-Inuit groups in Alaska who kinda resent being outvoted when it came time to decide what term to tell everyone to use for all of the boreal tribal groups). But it’s been a few years since I can remember them covering anything that resembles a surviving native culture from North America. The only one I remember of late was the Aztec Jaguar Warrior to pair with the Eagle Warrior from S7, but I’m not aware of anyone claiming to represent the Aztec people these days.

@LegoDavid:
It might be a combination of a few factors:
1. People have commodotized North American native cultures for decades, while this may have been a fairly new experience for the Maori people.
2. At least some North American native people have been able to cash in on this by becoming professional screen actors, where that didn’t happen with Bionicle.
3. North American cultures are often depicted with a fairly generic likeness that doesn’t really represent any specific tribal group (and there are quite a few), while the Maori are a single group.
4. One of the specific issues that had to be resolved was the use of the word “Tohunga” (Maori for “holy man”) to refer to the villagers (later called “Matoran”). I’ve long wondered if there would have been as much flak if they’d simply switched the terms “Turaga” and “Tohunga” before the theme launched, but I’m not aware of anything that really matches that specific issue in North America.

Maybe. I dunno. I could be way off base here. Maybe in North America they just enjoy what attention they receive, or maybe in New Zealand there was just one really pissed off individual who set everything in motion. What I do know is that in even just the last ten years, there’s been a pronounced shift, where simply opening a restaurant can get you shredded online for “cultural appropriation”, even if you spent time being trained in the country of origin.

@BelgianBricker:
Perhaps you missed when The LEGO Company toppled Hasbro off the throne? I can’t remember exactly when it happened, but 2014 with TLM causing a surge in sales seems likely. I don’t know if they’re still biggest. I think there may have been some controversy about Mattel overtaking them by buying a certain clone brand.

@pumaman:
I wonder how often you’ve found your opinion on matters relating to your own ancestry were unwelcome because they undermine the narrative. I suspect quite a bit of late.

@CCC:
The description notes that there are 562 recognized tribes just in the US, and that they include a very different range of cultures. It’s not meant to represent a single village, but a sampling of what spans an entire continent in the third or fourth largest nation in the world (it’s complicated). In Anchorage, at the Alaska Native Heritage Center, you can actually find something similar. There are seven major tribal groups that hail from Alaska, and behind the main building you can see a representation of village life from each of these seven groups. Within a short walk, you can explore the traditional homes of each group, both inside and out. Does it represent anything you’d find in real life? Absolutely not, but it allows you to learn about each of the major tribal groups in a single afternoon vs spending at least a month traveling all over Alaska.

@Legobrickerfan:
According to the description, with the helpful advice of one of the people that other people get outraged on behalf of.

Reading all of these comments, I am convinced that two or more things can be true at the same time. Of course a play set can be created and enjoyed innocuously. It may represent good heartedness with no ill intentions. And yet, at the same time, it can be offensive to others. I don't surmise from these comments that anyone is saying anyone else "should" be offended. Rather, my take is they are saying some "will" or "may" be offended. To some degree, it is up to each of us to determine whether the incremental joy of purchasing new sets that will or might be offensive to others is worthwhile. Either way, I don't think guilt should be assigned to those who enjoy the sets for their aesthetic appeal, as long as those enjoying the sets are willing to learn about the subject matter and, in the process, gain a better understanding of why the subject peoples could be offended. If we can't make this simple step to understand each other better as varied cultures, we are base.

The concept that I feel is perhaps unintentionally under-represented here is the power dynamic. White Europeans may not mind a mash up of cultures from the middle ages through the castle theme because they are creating it. White Americans may not mind a mash up of cowboys because they are creating it. If Indians or Native Americans were involved in the creation of these sets, I fully and confidently expect they would have been crafted differently. Imagine the German in a kilt, the Eskimo in a beret, or the Asian in a fez. Sure, one could craft a scenario where the imagery might work, but it would be so convoluted as to appear nonsensical. I don't mean to speak for others, but that is my take on the various comments about the mash up of Indian culture. And let us not forget that some of this is even more precious because it is tied directly to the spiritual nature of people depicted.

People who are disadvantaged by various circumstances, whether it be sex, race, religion, sexual orientation, height, weight, ethnicity, or wealth, are often not in a position to posit their concerns safely. That is exactly when and where any of us who are in those advantaged positions should consider whether we want to get involved. If you do, that doesn't make you evil or good. If you don't that doesn't make you evil or good. We are only defined by the totality of our humanity.
Each of us can make our own decisions and, in the process, have our own respective impact.

Companies do not have that luxury of independence. Missteps can be financially disastrous. Clearly this does not make their intentions pure, but it does require them to give careful consideration to any potentially risky propositions.

@AustinPowers I chuckled at your last comment. Other than the ex-Nazi reference, your description accurately depicts my dear, late father. In respectful contrast to your assertion, I believe most Americans today consider contemporary Germans as anti-Nazi. And yet your country, just like mine, struggles with the invasive intolerance of the fringes.

@Alatariel: When I was a kid accuracy was very important to me. I loved to learn about all sorts of things for fun, so it was important to me that toys based on real things accurately reflected those things, and that books I read had accurate information. For instance, at the age of 6 I really hated the 1998 Space Port space shuttle because it was so much less accurate than the 1995 Launch Command space shuttle. At that age I didn't fully appreciate how inaccurate the Western sets with Indians were and I was more interested in space shuttles anyway, but I'm sure if I'd been more interested in Old West history than the NASA space program the Western sets would have bothered me more. Kids are a lot smarter and more observant than we give them credit for.

@AustinPowers said:
" @Prof_Physika said:
" @Lego_mini_fan said:
" @Prof_Physika said:
" @Lego_mini_fan said:
"I just rebuilt 6746 from the used lot I got and no aspect of it is racist"

There’s at least one stereotype that Plains Indians, famous for their use of tipis, also erected totem poles. "

I wasn’t talking about what type of teepees they used."

It’s not about what type of tipi they used. It’s that the set includes a tipi and a totem pole when the two respective cultures that used those didn’t overlap."
So what? Most people in the US seem to think all Germans are Sauerkraut-loving ex-Nazis, living in half-timbered houses and running around in Lederhosen, yodeling all day. And do we complain about that? ;-P"

One, the historical oppressive context between predominately white Americans and American Indians does not at all match the context between Americans and Germans. Two, if TLG released a sub-theme titled “Germans” (or even “Krauts”) that DID depict Germans in that light, it’d raise a few eyebrows, no?

This is such an easy thing: don’t misrepresent groups that already have such limited representation, especially when that marginalization is due to centuries worth of oppressive and genocidal behavior. Absolutely baffled why so-called AFOLs can’t grasp that.

Well this has been a very productive day. Random Set of the Day was initially created for conversation and talking about our favorite sets, stuff we missed out on, and even critiquing some of the decisions made in older sets, it's not just about meming and lovingly making fun. I think it's important that the conversation had today happened, it's not the norm, but it did matter. Thank you to all that understood the purpose of it, and thanks to those that did offer opposition, it kept the conversation from being stale.

Well done, @MCLegoboy. Appreciate your perspective & attitude.
Now, on to some meming and making fun.

Needs more Blacktron. That is all.