Dropped through the letterbox just now ...
A quick scan shows an extra (N Gauge Supplier Compendium - although I would ask our NGS Committee people why this Forum is not listed in "Helpful Websites" whereas "the other place" is !), and that the Journal has received a "make-over".
Nice piccies from the model-making competition too :thumbsup:, and a certain Mr Fagg has an article ;)
Hi All, Mine has just landed with a thud, on my doormat, hopefully I'm going to be able to sit down now and read it, with a nice cup of coffee.
Regards, Ken.
Quote from: Only Me on January 29, 2016, 11:21:19 AM
I could write a paragraph or two here on reasons, but most know so I wont waste my fingers.
Ditto, and ditto.
Quote from: Only Me on January 29, 2016, 11:21:19 AM
I could write a paragraph or two here on reasons, but most know so I wont waste my fingers.
Hi, I'm intrigued, I've been a member of the Society for a few years but obviously unaware of said reasons.
Regards,
Ken.
Quote from: tripper on January 29, 2016, 04:15:23 PM
I've been a member of the Society for a few years but obviously unaware of said reasons.
I
really hope that we don't get a rehash of all that
again !!!Ken, please use the full Search functionality on here if you
really want to know, so that this thread remains about
this issue, and not all the old baggage ... you have two member names to help narrow down your search results.
Mine arrived today. Looks like another excellent issue.
:poop: Only just renewed membership on Monday a wee bit late this year. Hope mine is on the way!
Mine dropped on my head (literally!) this morning - not had more than a brief flick-through so far, but on the first impression it looks to be a realllllly good issue. :)
I agree, however it includes a shop order form but what do the shop sell ?
couple years back promissed a stock list , once a year but to date nothing.
dont say on line as I dont have a computor , better when old management was in order - what went wrong ???
Mine crashed on to the door mat this morning, I have had a quick browse and it looks like it is going to be another good read. :thumbsup:
Quote from: mr bachmann on January 29, 2016, 08:19:32 PM
I agree, however it includes a shop order form but what do the shop sell ?
couple years back promissed a stock list , once a year but to date nothing.
dont say on line as I dont have a computor , better when old management was in order - what went wrong ???
ŷ
Hi
The list used to be sent with each journal and I think it was last January when it's was changed to once a year. Maybe there will be one with journal 2/16.
Question how are you posting on here? What ever you are using for that should also give you access to the NGS shop website.
Cheers
Paul
Quote from: MikeDunn on January 29, 2016, 10:58:36 AM
A quick scan shows an extra (N Gauge Supplier Compendium - although I would ask our NGS Committee people why this Forum is not listed in "Helpful Websites" whereas "the other place" is !), and that the Journal has received a "make-over".
I read through the supplement, and yes, was also surprised why RMWeb was included in the "Helpful Websites" section but the NGF was not. Would be curious for some explanation as the NGF is surely the better of the two websites when it comes to 2mm modelling.
Cheers, NeMo
Quote from: NeMo on January 29, 2016, 08:28:01 PM
Quote from: MikeDunn on January 29, 2016, 10:58:36 AM
A quick scan shows an extra (N Gauge Supplier Compendium - although I would ask our NGS Committee people why this Forum is not listed in "Helpful Websites" whereas "the other place" is !), and that the Journal has received a "make-over".
I read through the supplement, and yes, was also surprised why RMWeb was included in the "Helpful Websites" section but the NGF was not. Would be curious for some explanation as the NGF is surely the better of the two websites when it comes to 2mm modelling.
Cheers, NeMo
That does seem a bit strange when that site or its parent firm's magazine seem to have very little N gauge content ( when I do bother to look anyway)
I think the Magazine has improved a lot since the new editor Graham took over. The magazine is for the readers from what I can see and needs our support. If our Mr Charles Fagg can write a article for the mag I might try my hand. Forget the past the future is what matters with the magazine and at the moment it is a good read and I am pleased with it.
Mine arrived today as well, I have only scratched the surface but there is a lot of interesting stuff in it. well done to Mr Hedges, his team and the contributors
Regards,
Alex
Quote from: tripper on January 29, 2016, 04:15:23 PM
Quote from: Only Me on January 29, 2016, 11:21:19 AM
I could write a paragraph or two here on reasons, but most know so I wont waste my fingers.
Hi, I'm intrigued, I've been a member of the Society for a few years but obviously unaware of said reasons.
Regards,
Ken.
In answer to your question: politics! LoL :laugh:
Joking aside, just enjoy both the NGF + NGS. They both greatly benefit the N Gauge modelling community.
Let's all stick together and help each other out :NGaugersRule:
Quote from: mr bachmann on January 29, 2016, 08:19:32 PM
I agree, however it includes a shop order form but what do the shop sell ?
couple years back promissed a stock list , once a year but to date nothing.
dont say on line as I dont have a computor , better when old management was in order - what went wrong ???
I note your comments about the lack of a shop list and would draw your attention to Shop News on page 5 of the Society Newsletter that accompanied your journal. It states, "if members would like a hard copy, a simple phone call to the shop is all that is required and it will be supplied post free". This announcement has been made in every journal since the beginning of 2015 when the first list was published. By sending it out on demand it not only keeps costs down but also ensures that the list is up to date and even shows the number of each item in stock at the date it was printed.
I have already printed off and sent out 3 this morning and would be very pleased to send one to you.
Regards,
Gill
Shop Manager and NGS Committee Member
Quote from: mr bachmann on January 29, 2016, 08:19:32 PM
dont say on line as I dont have a computor , better when old management was in order - what went wrong ???
Re your first point - use whatever you're using to view this then ::)
Re your second - it's well-documented, use the Search function if you
really don't know ... and I doubt many of those, knowing the reasons, will agree the old was better with hindsight !!!
Quote from: Jerry Howlett on January 29, 2016, 04:48:01 PM
:poop: Only just renewed membership on Monday a wee bit late this year. Hope mine is on the way!
Whoops... suggestion to the NGS membership admins: email out a membership renewal reminder. I appear to be lapsed.
Quote from: MikeDunn on January 30, 2016, 02:09:25 PM
Quote from: mr bachmann on January 29, 2016, 08:19:32 PM
dont say on line as I dont have a computor , better when old management was in order - what went wrong ???
Re your first point - use whatever you're using to view this then ::)
Re your second - it's well-documented, use the Search function if you really don't know ... and I doubt many of those, knowing the reasons, will agree the old was better with hindsight !!!
as for the computer its usually a quick play when I or the grandkids visit and its one of them big phone like things .
I'll contact the shop for a list , thanks all
Received my Journal yesterday, have had a quick look today.
I think the quality is exceptional, presentation thoroughly professional and content good. I have always looked forward to my Journal and in my view the standard gets better and better Grahame and contributors are to be congratulated.
Roy
IMO Graham as editor has improved the journal and intends to carry on doing so. I am vice chairman of a specialist tropical fish association, and barely half of our committee actually do something to maintain let alone bring improvements for all members to enjoy.
My late Father was a Merchant Navy officer and had a great expression...empty vessels make most noise. I have found and continue to find this to be so often true, that those who contribute nothing, and would never be likely to make the most noise.
The NGS membership is colossal when compared to our fish club, yet still the NGS editor has to appeal for articles just as ours does. It also happens that our committee end up writing articles to put something between the covers of our fish club journal. Just saying...
Quote from: trkilliman on January 30, 2016, 04:10:48 PM
The NGS membership is colossal when compared to our fish club, yet still the NGS editor has to appeal for articles just as ours does. It also happens that our committee end up writing articles to put something between the covers of our fish club journal. Just saying...
That's a valid point, but at least two members have articles in there, yours truly and Peter Fagg. There may well be others. In the last issue I worked with two other members of the forum for an article that went into the Journal. So I think the N Gauge Forum has a good track record then it comes to helping the NGS Journal out.
It's a shame that Grahame isn't involved here any more because that would be one way he could encourage more input from the many expert modellers on this forum.
Cheers, NeMo
Quote from: lil chris on January 29, 2016, 10:00:27 PM
I If our Mr Charles Fagg can write a article for the mag I might try my hand.
Congratulations Peter Charles Fagg on getting your article published, and bravo for mentioning this forum twice in the article and getting that past the censor's red pencil :D
Best regards,
Joe
Hello all,
Stated interest first: I am an NGS VP so I am not entirely neutral in this!
However... I had a flick through the journal this morning and thought it was very good, as ever, but I was very surprised and a little irritated that the NGF wasn't mentioned in the websites section when RMWeb was.
FWIW the bit of the NGS I do - helping to develop our kits and RTR - gets a good look in here as I start threads on all our projects including the timber carrier, colletts, Thompson BGs.
And the NGF has been incredibly supportive of our Revolution trains project too...
Incidentally, we will be announcing a new NGS RTR project and and a new kit here, on our website and on RMWeb in the Spring.
cheers
Ben A.
Quote from: joe cassidy on August 11, 1974, 02:49:28 AM
and bravo for mentioning this forum twice in the article and getting that past the censor's red pencil :D
If there is any rift between the NGS and the NGF then I feel comments like these don't help, even if said in jest. Neither is perfect, but both the Society and the forum should be working together to make N Gauge the best it can be.
Happy modelling.
Steven B
Quote from: Steven B on January 30, 2016, 07:59:43 PM
If there is any rift between the NGS and the NGF then I feel comments like these don't help, even if said in jest.
I don't think anyone, anywhere, at any time has said there's a rift between this forum and the membership of the N Gauge Society. ;)
Cheers, NeMo
There is absolutely no rift between the NGF and NGS. I've happily been a member of the NGS since the 90's. I must say that I'm perplexed that the forum didn't make it into the Journal, and felt that it went against the name compendium! ;)
As I've always said, I'm happy to work with the NGS and have always supported the Society on here by allowing products and articles to be shown, as well as supporting Ben and Mike with their own project. The whole idea of this forum was to help fellow modellers and to make a 'home' for N gaugers on the internet to communicate with each other. The Journal is great, but slow for correspondence.
What would be nice is to find out why we were missed, and perhaps include a page in the next Journal to inform NGS members? I have tried many times to include an advertisement in the Journal, but it has never come to fruition.
Quote from: Steven B on January 30, 2016, 07:59:43 PM
If there is any rift between the NGS and the NGF then I feel comments like these don't help, even if said in jest. Neither is perfect, but both the Society and the forum should be working together to make N Gauge the best it can be.
There is no rift between the NGS and the NGF because loads of people belong to both as I do.
You are right that the Society and the forum should be working together to make N Gauge the best it can be.
So why didn't the NGS journal mention the NGF website in their list of useful sites ?
Best regards,
Joe
Quote from: joe cassidy on January 30, 2016, 09:47:31 PM
So why didn't the NGS journal mention the NGF website in their list of useful sites ?
A call for commission of inquiry would have to be formally requested to the NGS committee with a list of backers, I guess. I'm not going to check the procedure, because -effort-.
I go with "it's an oversight" until stated otherwise.
Quote from: joe cassidy on January 30, 2016, 06:14:48 PM
Quote from: lil chris on January 29, 2016, 10:00:27 PM
I If our Mr Charles Fagg can write a article for the mag I might try my hand.
Congratulations Peter Charles Fagg on getting your article published, and bravo for mentioning this forum twice in the article and getting that past the censor's red pencil :D
Best regards,
Joe
Thank you, the article did suffer a little with some of my wording as did my mention of "The "N" Gauge Forum", reduced in length but that is what happens!
For years I wrote articles in the "Woodturning" Magazine (Guild of Master Craftsmen publication) and it was rare for articles of 2000 words and more not to suffer from being truncated.
Glad you enjoyed my meagre offering, warmest regards, Peter.
Quote from: railsquid on January 30, 2016, 03:13:20 PM
Whoops... suggestion to the NGS membership admins: email out a membership renewal reminder. I appear to be lapsed.
Hello Railsquid
You are due to renew next month (Feb) and if the distributors have done their job there should be a renewal reminder form with your copy of journal 1/16 which is on its way to you. Also, as an aide memoire, your renewal date is printed on your journal address sheets.
You don't have to wait for the form, you can renew online at www.ngsjoin.com (http://www.ngsjoin.com) whenever it's convenient.
Cheers!
Mike Bloomfield, NGS Mem.Sec.
QuoteFor years I wrote articles in the "Woodturning" Magazine (Guild of Master Craftsmen publication) and it was rare for articles of 2000 words and more not to suffer from being truncated.
A man of many talents!
Thank you for submitting an article Peter, I for one was impressed with your panel and would like to read a follow-up article on how it performs on your layout :thumbsup:
Skyline2uk
Quote from: memsek on January 31, 2016, 11:04:33 AM
Quote from: railsquid on January 30, 2016, 03:13:20 PM
Whoops... suggestion to the NGS membership admins: email out a membership renewal reminder. I appear to be lapsed.
Hello Railsquid
You are due to renew next month (Feb) and if the distributors have done their job there should be a renewal reminder form with your copy of journal 1/16 which is on its way to you. Also, as an aide memoire, your renewal date is printed on your journal address sheets.
You don't have to wait for the form, you can renew online at www.ngsjoin.com (http://www.ngsjoin.com) whenever it's convenient.
Cheers!
Mike Bloomfield, NGS Mem.Sec.
Oh, excellent, I thought it had been more than a year, thanks! I'll start camping out by the letter box then :D
My copy arrived just as I was setting out to go to London via Brighton. Joined my wife on the Brighton to Victoria train and when she started to look at the paper, I got out the journal to glance through. "You can't read that in public", she said, as if it was a girly magazine. However, she was joking so I enjoyed the latest journal all the way to Victoria. I like the format and content.
In the last couple of weeks I've motorised a turntable using the 'Arduino' board, as outlined in the December issue of the Society Journal, and done the whole thing for under £40: not bad for a a fully motorised turntable.
Roger
Quote from: railsquid on January 31, 2016, 11:12:42 AM
Oh, excellent, I thought it had been more than a year, thanks!
I kept lapsing ... in the end I muttered "Buggrit !" & did a 5-year renewal ::)
Quote from: Tank on January 30, 2016, 09:08:00 PM
What would be nice is to find out why we were missed, and perhaps include a page in the next Journal to inform NGS members? I have tried many times to include an advertisement in the Journal, but it has never come to fruition.
Apparently all you have to do is search this forum as it's been rehashed here "countless times." :confused1:
My copy arrived today :thumbsup: .I have not had a proper look yet but I did notice something - one thing I will not be doing when my renewal comes up is renewing for life! The subscription is £16 for one year and £240 for 'Life'; Family Membership is £2 for one year and £30 for 'Life'; overseas postage for me is £8 per year and £120 for 'Life'. Have you noticed anything yet? 'Life' is only 15 years - I know I am approaching pensionable age, but I want to live more than 15 years! :goggleeyes: :smiley-laughing: ;). David.
Having been following this thread, I was aware that our esteemed member PCF had an article in the latest NGS journal.
Here at the Antipodes, the postman doesn't come until about 2pm (well at least where I live), and of course we don't have letterboxes in our front doors. The letterbox is out at the top of the drive near the road. So I when I checked yesterday afternoon, I was happy to find NGS journal 1/16 sitting in there with the usual wildlife (spiders).
As soon as I had it open back in the house, I turned straight to the contents page. Although I couldn't see Peter's name anywhere, when I saw "I Think I Can" I thought that's gotta be Peter! So I turned immediately to page 38!
Well done, Peter. Great article and photos, and thanks for mentioning the NGF and Malc! :thumbsup:
George
Had the opportunity to read it from cover to cover over the past couple of days and have to agree that it is much improved over the content of 2 years ago. Although the NGF was missing from the suppliers' supplement there was plenty of NGF input.
One curious thing that did strike me was the extra publicity given to DJModels. As well as being featured in the Mermaid article, and the listing of announced models not yet delivered, DJModels also got a special mention in the Warley report. Whereas other suppliers only had a brief item on what they displayed, for DJModels who did not display at all there was an extra plug for the planned Class 17, Class 23 and J94. Well done to the Editor for slipping in that extra mention.
Quote from: Bealman on February 09, 2016, 12:51:26 AM
Having been following this thread, I was aware that our esteemed member PCF had an article in the latest NGS journal.
Here at the Antipodes, the postman doesn't come until about 2pm (well at least where I live), and of course we don't have letterboxes in our front doors. The letterbox is out at the top of the drive near the road. So I when I checked yesterday afternoon, I was happy to find NGS journal 1/16 sitting in there with the usual wildlife (spiders).
As soon as I had it open back in the house, I turned straight to the contents page. Although I couldn't see Peter's name anywhere, when I saw "I Think I Can" I thought that's gotta be Peter! So I turned immediately to page 38!
Well done, Peter. Great article and photos, and thanks for mentioning the NGF and Malc! :thumbsup:
George
George, thank you for your kind words, I just wish I had more interesting things to write about as for the NGF and Malc, credit where credit is due!
Warmest regards, Peter.
Quote from: MacRat on January 31, 2016, 10:32:39 AM
Quote from: joe cassidy on January 30, 2016, 09:47:31 PM
So why didn't the NGS journal mention the NGF website in their list of useful sites ?
A call for commission of inquiry would have to be formally requested to the NGS committee with a list of backers, I guess. I'm not going to check the procedure, because -effort-.
I go with "it's an oversight" until stated otherwise.
Because Mr Editor is not welcome here, at a rough guess.
I took exception to the tone of his comments on the mermaid article aimed at me. Oh look DJM's are now delayed with no word as to for how long.
In the competition section 2 kits were quoted as N'Tastic Shop kits, when he knows full well one was a Mill Lane Sidings Kit and the other County Rolling Stock. When I closed N'Tastic Shop certain people seem to have maliciously spread the world that County Rolling Stock was closing despite what I said.
The sudden in crease of 2mm fine scale articles was also noticeable and will only increase.
Comments below refer to how much free publicity DJM seem to get, yet have manufactured nothing in N Gauge yet.
Rant over........................
Quote from: Formerly NtasticShop on February 09, 2016, 11:10:01 AM
I took exception to the tone of his comments on the mermaid article aimed at me. Oh look DJM's are now delayed with no word as to for how long.
In the competition section 2 kits were quoted as N'Tastic Shop kits, when he knows full well one was a Mill Lane Sidings Kit and the other County Rolling Stock. When I closed N'Tastic Shop certain people seem to have maliciously spread the world that County Rolling Stock was closing despite what I said.
Comments below refer to how much free publicity DJM seem to get, yet have manufactured nothing in N Gauge yet.
Funny I read the same issue and didn't think there was any digs at you and that there were some pointed comments about DJM!
I'm not sure that confusing N'Tastic and CRS is deliberate (or malicious)!
Cheers, Mike
Quote from: red_death on February 09, 2016, 12:13:49 PM
Quote from: Formerly NtasticShop on February 09, 2016, 11:10:01 AM
I took exception to the tone of his comments on the mermaid article aimed at me. Oh look DJM's are now delayed with no word as to for how long.
In the competition section 2 kits were quoted as N'Tastic Shop kits, when he knows full well one was a Mill Lane Sidings Kit and the other County Rolling Stock. When I closed N'Tastic Shop certain people seem to have maliciously spread the world that County Rolling Stock was closing despite what I said.
Comments below refer to how much free publicity DJM seem to get, yet have manufactured nothing in N Gauge yet.
Funny I read the same issue and didn't think there was any digs at you and that there were some pointed comments about DJM!
I'm not sure that confusing N'Tastic and CRS is deliberate (or malicious)!
Cheers, Mike
I can read it in context of comments made elsewhere as well ( http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/102639-county-rolling-stock-kickstarter-n-gauge-rtr-mermaid/ (http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/102639-county-rolling-stock-kickstarter-n-gauge-rtr-mermaid/) see post 24). This is as he took my money for an advert in the NGS Journal while thinking the astute would not back it as DJM is working on one.
I also get other comments and feedback about CRS still existing, muddying the water does not help. I am not surprised your the first to respond in his defense.
I have said my view from where I sit, it will be interesting to see the line up of the new 2mm Society sorry I meant N Gauge Society committee.
Please not that the address given in the magazine's suppliers booklet for Etched Pixels/Ultima Models is wrong. It's 18 months out of date and nothing sent there will arrive at anything but what is now becoming a set of cheap one bedroom flats.
Quote from: Formerly NtasticShop on February 09, 2016, 12:53:47 PM
I can read it in context of comments made elsewhere as well ( http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/102639-county-rolling-stock-kickstarter-n-gauge-rtr-mermaid/ (http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/102639-county-rolling-stock-kickstarter-n-gauge-rtr-mermaid/) see post 24). This is as he took my money for an advert in the NGS Journal while thinking the astute would not back it as DJM is working on one.
I also get other comments and feedback about CRS still existing, muddying the water does not help. I am not surprised your the first to respond in his defense.
I have said my view from where I sit, it will be interesting to see the line up of the new 2mm Society sorry I meant N Gauge Society committee.
Richard
You know full well my views on the Mermaid and that it was a project that I supported.
As for your comment about me defending Grahame - I make no secret of the fact that he is my friend!
I'm not sure what has annoyed you about the NGS Committee such that you feel the need to make jibes about 2mm - I can't think of anyone on the Committee that models in 2mm FS (though I am a member (possibly others are as well) so that I can buy some of the track components and wagons parts). I don't really see the problem with including 2mm FS in the NGS Journal particularly when many 2mm layouts utilise N gauge products (and vice versa). If you have a problem please bring it up with the NGS Committee (committee@ngaugesociety etc).
Cheers,
Mike
(NGS Product Development Officer)
Quote from: Formerly NtasticShop on February 09, 2016, 11:10:01 AM
The sudden increase of 2mm fine scale articles was also noticeable and will only increase.
I must admit that I agree with you here. I don't think 2mm
finescale has any business being in the N Gauge Society journal. The Journal is meant to be a showcase for N Gauge modelling. I don't have any problem including 2mm modelling generally; for example I'd have no problem with an article about scratchbuilding something like a station or goods shed that happened to be on a 2mm finescale layout. But once you start talking about building track to finescale standards and adjusting wheel back-to-back dimensions, I think you've crossed the line. So looking at the Fencehouses layout (as lovely as it is) the entire page (!) about finescale track was promoting something OTHER than N gauge.
Please Grahame, don't do this. I find it hard to imagine that the Editor couldn't find another N gauge layout somewhere in Britain (heck, the world!) that would have shown off the N gauge hobby to its advantage. Going down the 2mm finescale avenue is basically saying "N gauge is nice, but if you're serious about modelling, you should be doing this -- 2 mm finescale -- instead of commercial N gauge track". Just don't open this can of worms Grahame, and instead solicit articles from NGS members about their layouts.
Quote from: Formerly NtasticShop on February 09, 2016, 11:10:01 AM
Comments below refer to how much free publicity DJM seem to get, yet have manufactured nothing in N Gauge yet.
Dave Jones has a massive amount of goodwill in the hobby, off the back of some really good work done during his tenure at Dapol. Some great models made during his time, and his connection with the actual hobby seems to be unique, at least in the UK. I think we all have high expectations that his upcoming models will be at least as good as the best Dapol stuff, perhaps better.
But you're right, this goodwill is based on expectations rather than anything more solid. I'm sure it is very annoying for those who've been plugging away at the hobby for years, producing kits and other doodads, who don't get anything like the attention DJM has been getting.
FWIW, if I was Dave Jones I'd probably be breaking out in cold sweats during the night worrying about all these projects I've got going at once and whether they'll live up to their potential! High expectations go both ways -- just think about how excited some of us were when we heard George Lucas was producing a prequel series to the beloved 'Star Wars' trilogy of the 1970s/80s...
My thanks to any and all the businesses working in the British N gauge hobby, large and small, established and new. I'm sure it's hard to please everyone all of the time, and make a healthy profit at the same time. :beers:
Cheers, NeMo
Quote from: NeMo on February 09, 2016, 05:39:28 PM
I must admit that I agree with you here. I don't think 2mm finescale has any business being in the N Gauge Society journal.
So where do you draw the line? As I said many 2mm FS layouts run N gauge stock. The scenic sections of my layout will almost certainly use Easitrac (as I had some before Finetrax appeared) and Wayne's Finetrax points ie a mix of 9.42mm and 9mm track. People have long complained (unfairly IMHO) that the 2mm FS attitude is elitist, are we now going to be so parochial that 0.42mm in the track and 2% in the scale is going to be excluded? Sounds like shooting ourselves in the foot!
From memory wasn't the Fencehouses spread a few photos (with much of it running N gauge stock!)?
Quote from: NeMo on February 09, 2016, 05:39:28 PM
But once you start talking about building track to finescale standards and adjusting wheel back-to-back dimensions, I think you've crossed the line. So looking at the Fencehouses layout (as lovely as it is) the entire page (!) about finescale track was promoting something OTHER than N gauge.
Adjusting wheel back to backs is (often unfortunately) a necessary part and parcel of getting any track and wheels to work well unless the manufacturers stick to standards.
Cheers, Mike
Quote from: red_death on February 09, 2016, 05:49:20 PM
So where do you draw the line?
Easy. Using back-to-back gauges to fix a problem with something derailing is fine. No issues there. But if you need to use a gauge (and make adjustments if necessary) to every piece of stock to ensure it runs on a layout then you have crossed the line. It's not commercial N gauge any longer.
I think you're looking for a grey area that doesn't exist so that it allows 2mm finescale stuff to be published in the NGS Journal. The 2mm finescale folk have their own society and magazine where they can publish all the photos they want to Fencehouses, St Ruth, and all the other great 2mm finescale layouts. But if it isn't running on commercial N gauge track, then keep it out of the NGS Journal. The clue is in the name: "The N Gauge Journal". Otherwise you may as well stick EM, P4, S or anything else finescale in its pages on the basis of "much that can be learnt by the average N gauge enthusiast" as the Editor of the NGS Journal put it at the top of the Fencehouses article.
Basically, I don't want the NGS to become DEMU Lite. I pay my £16 a year for N gauge stuff. Not 2mm finescale. End of story. If I want to look at other scales and gauges, I'll buy a copy of 'Railway Modeller' thank you very much.
Cheers, NeMo
I enjoyed the 2FS features, ironically I thought the NGS Journal this edition was a better advert for the scale than the current 2mm Association mag...
Fence Houses is great inspiration whatever scale you model in :)
Quote from: red_death on February 09, 2016, 05:49:20 PM
So where do you draw the line?
I have absolutely no wish to get drawn into any argument, but I'd just like to point out there's a big difference between an N gauge layout using out-of-gauge track (the clue is in the name!) and a 2mm finescale layout that actually features on the 2mm scale association website:
http://www.2mm.org.uk/layouts/fencehouses/index.html (http://www.2mm.org.uk/layouts/fencehouses/index.html)
No axe to grind, just saying :D
I have to agree at being surprised to find 5 pages (8.3%) of the article content devoted to a 2mmFS subject. Nice subject, no doubt, but I agree it's simply not relevant (I wonder what the 2mm Scale Association think). Personally I like the subject and era of that model so these don't grate much, but I can see others who don't being more perplexed at the inclusion as seems to be coming across.
Is this simply a reflection that the NGS is now in dire straights in terms of content? To update content source of the article pages of some previous journals, and below are the number of article pages, and the number written by the editor:
1/16 article pages are pp19-79 of which 26 pages by editor spanning 3 main articles, 1 smaller, multiple (large!) photo spreads and additional info pages. Thats 43% of the content. It's interesting too that only PGF is a relatively unknown/new author - the other main articles seem to be NGS regulars.
6/15 pp19-76 of which 24 pages by editor spanning 2 main articles, 1 smaller, and several photo spreads. (42%)
5/15 pp19-80 of which 16 pages by editor spanning 3 main articles and 1 smaller photo spread (26%)
4/15 pp21-78 of which 20 pages by editor spanning 3 main articles and center spread words (35%)
3/15 pp20-78 of which 11 pages by editor spanning 2 main articles, 1 smaller articles and center spread words (18%)
2/15 pp20-79 of which 17 pages by editor spanning 2 main articles, 2 smaller articles and center spread words (28%)
1/15 pp18-79 of which 19 pages by editor spanning 3 main articles and center spread words (31%)
6/14 pp20-80 of which 18 pages by editor spanning 2 main articles, 1 smaller articles and center spread words (30%)
4/14 pp19-81 of which 18 pages by editor spanning 2 main articles, 3 smaller articles and center spread words (29%)
See below for previous editor data contrast. It's been raised before but it's worth updating with latest as the trend here is quite steadily upwards indicating serious problems on the horizon for diverse multi-author content which is surely the entire point of the publication - for Society members to share their modelling, achievements, ideas, projects, layouts, and even failures.
One other point that hasn't been noticed is the downright embarrassing (for the NGS) response to the final letter. This was concisely pointing out that basically there were errors in curve radii in previous journal, perhaps, worst "for example 1 inch is quoted as 23mm". The response seems laughable, blaming conversion and rounding (err, how? An inch is 25.4mm, or say 25mm for ease - simple known fact), or finer rounding resolution, but then there is "space and what gets left out"? Really this is comical - say 25 then - takes no more space than 23 - at least you'll only be 2% out, not 20%. Really, manning up and accepting there was an error would have been a far more simple, honest, and upstanding response from the editor.
It's no big deal, mistakes happen, but responding to them as was does the society no favours...
Congrats to PCF for getting his article published.
Cheers,
Alan
Previous editor:
6/13 pp22-85 of which 0 pages by editor
5/13 pp28-93 of which 0 pages by editor
4/13 pp16-91 of which 0 pages by editor
3/13 pp18-88 of which 4 pages by editor spanning 1 article
1/13 pp22-84 of which 0 pages by editor
(Average of 1.2% content)
I do think this attitude toward 2mm Finescale is unfortunate, I'm a member of the 2mm Association and the N gauge society and like to think that both embrace what's best in the 2mm/N family encompassing both gauges. The 2mm Association has numerous members who model to N gauge track and wheel standards and their work is often published in the 2mm magazine - and even wins pots at the AGM like John Birkette-Smith's beautiful GWR Bulldog which won the Chairmanship Trophy a couple of years ago.
I model predominantly in 2FS but I'm planning a 1970s blue diesel layout which will be N. That said, the N layout will have hand built track on the visible section as it looks so much better and the pointwork can be tailored to the specific location. By the criteria espoused above because the track is not commercial, albeit 9mm gauge, would that exclude it from the N gauge mag.
I've been commissioned and am currently working on a book for WildSwan on modelling in the 2mm scales which will encompass the very best of N gauge and 2mm modelling. The criteria for inclusion will be great modelling in the 2mm family regardless of the odd half a millimetre in the gauge.
Jerry
Quote from: Dr Al on February 09, 2016, 07:47:51 PM
I have to agree at being surprised to find 5 pages (8.3%) of the article content devoted to a 2mmFS subject. Nice subject, no doubt, but I agree it's simply not relevant (I wonder what the 2mm Society think). Personally I like the subject and era of that model so these don't grate much, but I can see others who don't being more perplexed at the inclusion as seems to be coming across.
I don't know what the 2mm Society thinks but the 2mm Scale Association is thankfully not so blinkered. With your obsession with stats it amazes me that with only three words in the Associations name, you consistent entry get 33% of them wrong.
It's obvious from many of the comments in this thread that for whatever reason some people don't like Graham. I happen to get on with him very well but, personalities aside, there is little doubt that the magazine is light years ahead of what it was before he became editor.
Jerry
I have to agree with Jerry in both the above posts, and state my looking forwardness to both the book and the BR blue layout mentioned!
Im a member of both the NGS and the 2mm Association - To my (heretical maybe, 4mm scale programmed) mind, I see both options as opposite sides of the same coin, particularly in helping me get a better grasp of what these very small trains are all about.
There is plenty to admire and be inspired by in both..... I think they call it cross-fertilization.
Seriously guys, does this really matter? You are getting irate about 8.3% of the journal!
As an open forum, perhaps the NGS content and magazine should not really be discussed openly especially as a one sided discussion without the input from the society and in such a negative way. As Jerry says, they are similar and modelling can cross between them so why can't we all just get along and enjoy our, and others, modelling!
I get very frustrated by the single minded nonsense that seems to invade the NGF on too many occasions. I am looking forward to reading my Journal - not arrived yet, and no I am not complaining about that, just mentioning that some of you are a step ahead of others.
Anyway, i am off to do some model making to calm down again!!!!
Best wishes
Simon
Ok, just gone down for a cuppa, modelling in the spare room upstairs, and my wife told me the Journal was on the side waiting for me. Just had a brief look through and want to add my comments -
Looks like a VERY good read so congrats to the Journal crew!!
Some great modelling and walk through's as well
Now, the topic of controversy - 'Fencehouses', What a stunning model, very well executed and including a really good explanation as to why it should be included in the journal - 'much of the rolling stock is RTR 1:148 N gauge...'
Anyway, am off to read more deeply.
best wishes
Simon
Quote from: bridgiesimon on February 09, 2016, 08:42:23 PM
Seriously guys, does this really matter? You are getting irate about 8.3% of the journal!
Simon
I have to agree with Simon. Admittedly I am a relative newcomer to this 'hobby' of ours - but that surely, is what it is, a hobby. I enjoy reading my copy of the Journal, (belated well done to Peter re the article), and do not mind some slight diversification. I quite often buy a computer magazine or two, but do not complain when it contains an article about a printer or a digital camera. I appreciate that a forum, by definition, is an open place for discussion and debate, but one of the things that attracted me to this forum, was the light heartedness that was prevalent, (most of the time ???). :beers:. David.
Quote from: queensquare on February 09, 2016, 08:06:32 PM
I don't know what the 2mm Society thinks but the 2mm Scale Association is thankfully not so blinkered. With your obsession with stats it amazes me that with only three words in the Associations name, you consistent entry get 33% of them wrong.
It's obvious from many of the comments in this thread that for whatever reason some people don't like Graham. I happen to get on with him very well but, personalities aside, there is little doubt that the magazine is light years ahead of what it was before he became editor.
Fair enough - happy to accept and update any errors....contrasting the editor with his 1inch = 23mm gaffe....
The magazine is better in standard. Nobody's disputing that. But, there is clearly an issue with the content IMHO - 43% by the editor, one article by the previous editor, and one by a regular contributor in one journal makes it feel like there is very little space for articles by others. This seems diametrically opposed to the purpose of the journal IMHO - so I don't feel it's unreasonable to think: why is it so?
As for lightheartedness - fair enough, but as a paying subscriber it's perfectly reasonable to voice a more serious opinion as well.
Cheers,
Alan
Quote from: queensquare on February 09, 2016, 07:53:18 PM
I do think this attitude toward 2mm Finescale is unfortunate, I'm a member of the 2mm Association and the N gauge society and like to think that both embrace what's best in the 2mm/N family encompassing both gauges.
Precisely. You're a member of both associations so you can enjoy both. No need for one association to include material relevant to the other scale/gauge. The "2mm/N family" monicker is meaningless, unless you're going to tell me that the Scalefour Society magazine would be running articles about a particularly nice 00 gauge layout. I'll make my point again: if I wanted to read about other scales and gauges, even 2mm finescale ones, I'd buy a pick-and-mix magazine like 'Railway Modeller' that has a bit of everything. Personally, for my subscription to the NGS, I'd expect a Journal that is 100% tailored to my chosen scale and gauge. Not similar ones. But N gauge. End of story.
Quote from: queensquare on February 09, 2016, 08:06:32 PM
It's obvious from many of the comments in this thread that for whatever reason some people don't like Graham.
Not the case here. I've worked with Grahame several times now, and insofar as one can tell in emails, we get along fine. I had something in this issue of the NGS, and in the last one, and should the situation arise, will happily submit something else to NGS issues in the future.
In any case, I don't think anyone is saying Fencehouses is a bad layout or the article wasn't interesting. The debate, if there's one to be had, is whether an article about a 2mm finescale layout is the best use of space in the NGS Journal. Put another way, was there an N gauge layout that wasn't included to make space for it? If that wasn't the case, and there really wasn't anything the Editor wanted to run from N gauge (as opposed to 2mm finescale) modellers -- then why not? Is the membership not submitting enough material? Can the Editor do anything to improve that situation?
If you want to talk about "cross pollination", perhaps the Editor of the NGS Journal visit the N Gauge Forum and asking people here to write articles for the Journal? There's a lot of NGS members here, many of whom frequently post pictures about their fantastically interesting layouts. I'd love to read more about them in the NGS Journal!
Quote from: queensquare on February 09, 2016, 07:53:18 PM
That said, the N layout will have hand built track on the visible section as it looks so much better and the pointwork can be tailored to the specific location. By the criteria espoused above because the track is not commercial, albeit 9mm gauge, would that exclude it from the N gauge mag.
Obviously not. Provided the layout can have ready-to-run N gauge locos plonked on top of it and expected to run, it's N gauge. Indeed, as a fan of the BR blue era, I'd look forward to reading about this layout and your decision to combine handmade and commercial track in one layout.
Cheers, NeMo
Having been the owner/editor of a club magazine in the past (different subject matter, but reliant on the input of the more skilled members and the editor for content) I can understand the amount of work that can be involved and the potential difficulty in sourcing enough good content. I usually ended up writing a lot of the content for mine.
While I suspect the supply of good and interesting content is a bit better for the NGS, it's still a tricky job to balance between what you as an editor see as necessary for the magazine and what you're being sent. So I can certainly understand why a lot of it is Graham's work. I really hope to see a lot more content that's not his though!
The 2mm layout feature was interesting and does look very nice. With the option of N gauge finescale track now, it did give an idea of something we *could* do in N (even if we don't want to) and as I tend to read articles on other people's layouts for inspiration for things to do on mine, rather than copy the whole thing, I don't mind the odd one that's 2mm track. I also like articles on the simpler layouts that focus on running as much as modelling, so hopefully it'll stay a good mix and there'll be some inspirational N gauge ones in there too without much need to show 2mm ones (or at least keeping them to "here's a pic" rather than a full feature). Hopefully I'll be able to contribute something useful to the NGS Journal at some point.
One thing I have noticed over the years is that in both hobbyist clubs/societies and internet forums, there's *always* a point where a difference of opinion becomes anything from a squabble to a full on religious war. It's human nature and I usually just step back and let it blow over. Sometimes people will forget they're doing it for the passion or interest and take their ball away but at the end of the day, it's not great to see public arguments over it all. Especially when it's a relatively struggling hobby in commercial terms and generating new interest.
There's a lot more to be said/argued on it all, but is it really necessary?
I am not sure what the Scalefour Society has to do with this ( I could guess)but as possibly the only member of the Society on here I think it worth mentioning that the Society does indeed showcase other scales at the annual Scaleforum as part of the wider appeal of "finescale" modelling.
Probably not OO though, granted ;)
Good modelling is good modelling regardless of the track gauge the trains run on, or even the scale involved.
The trains themselves, and even the whole railway infrastructure, are but just a small part of what creates the overall picture we are trying to portray.
Okay I'll go for it and say my piece, the bigger picture as I see it from what I hear and this could be wrong.
The current committee I have no major issues with ((excluding conflicts of interests, editor (who I thought I got on with)) and some staying posts for far to long), but I am hearing thinks on the grapevine about a potential new chairman who is a 2mm fs modeler. I suspect he wants to get his hands on the NGS pot of cash to develop 2m fs (1:152) products. I am have been advised against buying one NGS kit because it is to small as it was developed by this individual when he was the NGS kit development officer some years ago. This is why I am so concerned by the stead creep of 2mm articles as it is a warning of what is to come.
Remember this may be fact or fiction, I may, just may have been misinformed but I have heard this from several different sources.
Quote from: Dr Al on February 09, 2016, 09:06:32 PM
The magazine is better in standard. Nobody's disputing that. But, there is clearly an issue with the content IMHO - 43% by the editor, one article by the previous editor, and one by a regular contributor in one journal makes it feel like there is very little space for articles by others. This seems diametrically opposed to the purpose of the journal IMHO - so I don't feel it's unreasonable to think: why is it so?
I come to a much more simple conclusion ie that there isn't being sufficient content supplied. No need to try and extrapolate that into there being no space for others. I know from talking to Grahame that while he tries at times to group articles into similar themed issues at other times he is struggling for content - he is not sitting on masses of content.
Quote from: NeMo on February 09, 2016, 05:59:07 PM
I think you're looking for a grey area that doesn't exist so that it allows 2mm finescale stuff to be published in the NGS Journal. But if it isn't running on commercial N gauge track, then keep it out of the NGS Journal.
Basically, I don't want the NGS to become DEMU Lite. I pay my £16 a year for N gauge stuff. Not 2mm finescale. End of story. If I want to look at other scales and gauges, I'll buy a copy of 'Railway Modeller' thank you very much.
I have no idea what DEMU has to do with it (as that definitely isn't scale specific, in fact it is more about modelling the D&E prototype regardless of scale!).
That aside, I'm not looking for a grey area that doesn't exist - I've given you two real examples (N stock running on 9.42mm track and a combination of 9.42mm/9mm track), I can offer you a third which by your definition shouldn't appear in the NGS Journal (handbuilt 9mm track).
Cheers, Mike
Quote from: Formerly NtasticShop on February 09, 2016, 09:40:09 PM
The current committee I have no major issues with ((excluding conflicts of interests, editor (who I thought I got on with)) and some staying posts for far to long), but I am hearing thinks on the grapevine about a potential new chairman who is a 2mm fs modeler. I suspect he wants to get his hands on the NGS pot of cash to develop 2m fs (1:152) products. I am have been advised against buying one NGS kit because it is to small as it was developed by this individual when he was the NGS kit development officer some years ago. This is why I am so concerned by the stead creep of 2mm articles as it is a warning of what is to come.
Richard
I don't know who told you that, but it is complete fiction. I'm pretty sure I know the full list of nominees for chairman and none of them fit that description. In fact hasn't there only been 2 kit development officers of the NGS? Andy Calvert and Ben?
Cheers, Mike
We had the pleasure of exhibiting Horseblock Lane at the East Ham Finescale show last year, despite being N gauge. I'd like to think we got that invite based on the criteria Jason mentions. We saw Grahame at the Egham and Staines show last month when exhibiting Deansmoor and he was asking for an article for the Journal straight away. The content issue is not for the want of asking on Grahame's behalf.
A few pictures of 2mm Finescale doesn't distress me as I find it inspiring. Like Mike Hale I'm a member of both NGS and 2mm Association as a way of accessing ideas and detailing parts. I'm happy with the world of N Gauge because I can meet my modelling aims with commercial N gauge stuff in the main in a reasonable period of time, without resorting to watch making techniques that I doubt I could summon the patience to master. But each to their own, I'm off to pen a Journal article in the hope of getting my name in there again!
PS: I'd be interested to know which kit is said to be on the small side....
Quote from: red_death on February 09, 2016, 09:41:20 PM
Quote from: Dr Al on February 09, 2016, 09:06:32 PM
The magazine is better in standard. Nobody's disputing that. But, there is clearly an issue with the content IMHO - 43% by the editor, one article by the previous editor, and one by a regular contributor in one journal makes it feel like there is very little space for articles by others. This seems diametrically opposed to the purpose of the journal IMHO - so I don't feel it's unreasonable to think: why is it so?
I come to a much more simple conclusion ie that there isn't being sufficient content supplied. No need to try and extrapolate that into there being no space for others. I know from talking to Grahame that while he tries at times to group articles into similar themed issues at other times he is struggling for content - he is not sitting on masses of content.
Thanks - this is valuable information. Clearly there is a major content problem then - i.e. there isn't enough. Maybe the NGS needs to be much more candid in making this clear to its members?
Or is the Journal simply aging beyond its years (in this age of instant gratification, internet forums, post, article and content)? What is the editor doing to address this? Is content and new contributors actively being sought?
Thanks,
Alan
Quote from: red_death on February 09, 2016, 09:45:05 PM
Quote from: Formerly NtasticShop on February 09, 2016, 09:40:09 PM
The current committee I have no major issues with ((excluding conflicts of interests, editor (who I thought I got on with)) and some staying posts for far to long), but I am hearing thinks on the grapevine about a potential new chairman who is a 2mm fs modeler. I suspect he wants to get his hands on the NGS pot of cash to develop 2m fs (1:152) products. I am have been advised against buying one NGS kit because it is to small as it was developed by this individual when he was the NGS kit development officer some years ago. This is why I am so concerned by the stead creep of 2mm articles as it is a warning of what is to come.
Richard
I don't know who told you that, but it is complete fiction. I'm pretty sure I know the full list of nominees for chairman and none of them fit that description. In fact hasn't there only been 2 kit development officers of the NGS? Andy Calvert and Ben?
Cheers, Mike
Thank you Mike
I wait with interest to see the list of nominees, when do the members get to see this list?
I do believe one other person was involved in the development of at least one kit.
Hello Richard,
I am responsible for collating committee nominations for the election. All those standing for chairman are, to my definite knowledge, enthusiastic N gauge modellers.
I believe one or two of the very early NGS kits were a little on the small side, but this was because they were etched brass kits shrunk down from 4mm prototypes and literally produced at 50% and were therefore 1:76/2 = 1:152, which happens to be strict 2mm scale. I do not know if this was intentional, a mistake or simply a function of the limitations in technology at the time. It also made the kits fiendishly difficult to build, as some of the parts that were small but manageable in 4mm became impossible to handle in 2mm.
One of the kits involved was the Queen Mary brake van, which has of course been superceded by a nice 1:148 RTR model. One of the reasons for selecting the QM brake was that we felt the existing kit needed to be retired. All the upcoming kits and RTR items I am involved with are to 1:148 scale.
A few years ago there was some discussion about producing one of the UK models in 1:160 scale for continental NGS members, but this came to nothing.
As far as I am aware there is no plan for a 1:152 scale model under the NGS banner.
I don't disagree that some of those on the Committee are tending to stay in post for too long, and there is a general feeling that three years is probably long enough; however the problem is what happens if there is no replacement volunteer? In this election there is one committee post for which no nominations were received by the deadline; if the incumbent cannot be persuaded to continue then the another committee member may have to be co-opted until a volunteer comes forward.
Names of all the candidates we have, along with their proposers, seconders and a brief biography/election statement from each will appear in the next journal.
On a personal note, the only thing that is strict 2mm scale about Fencehouses is the track and wheels. A lot of the stock is to 1:148 scale, originally N-gauge, but nicely detailed or weathered, and of course the ground cover, trees, architecture, woodwork and track plan are just as applicable to N as to 2mm. In my view its inclusion in the NGS journal is perfectly reasonable.
cheers
Ben A.
(NGS Vice President and Returning Officer)
We are never going to agree but, as I said, I do think it's a shame that some have such strong objections to inspirational but fractionally different, albeit closely related, models occasionally being shown in the N gauge mag.
Regarding S4, I have exhibited my 2mm layout at both expo-EM and the S4 Society AGM as guest layout. What I find is that both these groups above all wish to promote good quality modelling, majoring in their own favoured standards, but embracing good modelling whatever the scale.
Jerry
Quote from: Dr Al on February 09, 2016, 09:50:28 PM
Thanks - this is valuable information. Clearly there is a major content problem then - i.e. there isn't enough. Maybe the NGS needs to be much more candid in making this clear to its members?
Or is the Journal simply aging beyond its years (in this age of instant gratification, internet forums, post, article and content)? What is the editor doing to address this? Is content and new contributors actively being sought?
Hi Alan
I'm not sure that the NGS could be much more candid - pretty much every issue contains a plea for articles!
I think that at times people are reluctant to write up what they have contributed on online forums (to me both online and written offer different advantages - personally I find that I can contribute bits and pieces here and there online but that when I get time to sit down and write an article I try to collate lots of bits and pieces into a consolidated article).
Cheers, Mike
Quote from: queensquare on February 09, 2016, 10:56:27 PM
We are never going to agree but, as I said, I do think it's a shame that some have such strong objections to inspirational but fractionally different, albeit closely related, models occasionally being shown in the N gauge mag.
Regarding S4, I have exhibited my 2mm layout at both expo-EM and the S4 Society AGM as guest layout. What I find is that both these groups above all wish to promote good quality modelling, majoring in their own favoured standards, but embracing good modelling whatever the scale.
Jerry
I know its a regular sortta typo, but its P4 :O
I feel bad now ive said that someone I esteem as Jerry C but its meant
for the record ;)
I was tipped off by a member to read the posts on this thread, and although reading the posts from yesterday made me think "oh no, here we go", I'm glad to see sensible answers and no tempers in the later posts!
Just to reiterate what has been said before, the NGS Committee doesn't mind threads/posts on here about certain NGS issues, but if I feel that the thread is going in the wrong direction, or if the NGS instruct me to act then I will do so.
Keep supporting the Journal and the Society, as the hobby needs it. :thumbsup:
Something that struck me reading through these posts is the difficulty that the NGS is having in getting submissions (no editor wants to write nearly half the magazine. If nothing else, it's embarrassing, let alone exhausting). As Mike pointed out, often we aren't as comfortable sitting down to write an article as we would be a post. There are a few reasons for this:
1. Posts are quick and easy to write
2. You can be wrong in a post and someone will correct you, no harm done.
3. Posts are meant to be part of a conversation so you are not expected to say everything important there is to say.
Unfortunately, articles are subject to a great deal more scrutiny and held to a much higher standard. That is not to say that many of the members here are not MORE than capable of writing a very good article, but rather that the stakes may seem much higher.
The forum offers us a wonderful tool for writing articles however: crowd-sourced knowledge from a variety of experts. I think that if those of you who are NGS members are serious about wanting more articles, a good way to go about it would be to start a thread on here, posting a skeleton outline of what you want to cover or a rough draft and getting feedback from other forum members about it. Even an article you feel barely informed enough to write about might come together easily if you started asking for help on here. I have gotten marvelously detailed advice from members on here more times than I can count and if I were going to write an article for the NGS I can't imagine trying to do it without the input all of you so readily give.
I think both the 43% Editor Created contend and the 2mm offerings are a reflection of a lack of member generated articles on relevant topics, not an indication that the journal wants to move towards 2mm or to become a soap box for the editor. If you want to see less editor written material and less/no 2mm content, the answer is simple, help contribute, even if you just request that someone ELSE write an article on it for the NGS (in fact a thread entitled: "What articles would you like to read in the NGS Journal?" Might be well in order for just the purpose of uniting writers and information-seeking would-be readers)! I think if the editor had had a stack of n gauge articles and photographs on his desk to choose from, we would not have seen more than perhaps a single article by him and probably would have seen nothing 2mm of note. If we want the next journal to be like that, let's get our pens out and join PCF and NeMo in representing the NGF in print!
:A1Tornado: :Carriage: :Carriage: :Carriage: :toot:
Quote from: JasonBz on February 10, 2016, 01:31:07 AM
I know its a regular sortta typo, but its P4 :O
I feel bad now ive said that someone I esteem as Jerry C but its meant
for the record ;)
[/quote]
Fair cop, albeit partially, as it's the Scalefour or S4 Society promoting P4 standards.
Cheers Jerry
I have been a member of a specialist tropical fish association for 38 years. We had a monthly Journal up until a few years back when we decided to become bi-monthly. Some howls of protest but we had the same problem...lack of material from the membership. It was no longer sensible or viable to mail our our Journal each month with so little content. Even now our editor frequently has to source articles to re-print from like clubs Worldwide.
I think the art of composition has somewhat been lost, and lifestyles have changed so much that some struggle to find time to sit down and write in a style that makes good reading.
The editor of a Nationally available fishkeeping magazine once told me they have to discard around 50% of what is submitted for publication, as it's little short of gobbledy-gook or needs a lot of work put in to make a reasonable article of it. Certainly when I worked in a college I was surprised at the lack of what I call writing flair amongst students. Perhaps it's a result of the text message era?
I'm sure there are increasing dilemmas for editors of all types of magazines. Our youngest daughter recently undertook some work experience in London, with one of the top titles dedicated to lets say, the more affluent properties. Whilst there she discovered they have been shedding staff. They are continually selling less magazines each month, and they put it down to people are increasingly finding what they want on the internet...so why buy a magazine?
Getting back to the N gauge Journal, I have submitted a short article in the last few days along with some photos to support it. This is the first time I have written something for the NGS, but felt I could respond to the call for articles.
Quote from: red_death on February 09, 2016, 11:17:08 PM
I think that at times people are reluctant to write up what they have contributed on online forums (to me both online and written offer different advantages - personally I find that I can contribute bits and pieces here and there online but that when I get time to sit down and write an article I try to collate lots of bits and pieces into a consolidated article).
Cheers, Mike
It does therefore seem that the Journal is maybe becoming increasingly out of place with the current methods in which we consume articles or information, which is largely based around the internet.
Thinking about it, having posted plenty of content of modelling in the workbench threads on various forums, I doubt I'd feel the motivation to encapsulate those posts in articles - in an ideal world it'd be nice, but once posted I would simply refer folks to those posts if interested, rather than an article.
So, the question is, should the NGS maybe be thinking about modernising, revamping the whole thing completely, and move the journal online instead? Surely this could work (in many ways better than the current paper journal). I'm sure that paper versions could be offered to those who desire also. Given that it'll already be generated on computer, is it too big a leap then to post it online? And save printing costs that could be channelled into other projects? Presumably, the big negative for this would be the need for greater commitment of web-volunteers to administer and oversee this, and additional bandwidth usage costs. But it seems to me like these are the thoughts and discussions that need to be made for the future, given the current state of contributions.
Thoughts?
Cheers,
Alan
Interesting Dr Al.
The tropical fish club I referred to a couple of posts earlier began to offer a pdf membership around 2 years back. We are able to offer this type of membership for half that of a printed and mailed copy. Our pdf version of membership is growing steadily. The pdf version is said to cost us next to nothing, so these membership fees are a great way of swelling our clubs coffers
Some will always want a printed copy and this option will be available for quite some time I would imagine.
Food for thought?
Quote from: Dr Al on February 10, 2016, 09:35:27 AM
So, the question is, should the NGS maybe be thinking about modernising, revamping the whole thing completely, and move the journal online instead?
Personally I rather like having a lump of dead tree with printing on it drop through the postbox every couple of months. I don't subscribe to any other physical magazines or newspapers but for this hobby it does add rather nicely to the information online.
For starters, the physical magazine format presents information to you in a very different way to the web by being linear. It's something to read through and gain knowledge that you weren't specifically searching for (half the skill of Google-Fu is knowing exactly what you're searching for ;) ). So you'll end up gaining information and inspiration you didn't realise you needed.
There's also the aspect of the age demographic of NGS members. As they tend towards the older generation, there'll be a definite subset of them that doesn't have a lot of experience with the internet or even access in the immediate way that's useful when working on a project.
So keeping the journal, I think, is a valuable part of the society.
Having said that, the society should (and is) move towards having a lot more information online. The revamp of the shop to having proper online access is great. The resources required (in terms of skilled people with time on their hands) is fairly large for a big society like the NGS, so having a specific NGS forum for members only would definitely be useful in some ways, but given there's the NGF and other forums out there that have a big crossover of membership, it seems an unnecessary use of manpower.
What *might* be handy would be if the NGS could team up with NGF and RMWeb and authorise members only sub-forums on those sites. It would benefit the NGS by offering yet another valuable resource for its members without much manpower required on its part and would benefit these forums by bringing in new members and cross promotion. We're into potential 'political' territory here though and I'd recommend the NGS having a separate External Liaison Officer to handle deals with outside groups rather than lumping it all on the journal editor.
A PDF version of the journal would be a great option for members. Personally I'd be *very* happy with it in that format to save paper. Even if I'm paying the same amount for membership.
Living in the US, I would truly appreciate a digitally accessible version of the NGS magazine. It would almost certainly allow for a much lower cost for international membership (many clubs only offer digital memberships to international subscribers anyway) and be a great way for them to make a good profit (since so much of the cost of the magazine is tied up in printing it). That said, often the fear when offering a digital format is that the magazine will circulate illegally and for free. While there is certainly some of that that will happen, I would guess the amount will be marginal. Smaller magazines like this simply don't get the circulation levels necessary for them to be easily pirated. They could almost certainly offer an online version (free for paper subscribers) which would take in some extra cash and submissions and would potentially reach a wider audience. Honestly, at the present, it's prohibitively expensive to join up internationally unless you have kits you want to order. Moreover, I'm guessing they don't make any extra money off of international memberships (likely they make less) and a digital version would certainly be much more profitable for that demographic (though I would guess the total number of international members probably totals less than 50, but I may be completely wrong about that). If I lived in the UK, I would already have volunteered to help them figure out a way to do it, if they wanted (they seem more than happy to have volunteers at the committee/administrative level). Anyone living in the UK with a little tech knowledge who wants to volunteer to do that for them so I can get my digital copy would become my new favorite forum member ;)
(By the way, for clarity, I am NOT advocating they scrap the paper copy at all; I'm simply advocating for a digital version in addition to the extant paper one as an option (either low cost or international only). There is nothing better than a hard copy of something you really want to sink your teeth in to and I wouldn't want to take that away from anyone, or myself for that matter! I just think it is a good opportunity for the NGS to make some extra money and reach a wider audience.)
So, if you don't mind me asking, where's your membership number? ;)
Quote from: Dr Al on February 10, 2016, 09:35:27 AM
It does therefore seem that the Journal is maybe becoming increasingly out of place with the current methods in which we consume articles or information, which is largely based around the internet.
Thinking about it, having posted plenty of content of modelling in the workbench threads on various forums, I doubt I'd feel the motivation to encapsulate those posts in articles - in an ideal world it'd be nice, but once posted I would simply refer folks to those posts if interested, rather than an article.
So, the question is, should the NGS maybe be thinking about modernising, revamping the whole thing completely, and move the journal online instead? Surely this could work (in many ways better than the current paper journal). I'm sure that paper versions could be offered to those who desire also. Given that it'll already be generated on computer, is it too big a leap then to post it online? And save printing costs that could be channelled into other projects? Presumably, the big negative for this would be the need for greater commitment of web-volunteers to administer and oversee this, and additional bandwidth usage costs. But it seems to me like these are the thoughts and discussions that need to be made for the future, given the current state of contributions.
I don't think the issue of paper vs a PDF of a mag is really the issue. The issue (or at least the one we embarked upon!) is getting the content in the first place - you have given a great example of someone who can write well and has interesting content to add but who is happy to contribute to forums but not in an article format (which would be necessary whether we are talking about paper or an electronic form).
I don't see how moving electronic helps solve the contributions issue. Happy to be put right though!
Cheers, Mike
Quote from: Bealman on February 10, 2016, 10:23:18 AM
So, if you don't mind me asking, where's your membership number? ;)
It's hardly a requirement to list it ... if he doesn't want to (and many don't) that's his choice ...
Quote from: MikeDunn on February 10, 2016, 10:32:48 AM
Quote from: Bealman on February 10, 2016, 10:23:18 AM
So, if you don't mind me asking, where's your membership number? ;)
It's hardly a requirement to list it ... if he doesn't want to (and many don't) that's his choice ...
More of a case of forgetting we've got an option to enter it in my profile ;)
Quote from: Bealman on February 10, 2016, 10:23:18 AM
So, if you don't mind me asking, where's your membership number? ;)
I am actually not joined up yet. When I started modeling the shop was closed and the posts on here were so vitriolic or made me so suspicious that it has taken me a long time to come around to forking over the 38£ for a first time international membership. Part of what has held me back was that I wanted to see what the journal and society would be like after the turmoil (which I'm still only vaguely clued in on but am ultimately unconcerned with) and partly because I didn't want to join up until I could actually buy items from the shop, which is the big draw for me. The reason I felt like it was appropriate for me to chime in is that the cost IS what has kept me from joining up and a PDF version with a lower price tag might help alleviate that initial cost for people who aren't sure about joining, like me. My suggestion about the thread doesn't seem to have been entirely inappropriate either as it has already been created and responded to by several members and seemed a more constructive way forward than where this thread was heading. If other NGS members feel that I shouldn't have stuck my nose in, I'll delete this post and my earlier one and not bother with it again. I certainly wasn't trying to create anymore animosity.
-Philip
EDIT: I just paid (it wouldn't let me order the binder :/ ). I'll post my number when they send me one.
Quote from: Zwilnik on February 10, 2016, 10:54:36 AM
More of a case of forgetting we've got an option to enter it in my profile ;)
There is that too :laughabovepost:
Quote from: red_death on February 10, 2016, 10:30:33 AM
I don't think the issue of paper vs a PDF of a mag is really the issue. The issue (or at least the one we embarked upon!) is getting the content in the first place - you have given a great example of someone who can write well and has interesting content to add but who is happy to contribute to forums but not in an article format (which would be necessary whether we are talking about paper or an electronic form).
I don't see how moving electronic helps solve the contributions issue. Happy to be put right though!
I think having your input on all this (as someone closer to the NGS than most) is particularly valuable.
Thinking out loud, would the editor consider using internet posted content that he could then work into articles? Is that simply too much work? In some cases I'm sure yes, in others I'm sure it could be fairly easy to do - I can think of a few threads where the pictures are there and the words could be plucked from successive posts without massive effort.
For my own content, if there really was interest in article-ising some of it, then I'd reconsider the possibility of doing so. I'd therefore happily openly invite yourself and/or the editor to read some of the content and decide if it'd be of value, and contact me if so. While you imply you'd be interested (thank you!), sadly I suspect the editor will not, but lets remain open minded.
On a different point - if an article is published by NGS would this preclude it (even implicitly) from being posted online at a later date, should the author so desire? I guess there's no issue of copyright etc, but would the NGS be a little bit miffed, or not bothered?
Cheers,
Alan
On the electronic vs paper issue, I spend way too much time in front of screens due to my job, and like to have something tangible I can read away from any internet-enabled devices. No objection to a PDF option, but for me I see the subscription as paying for the physical magazine, if it became just another PDF to squint at I'd probably let the subscription lapse (note to self: need to renew).
Quote from: Dr Al on February 10, 2016, 11:42:15 AM
Thinking out loud, would the editor consider using internet posted content that he could then work into articles? Is that simply too much work? In some cases I'm sure yes, in others I'm sure it could be fairly easy to do - I can think of a few threads where the pictures are there and the words could be plucked from successive posts without massive effort.
There used to be occasional articles in the NGS Journal on various subjects entitles "From the Net".
I thought they were quite good.
Best regards,
Joe
Quote from: Dr Al on February 10, 2016, 11:42:15 AM
Thinking out loud, would the editor consider using internet posted content that he could then work into articles? Is that simply too much work? In some cases I'm sure yes, in others I'm sure it could be fairly easy to do - I can think of a few threads where the pictures are there and the words could be plucked from successive posts without massive effort.
<snip>
On a different point - if an article is published by NGS would this preclude it (even implicitly) from being posted online at a later date, should the author so desire? I guess there's no issue of copyright etc, but would the NGS be a little bit miffed, or not bothered?
As Joe mentions, some of the content from the N Gauge Yahoo group was written up in the "From the Net" articles a few years ago. Unfortunately taking a blog or set of forum postings and converting them into a readable article takes more time and effort than a simple copy and paste. Even if Graham was to do this there would no doubt be negative comments about what was left in and what was taken out. Far better for the person writing the web content to do the re-write.
From my experience, the NGS is happy for content to be re-used elsewhere, ideally with the "as previously printed in the NGS Journal" by way of acknowledgement. There are several articles/projects that have appeared in the Journal that have been on the web prior to appearing in the Journal and then going on to appear in the commercial magazines. Similarly having "as previously seen on N Gauge Forum" shouldn't be a bar to publication in any printed magazine. It's a matter of courtesy.
Happy modelling.
Steven B.
Gents,
Now things have calmed down from what became petty squabbling in some cases.
A point made on here is very pertinent:
Quote from: Only Me on February 10, 2016, 10:56:58 AM
this is where a private area on the NGF for NGS members would come into its own as this kind of discussion should be discussed by members of the N Gauge Society.
While not yet a member I will be once the Christmas credit card bill is settled. But comments made on here in the open have made me look carefully the fact some individuals were happy to mention names and positions held and there disregard for them is actually rather saddening.
It could give a prospective members like myself a bad image of the NGS and therefore not join as it may well be perceived as in fighting breaking out in the open.
Thankfully calm has ensued and the topic has regained a more mature tone but it sets a dangerous president for people to be willing to make these sorts of comments in the open!
Every time the journal comes out I read the plea for articles and wonder if there is anything on my workbench that I could write up into an interesting article. Maybe it is a lack of confidence on my part but I don't think there is anything I've done that would be worth putting in a magazine; and I don't have enough knowledge of real railway matters to come up with something sufficiently informative in the vein of the milk or parcels train articles.
I took the plunge and wrote an article (first one) after the appeal before Christmas, on something I was doing at the time, really easy process to submit it. Pleasantly surprised to find it published in this journal. Definitely encourage others to do the same, unfortunately my workbench progresses at snail's pace.
Regarding the digital/paper subject, I agree with Philip (N-Gauge-US) that a lower priced digital only option would be nice for overseas members, much as I prefer print copies.
I came back to the NGS after a 8 year hiatus, and my 1st issue of the Journal was also the 1st with Grahame as editor. Comparing it (and ones after) to those I had from '06, the change is remarkable, and much improved, making a Journal better than it already was. Grahame has his detractors, and he and I have exchanged somewhat testy messages via forums and the Yahoo group in the past, but have also exchanged friendlier ones, as well. Many people b***ch about him, don't like him for whatever reason, criticize him for whatever, but I have yet to read of anyone of these folks jumping up and saying they could do better.
I find the whinging about the 2mmfs content amusing, like little kids saying "Noo, you can't bring that sort of sand into this sandbox!". In a hobby where the vast majority are quietly doing their thing in OO, those into the smaller scale are a niche. To say that N and 2mm should be kept totally separate is silly. As has been pointed out, many N gauge modelers utilize 2mm items, and many 2mm modellers use N gauge items.
If having a few pages of 2mm content in the Journal means I get a larger issue, verses a thinner one due to lack of strictly N gauge content, that works for me. Those who object, then perhaps they should consider providing some of that N gauge only content. I'm sure Grahame would rather just wear his editor cap, than have to wear it and a content writer cap.
I think all hands-on hobbies are shrinking with regards to folks involved in them. At least it seems so in the model railway hobby, the military modelling hobby, and the miniature dollhouse hobby, from what I read in forums and magazines. If this is the case, wouldn't it make more sense for folks in N gauge and folks in 2mm to be more tolerant of each other, and try and share/combine interests, than to insist both are completely different and should not be mixed?
Just thinking out loud.
Jim
Quote from: JimF on February 21, 2016, 10:38:10 AM
Regarding the digital/paper subject, I agree with Philip (N-Gauge-US) that a lower priced digital only option would be nice for overseas members, much as I prefer print copies.
Agreed, and I'd assume Grahame is using Quark, InDesign or something similar that exports to PDF very easily. Indeed, if he's using a Mac, he need only Print to PDF to get the job done adequately well. Plus, for those of us who write for the Journal, receiving PDF versions of our article for "proofing" before the thing is actually printed would be a really big improvement.
Quote from: JimF on February 21, 2016, 10:38:10 AM
I came back to the NGS after a 8 year hiatus, and my 1st issue of the Journal was also the 1st with Grahame as editor. Comparing it (and ones after) to those I had from '06, the change is remarkable, and much improved, making a Journal better than it already was.
Don't disagree compared with issues from the 90s and 00s, but please do look at some from the time Richard Bardsley as well. The Journal was excellent under his editorship too. The focus was perhaps a different, Grahame favouring "how to" articles above all else, whereas Richard had a more pot-luck approach that, you could argue, lacked focus even if it reflected the contributions made my the NGS membership.
Quote from: JimF on February 21, 2016, 10:38:10 AM
I find the whinging about the 2mmfs content amusing, like little kids saying "Noo, you can't bring that sort of sand into this sandbox!".
My concern about 2mm finescale in the N Gauge Society Journal is simply that it's
a different gauge and is therefore of less interest to me, as a paying member, than actual N gauge. There is a 2mm finescale journal, plus multi-scale commercial model railway magazines. Had the article been about 2mm modelling of something scenic or whatever, it wouldn't have irritated me. But promoting a 2mm finescale layout instead of an N gauge one seems, at best, a mis-use of NGS Journal space, and the page of text on 2mm finescale track totally irrelevant.
Basically, you may as well argue that bringing your cat to a dog show is fine because they're both pet mammals that eat meat.
Quote from: JimF on February 21, 2016, 10:38:10 AM
If having a few pages of 2mm content in the Journal means I get a larger issue, verses a thinner one due to lack of strictly N gauge content, that works for me. Those who object, then perhaps they should consider providing some of that N gauge only content. I'm sure Grahame would rather just wear his editor cap, than have to wear it and a content writer cap.
Your point about filling the Journal is a valid opinion, but one I disagree with if it means N gauge content has to make space for. As for your second point, I do write for the NGS Journal, quite regularly, and get along fine with Grahame, so this absolutely isn't a personal dig at him.
Quote from: JimF on February 21, 2016, 10:38:10 AM
I think all hands-on hobbies are shrinking with regards to folks involved in them. At least it seems so in the model railway hobby, the military modelling hobby, and the miniature dollhouse hobby, from what I read in forums and magazines. If this is the case, wouldn't it make more sense for folks in N gauge and folks in 2mm to be more tolerant of each other, and try and share/combine interests, than to insist both are completely different and should not be mixed?
Perfectly valid point about collaboration, but to stress again, there are plenty of model railway clubs that do that, and all the commercial magazines are multi-scale and multi-gauge magazines. But if I join the N Gauge Society, it's not unreasonable to assume any and all discussion of track will confine itself to N gauge track. Not 2mm finescale track. No problems at all with 2mm scenics, motor cars, buildings, etc. But "purity", I'd argue, is important so far as the track goes!
Likewise, thinking aloud! NeMo
Not being sure how to break up the msg into multi quotes (and sure I'd make a hash of it if I tried), I'll just reply point by point :)
A) The pdf proofing copy to a author is a good idea, if it is something easily done by the editor, and not more work for a voluntary position. As for the complete Journal, I would think someone else could handle that, after the Journal had been completed. I am only familiar with one group that has a digital edition, the Gauge O Group, and it is digitized and put on the website by someone other than the editor.
B) Here's a great example of one word missing from a text, that can, in cases, lead to all sorts issues. What I had meant to type was "making a GREAT Journal better than it already was". Mr. Bardsley was the editor when I was a member from '04 through '06, and I felt at that time the Journal was well worth the cost of my overseas membership.
C) I disagree with the "cat to a dog show" comment. I think it's more like bringing a bulldog to a collie dog show. Not the same, but I'd wager most of the collie owners would still admire the bulldog. As for the 'different gauge' thing? Personally, I think that has been more of a detriment to the popularity of UK rail modelling, in any scale, than any other single thing. I have tried to get friends interested in UR rail modelling, and have had a few show some interest. Untill they start reading about all the variations in the track gauge of the different scales. And, at how close minded and parochial about it many seem to be. That kills the interest pretty quick. I know, it will never change. Just a shame, as the UK rail hobby would be much more vibrant, I think, if it could.
D) Only Grahame would be able to say whether N gauge content was left out of a issue, to make room for 2mm content, but I would wager that is not the case. More a case of using what he has had submitted. I can see, and understand, if he put a bit of 2mm into a issue to maintain a 'theme' for the issue, and keep the bit of N gauge content aside, for a future issue.
E) I'm not talking about collaboration (or even tolerance) between folks working in N/2mm and other scales, just those in the former. Not all care to belong to a club, and many who would, don't have one nearby. As for the commercial press, unless I have missed some major earth shaking change, almost all are much more focused on 4mm than the smaller or larger scales. And even among strictly N 9mm gauge folks, I have seen heated discussions on forums between those who are happy with the look and wheel tolerances of plain old Peco track and those who feel the need for better appearance and tolerances. Should the Journal exclude content regarding the latter?
Just for the record, I have the start of 2 structure build articles 2 articles filed away, that may end up in the Journal one day. However, modelling has be non existent here for almost a year, due to all sorts of things. Hopefully back on track soon.
Jim
Quote from: NeMo on February 21, 2016, 11:46:25 AM
My concern about 2mm finescale in the N Gauge Society Journal is simply that it's a different gauge and is therefore of less interest to me, as a paying member, than actual N gauge. There is a 2mm finescale journal, plus multi-scale commercial model railway magazines. Had the article been about 2mm modelling of something scenic or whatever, it wouldn't have irritated me. But promoting a 2mm finescale layout instead of an N gauge one seems, at best, a mis-use of NGS Journal space, and the page of text on 2mm finescale track totally irrelevant.
Does that mean then that articles on broad-gauge and narrow gauge railways shouldn't be printed in the Journal as they use a gauge different to 9mm?
A lot can be learnt from 2FS models. Personally, I'd like to have read about how the structures on Fence Houses were build, or how the weathering was applied to the stock (much of it re-wheeled RTR!) rather than, for example read about Off-Scene Train Storage.
I think I must have a different Journal to NeMo's as the finer track article in my copy talks mostly about track from Atlas, Micro Engineering and FiNetrax. Easitrac is mentioned in one paragraph. Incidental, FiNetrax was developed for N gauge from the 2FS Easitrac, and now developments made by FiNetrax has made there way back in to the 9.42mm product!
There is mention of the 2mm Scale Association book "Track" - this is recommended reading for all railway modellers in any scale; It's quite popular with 4mm and 7mm scale modellers despite the difference in scales.
Both N Gauge and 2FS benefit from each other and both have a place in the NGS Journal! (and TINGS in my opinion).
Happy modelling.
Steven B.
Quote from: Steven B on February 21, 2016, 05:21:52 PM
Both N Gauge and 2FS benefit from each other and both have a place in the NGS Journal! (and TINGS in my opinion).
Happy modelling.
Steven B.
Hi
I think that sums it up for me.
If you stick to just n gauge subjects then you will miss techniques used by other people working in different disciplines and I don't just mean model railways.
Cheers
Paul
Being someone who has authored-or co-authored- a small number of articles for the 'Journal', all I can say is 'write one and submit it'; it will be up to the current editor as to whether it has a place in the magazine or not; and don't be surprised if it takes several months to appear.
Some of my early pieces are now well out of date due to new models from the Trade; but they were mainly written in the vein of 'I wanted to do so-and-so to create a whatever, and this is how I did it', even if by today's standard the models are now considered crude. As most of my articles were written about 15-20 years ago, I didn't even have the luxury of a word processor or email-typewriters and Royal Mail was the only way!
I was just hoping that the articles written might inspire someone to have a go at a similar model themselves; I use many articles by others in the 'Journal' to do just that.
Build something, then tell the rest of the Society how you did it!
Martyn
Quote from: Steven B on February 21, 2016, 05:21:52 PM
Does that mean then that articles on broad-gauge and narrow gauge railways shouldn't be printed in the Journal as they use a gauge different to 9mm?
Correct. There are several excellent magazines for narrow gauge modellers, such as 'Narrow Gauge & Industrial Railway Modelling Review', to which I'd direct you if you're interested in that sort of thing. Periodically covered in the usual commercial magazines as well. Not sure about broad gauge though.
Of course there's wiggle room. If the 2mm scale narrow (or broad) gauge was part of an N-gauge layout, I'd have no problems with that at all. Or if the article was about fitting DCC decoders into narrow spaces, then that'd be cool too. Maybe the article was about modelling Victorian stations, in which case, yay, useful stuff.
But I personally didn't join (and let me stress, pay for) an N-gauge magazine to read about other scales and gauges. I can buy 'Railway Modeller' for that.
Quote from: Steven B on February 21, 2016, 05:21:52 PM
A lot can be learnt from 2FS models. Personally, I'd like to have read about how the structures on Fence Houses were build, or how the weathering was applied to the stock (much of it re-wheeled RTR!) rather than, for example read about Off-Scene Train Storage.
Agree 100%. So long as the article focuses on practical stuff that's merely 2mm in scale and has nothing to do with the track gauge, that's fine by me.
Quote from: Steven B on February 21, 2016, 05:21:52 PM
I think I must have a different Journal to NeMo's as the finer track article in my copy talks mostly about track from Atlas, Micro Engineering and FiNetrax. Easitrac is mentioned in one paragraph.
You're quite right. But it's the old slippery slope argument. So we're cool about half a page of 2mm FS in the N Gauge Society Journal. But what about two pages? What about four, and a two-page article on back-to-back measurements using EM track and models? That's surely useful to everyone. What about a P4 article on re-wheeling rolling stock? Surely useful to kit-builders? Perhaps you can see my point now, even if you don't agree.
Cheers, NeMo
Well, I 'paid', as well, so I could get a quality magazine that focused on modeling in 1/148 scale. In the US, there are 2 (at least, there was, haven't checked in a while) bi-monthly magazines devoted to 1/160 N scale. I was looking for the equivalent for UK modelling.
If there were to appear a article about a narrow gauge layout, done in 1/148, great. If someone did a layout in broad gauge in 1/148, again, great. If a article about Fencehouses appeared as Steven B mentioned, regarding building the structures, even better, as I like doing structures.
Seeing 2 or more pages of 2mm content, or or EM content, or P4, because a issue of the Journal had a bit of 2mm content is, I think, a little overboard.
Perhaps wanting a magazine that narrowly focuses on just N 'gauge' track (itself a compromise) and nothing else is just something most do not seem to want, based on many of the comments so far.
Jim F
Quote from: NeMo on February 21, 2016, 06:52:04 PM
Quote from: Steven B on February 21, 2016, 05:21:52 PM
Does that mean then that articles on broad-gauge and narrow gauge railways shouldn't be printed in the Journal as they use a gauge different to 9mm?
Correct. There are several excellent magazines for narrow gauge modellers, such as 'Narrow Gauge & Industrial Railway Modelling Review', to which I'd direct you if you're interested in that sort of thing. Periodically covered in the usual commercial magazines as well. Not sure about broad gauge though.
Cheers, NeMo
I agreed earlier about the increase in 2mmfs articles in this issue but would expect to see Nn3 and Broad Gauge if done to 1:148 scale(British N Gauge) or 1:160 or 1:150 ie 9mm track gauge equivalent. 2mm is 1:152 and not 9mm is complete different, some 2mm modelers may choose to compromise and re-wheel RTR stock others don't. A 2mmfs kit built Van is noticeable smaller than a British N Gauge RTR version made to modern standards.
This is not anything like comparing 2 types of sand, it annoys the hell out of me every year when I see 2mmfs models in the NGS competition amazing models yes but not N Gauge. I would suggest that that the models have to be displayed on Code 55 track and next to a Stove R. That would certainly show up how small some of the locos and such have been.
Quote from: Formerly NtasticShop on February 21, 2016, 07:32:47 PM
This is not anything like comparing 2 types of sand, it annoys the hell out of me every year when I see 2mmfs models in the NGS competition amazing models yes but not N Gauge. I would suggest that that the models have to be displayed on Code 55 track and next to a Stove R. That would certainly show up how small some of the locos and such have been.
Hi
So my entry in 2009 should not have been allowed then as it used as a base the BH Enterprises coach shell which are actually to 2mm scale.
Cheers
Paul
My view on the inclusion of some quality small scale modelling that happens to be 2mm scale, is that some (or maybe many) N gaugers may wish to do 2FS at some point in their modelling life - There is a natural affinity to the two scales, that isnt there with EM, P4 or any other.
Quote from: JimF on February 21, 2016, 07:25:16 PM
Well, I 'paid', as well, so I could get a quality magazine that focused on modeling in 1/148 scale. In the US, there are 2 (at least, there was, haven't checked in a while) bi-monthly magazines devoted to 1/160 N scale. I was looking for the equivalent for UK modelling.
I think you're making my point for me. In the US there is no real distinction between N gauge and 2mm scale modelling. It's all 1/160th scale, and the commercial N gauge track is essentially the right gauge for 2mm scale models.
In the UK that is NOT the situation at all. There's N gauge, which is 1/148th scale modelling using 1/160th scale track (i.e., 9 mm track). If you're an N gauge modeller you're accepting the "narrow" track because it's cheap and reliable, even though it's out of scale. If you're a 2mm finescale modeller, at the very least you're using 9.42mm track, and quite possibly modelling to 1/158th scale rather than 1/160th.
If the N Gauge Society Journal includes 2mm finescale as well, that introduces a dichotomy. I'd argue, a philosophical one, which is this: is N gauge modelling a stepping stone to 2mm finescale or an end in itself.
Quote from: JimF on February 21, 2016, 07:25:16 PM
Perhaps wanting a magazine that narrowly focuses on just N 'gauge' track (itself a compromise) and nothing else is just something most do not seem to want, based on many of the comments so far.
I'm not sure you can draw that conclusion at all from this thread, nor the converse.
Quote from: Formerly NtasticShop on February 21, 2016, 07:32:47 PM
This is not anything like comparing 2 types of sand, it annoys the hell out of me every year when I see 2mmfs models in the NGS competition amazing models yes but not N Gauge. I would suggest that that the models have to be displayed on Code 55 track and next to a Stove R. That would certainly show up how small some of the locos and such have been.
Exactly. It gives the opinion than 2mm finescale is "better" and what "serious" modellers should be gravitating towards as their skills develop. N gauge for beginners; 2mm finescale for experts.
Instead I want the NGS to focus on what can be done with commercial, kit-built, or scratch-built N gauge models. I've nothing against other scales and gauges at all, but if they're included in the NGS Journal, there must be a strong reason to do so. Not just to fill up pages or because they happen to be pretty models.
If 2mm finescale models are winning NGS awards, I honestly think that's a rather sad state of affairs. Much better to give the prizes to models that run on 9mm track, even if they're objectively not quite as well made. If nothing else, the job of the NGS is to show what can be done in this gauge. It doesn't need to showcase the 2mm finescale side of the hobby; it has its own society and journal.
Cheers, NeMo
Quote from: PaulCheffus on February 21, 2016, 07:49:46 PM
Quote from: Formerly NtasticShop on February 21, 2016, 07:32:47 PM
This is not anything like comparing 2 types of sand, it annoys the hell out of me every year when I see 2mmfs models in the NGS competition amazing models yes but not N Gauge. I would suggest that that the models have to be displayed on Code 55 track and next to a Stove R. That would certainly show up how small some of the locos and such have been.
Hi
So my entry in 2009 should not have been allowed then as it used as a base the BH Enterprises coach shell which are actually to 2mm scale.
Cheers
Paul
Depends on what track standard it was built to run on 9mm or 2mmfs if it was for 2mmfs enter it in they competition.
Quote from: Formerly NtasticShop on February 21, 2016, 08:23:34 PM
Quote from: PaulCheffus on February 21, 2016, 07:49:46 PM
Quote from: Formerly NtasticShop on February 21, 2016, 07:32:47 PM
This is not anything like comparing 2 types of sand, it annoys the hell out of me every year when I see 2mmfs models in the NGS competition amazing models yes but not N Gauge. I would suggest that that the models have to be displayed on Code 55 track and next to a Stove R. That would certainly show up how small some of the locos and such have been.
Hi
So my entry in 2009 should not have been allowed then as it used as a base the BH Enterprises coach shell which are actually to 2mm scale.
Cheers
Paul
Depends on what track standard it was built to run on 9mm or 2mmfs if it was for 2mmfs enter it in they competition.
Hi
In this instance it was built to run on 9mm track, however one of my other entries was based on a Farish Mk2 coach but had 2mm SA wheels in for my other layout so that should be disqualified according to you just because the wheels were to a different standard.
My models are built by me using whatever I find suitable to get the end result and I don't see why a model built to 2mm SA wheel standards can't be included in a NGS competition as the only difference is the wheels. You might as well start disqualifying models built from some kits that are marketed as N gauge but are actually 2mm scale.
What about those people who use EasiTrac for their plain track work but Peco for the points. Should their layouts not feature in the journal as the majority of the track is 9.42mm gauge?
Cheers
Paul
Cheers
Paul
Quote from: PaulCheffus on February 21, 2016, 08:36:36 PM
In this instance it was built to run on 9mm track,
Then it's an N gauge model. Congratulations on the win!
Quote from: PaulCheffus on February 21, 2016, 08:36:36 PM
however one of my other entries was based on a Farish Mk2 coach but had 2mm SA wheels in for my other layout so that should be disqualified according to you just because the wheels were to a different standard.
Obviously if the model was made in such a way you could swap different wheelsets in and out depending on the layout you were playing with at the time, then that's fine too! Couldn't care less where you bought the wheels or axles from.
But I'd suggest leaving the 9mm track wheels in place while taking the photo though if you were entering it for the NGS competition! ;)
Quote from: PaulCheffus on February 21, 2016, 08:36:36 PM
My models are built by me using whatever I find suitable to get the end result and I don't see why a model built to 2mm SA wheel standards can't be included in a NGS competition as the only difference is the wheels. You might as well start disqualifying models built from some kits that are marketed as N gauge but are actually 2mm scale.
It's really not up to you (or me) to determine what counts as N gauge or what the Society is meant to do. That's all in the NGS Handbook.
The Introduction explains what N gauge is, including the British, American/Continental and Japanese variations, but then goes on to state that 2mm finescale, "is a specialist scale and is not really part of the N gauge family" and then goes on to explain that buildings and accessories can be used on N gauge layouts even though locos and rolling stock can't.
Now looking at the Constitution, the phrase "N gauge" is used several times, but not once is "2mm" used. I think that pretty much sums the purpose of the Society, but if you peruse the Purposes section, the first is "for enthusiasts of N gauge modelling to meet..." and the fifth is "stimulate the development of N gauge modelling techniques". Again, nowhere is anything said about 2mm or indeed any other scale or gauge.
On the other hand, I grant you this: the Competition rules section doesn't actually mention gauge or scale at all! ???
Cheers, NeMo
I assume that most of the contributors to this 'n'/2mm 'discussion' are actually members of the NGS...
Here is an extract from the home page blurb of the society to which you belong. (the bold-ing of some text is mine):
"Welcome to the website of the N Gauge Society (often referred to as the NGS). The Society is a non-profit making organisation, run by volunteers for the benefit of the railway modelling hobby in general and N Gauge modellers in particular."
I see that as quite enough justification for an article now and then on, say, 2mm modelling...
'That's all I have to say about that...'
I have been following this discussion from the beginning and am reminded of the Sunday morning 'discussion' programmes on the TV. Contributor 1 has his/her views on a subject, contributor 2 has his/her views on that subject. After half an hour or so of 'discussion', they still have their own views, so nothing has changed. ???. Everybody has their own views, (and is entitled to have those views), on a particular subject - it would be a boring world if everybody agreed on everything!
Wot Zogbert said!
Incidentally, the 'N Gauge Now' magazine advertises itself as "The wonderful world of 2mm modelling - 100% N Gauge" ................ David. :)
Personally I don't mind the odd peep above the parapet of the 1:148/9mm N gauge fortress (especially if it was a case of that or no content) - I might learn something new.
I might revise my opinion if it turns out 2mm dealers are systematically pushing N Gauge as a gateway drug to Finescale.
I'm starting out on a scratch building project and have been reading various 4mm & 7mm forums to get some ideas on techniques and methods of metal working. Does this mean that I can't then write about it in the Journal?
I'm beginning to wonder if some NGS members just want a Society of people who buy RTR models and run then on a layout with ready-to-plonk buildings without any kit or scratch building.
Personally, if an NGS member wanted to write an article on light weight baseboard construction using a OO Gauge layout I'd still be happy to read about it in the Journal.
Still, each to their own.....
Happy modelling,
Steven B.
You are correct, Dannyboy, it will just go 'round and 'round. I seriously doubt anyone's opinion will be changed.
Fortunately, those who don't mind a small bit of 'sacrilegious' content seem to be the majority. Those who object will continue complaining. That's life.
Mind, for the record, that I don't want the Journal to start being filled with 2mm (or other scales) content, but I do not feel that a small bit once in a while is indicative of that happening.
One thought I have had, is that perhaps the NGS, instead of offering kits, should really seriously explore producing and selling some of the types of items that one has to join the 2mm Assoc. to acquire. I think many N gauge modellers join that Assoc. only for that reason. I know I may have to, and I know at least 2 others who are members for the same reason.
Wonder if 2mmA's membership would drop significantly if that were to happen?
Jim F
Quote from: JimF on February 22, 2016, 12:26:02 PM
One thought I have had, is that perhaps the NGS, instead of offering kits, should really seriously explore producing and selling some of the types of items that one has to join the 2mm Assoc. to acquire.
I'd rather it be an "as well as offering kits", seeing as the kits are already there and hopefully it would just be a case of sourcing stock from the same suppliers as the 2mm association (unless they've got exclusivity deals, although I'd doubt that as there's not a big enough market to make that worthwhile).
Quote from: JimF on February 22, 2016, 12:26:02 PM
perhaps the NGS [...] should really seriously explore producing and selling some of the types of items that one has to join the 2mm Assoc. to acquire.
Go into competition with them ? Diluting the demand ? Making
neither group profitable in that area ?
You
really sure on that ? ::) If the market isn't large enough for the main mfrs to each produce a J72, what makes you think the market is large enough for both the 2mmA and NGF to compete ?
Why not? Isn't healthy competition (read that as 'cut the other's throat, maybe find a way to have a monopoly :) ) the foundation of our so-called global economy?
I don't model in 2mmfs, have no plans to. But, to build the pre-grouping wagons done in 3d I want, I need W irons for that, and have been told the only source is the 2mmA, so I have to join it to be able to buy them.
How many others have to do the same? Why can't the NGS provide for it's own members?
Perhaps the NGS would gain members, as I'm sure there are N modellers out there who are not members, but do belong to the 2mmA for access to their items.
My understanding is The 2mm Association was started by those who were not happy with using 9mm track, and wanting mush more prototypical rail spacing, track tolerances, etc.. Those that do will stay with, or join, the association.
I doubt seriously it will ever happen, so this is all probably academic. :)
Jim F
Quote from: JimF on February 22, 2016, 01:47:22 PM
Why not? Isn't healthy competition (read that as 'cut the other's throat, maybe find a way to have a monopoly :) ) the foundation of our so-called global economy?
I don't model in 2mmfs, have no plans to. But, to build the pre-grouping wagons done in 3d I want, I need W irons for that, and have been told the only source is the 2mmA, so I have to join it to be able to buy them.
How many others have to do the same? Why can't the NGS provide for it's own members?
Perhaps the NGS would gain members, as I'm sure there are N modellers out there who are not members, but do belong to the 2mmA for access to their items.
My understanding is The 2mm Association was started by those who were not happy with using 9mm track, and wanting mush more prototypical rail spacing, track tolerances, etc.. Those that do will stay with, or join, the association.
I doubt seriously it will ever happen, so this is all probably academic. :)
Jim F
Hi
If you want them that much then get someone like Allen at Worsley Works http://www.worsleyworks.co.uk/ (http://www.worsleyworks.co.uk/) to etch them for you (he has done custom work for me and others in the past). Why should the 2mm SA and its members support your modelling if you won't support them by joining.
I am a member of both the NGS and 2mm SA and I joined the 2mm SA as I wanted to use some of their parts in my models. However since joining I have also started to build a small layout to the 2mm SA standards.
Cheers
Paul
Quote from: PaulCheffus on February 22, 2016, 02:21:15 PM
Quote from: JimF on February 22, 2016, 01:47:22 PM
Why not? Isn't healthy competition (read that as 'cut the other's throat, maybe find a way to have a monopoly :) ) the foundation of our so-called global economy?
I don't model in 2mmfs, have no plans to. But, to build the pre-grouping wagons done in 3d I want, I need W irons for that, and have been told the only source is the 2mmA, so I have to join it to be able to buy them.
How many others have to do the same? Why can't the NGS provide for it's own members?
Perhaps the NGS would gain members, as I'm sure there are N modellers out there who are not members, but do belong to the 2mmA for access to their items.
My understanding is The 2mm Association was started by those who were not happy with using 9mm track, and wanting mush more prototypical rail spacing, track tolerances, etc.. Those that do will stay with, or join, the association.
I doubt seriously it will ever happen, so this is all probably academic. :)
Jim F
Hi
If you want them that much then get someone like Allen at Worsley Works http://www.worsleyworks.co.uk/ (http://www.worsleyworks.co.uk/) to etch them for you (he has done custom work for me and others in the past). Why should the 2mm SA and its members support your modelling if you won't support them by joining.
I am a member of both the NGS and 2mm SA and I joined the 2mm SA as I wanted to use some of their parts in my models. However since joining I have also started to build a small layout to the 2mm SA standards.
Cheers
Paul
I think, to be fair, Jim was suggesting that he
would join the 2mmfs society to access the parts he needs, so he would be supporting the society.
I have to say the main reason I joined the NGS was to get access to the kits. Unfortunately, almost all of the ones I'm interested have been long term out of stock......
Quote from: ScottyStitch on February 22, 2016, 02:49:08 PM
I think, to be fair, Jim was suggesting that he would join the 2mmfs society to access the parts he needs, so he would be supporting the society.
I have to say the main reason I joined the NGS was to get access to the kits. Unfortunately, almost all of the ones I'm interested have been long term out of stock......
Hi
I read it as he wanted the NGS to stock the 2mm SA bits he required.
Cheers
Paul
Quote from: PaulCheffus on February 22, 2016, 03:09:24 PM
Quote from: ScottyStitch on February 22, 2016, 02:49:08 PM
I think, to be fair, Jim was suggesting that he would join the 2mmfs society to access the parts he needs, so he would be supporting the society.
I have to say the main reason I joined the NGS was to get access to the kits. Unfortunately, almost all of the ones I'm interested have been long term out of stock......
Hi
I read it as he wanted the NGS to stock the 2mm SA bits he required.
Cheers
Paul
Yes I agree I think he does, but this:
"I don't model in 2mmfs, have no plans to. But, to build the pre-grouping wagons done in 3d I want, I need W irons for that, and have been told the only source is the 2mmA, so I have to join it to be able to buy them."
suggests that to get the parts he will join the 2mm group. I may be wrong.
Scotty
If you read it again, I think you'll see he's complaining about having to join them if he wants to purchase these and instead is arguing that the NGS should waste valuable resource (my words, not his) duplicating what is already done and available elsewhere because he doesn't want to join them - and he can't buy them unless he does. Which, let's be honest, is exactly the situation if a 2mmA member wants to buy something that is exclusive to the NGS ::)
Personally, were I that bothered, I'd either try to find a friendly 2mmA member & ask them if I could purchase through them - or just acknowledge that I was being unrealistic in my expectations of a small Club & join the other one myself !!! Who knows what else may become attractive, once the membership materials etc were issued ::)
Or - ask the NGS Committee if they can come up with a deal with the 2mmA for the NGS Shop to purchase items that the 2mmA make exclusively (and reciprocate, of course) :hmmm:
Quote from: MikeDunn on February 22, 2016, 03:53:57 PM
If you read it again, I think you'll see he's complaining about having to join them if he wants to purchase these and instead is arguing that the NGS should waste valuable resource (my words, not his) duplicating what is already done and available elsewhere because he doesn't want to join them - and he can't buy them unless he does. Which, let's be honest, is exactly the situation if a 2mmA member wants to buy something that is exclusive to the NGS ::)
Personally, were I that bothered, I'd either try to find a friendly 2mmA member & ask them if I could purchase through them - or just acknowledge that I was being unrealistic in my expectations of a small Club & join the other one myself !!! Who knows what else may become attractive, once the membership materials etc were issued ::)
Or - ask the NGS Committee if they can come up with a deal with the 2mmA for the NGS Shop to purchase items that the 2mmA make exclusively (and reciprocate, of course) :hmmm:
Yes, if they're exclusive to the 2mmA because they make them, then that would be a waste of resources. If however, the 2mmA is just sourcing them from somewhere, what's to stop the NGS sourcing them for its members too if there's demand?
The cross purchase deal though does sound like a much more sensible idea. Good for both groups.
Quote from: MikeDunn on February 22, 2016, 03:53:57 PM
Or - ask the NGS Committee if they can come up with a deal with the 2mmA for the NGS Shop to purchase items that the 2mmA make exclusively (and reciprocate, of course) :hmmm:
Not a bad idea, but I think there's an issue with tax or VAT or something. Specifically, because the NGS is a club that only sells to its members, there's a financial benefit of some sort. Someone else will know the details. But if they sell to non-members, even if you argue that's good for club revenues, it actually turns out there are definite financial costs involved.
Cheers, NeMo
There's no specific issue with VAT but potentially with corporation tax - any mutual trading (ie just selling to members of a club) is CT exempt, as soon as you sell outside the club then you are liable to CT.
On a more fundamental note I think Mike D has pretty much summed things up for me - if one or other society produces something you want then either join or find a friendly member. That is why the NGS (and 2mm SA) go to such lengths to develop products that will appeal to members and non-members. We are talking small clubs in the grand scheme of things and if they make something you want please support them or risk losing them!
Cheers, Mike
(not my NGS views but my personal views)
Quote from: JimF on February 22, 2016, 01:47:22 PM
My understanding is The 2mm Association was started by those who were not happy with using 9mm track, and wanting mush more prototypical rail spacing, track tolerances, etc.. Those that do will stay with, or join, the association.
I doubt seriously it will ever happen, so this is all probably academic. :)
Jim F
I have no intention of contributing further to the debate other than to say I think it's a real shame, and does the scale no favours, to have such narrow entrenched views.
I do however feel the above statement needs correcting as it's completely false. Modelling in 2mm scale at 1:152 predates commercial N by almost forty years, models first being displayed at the Model Engineering Exhibition in the 1920s. In addition articles appeared at regular intervals in the model press both pre and post war by modellers working in 2mm or 000. The first commercial offerings in the UK, by Lone Star, were also to a nominal 2mm scale. Continental Europe adopted 1:160 on 9mm gauge in the 1960s, British N grew out of the need to fit commercial mechanisms into the much smaller British loading gauge, hence the adoption of 1:148. N gauge is, if anything, a coarse version of the much older 2mm standard, not the other way round.
As I've said before I'm more than happy to use accurate 1:148 models alongside scratch and kit built 1:152 models, the difference is not really noticeable. I'm also happy to see 9mm N gauge models in the 2mm magazine - many have appeared over the years. It is after all the 2mm Scale Association - finescale is not mentioned in the name. 2mm finescale standards are recommended by the Association as they were established long before N appeared but those who wish to work to commercial N standards are also welcomed.
Jerry
Quote
I have to say the main reason I joined the NGS was to get access to the kits. Unfortunately, almost all of the ones I'm interested have been long term out of stock......
Production of kits has finally restarted following the relocation and restructuring of the Society Shop and items should be appearing at ngsjoin.com and on the Society Display Stand over the next few months (but there won't be any new stock for Glasgow, this weekend. Sorry!
Gill
Shop Manager and NGS Committee Member
Quote from: queensquare on February 23, 2016, 08:46:20 AM
I have no intention of contributing further to the debate other than to say ...
<Snip a lot of text>
Jerry
Classic!! :smiley-laughing: :smiley-laughing: :smiley-laughing:
NGS / 2mm.
A couple of years back a person on this forum very kindly obtained some of the 2mm ass'n cattle wagon bodies on my behalf. I was very grateful. Currently finishing them off as they ended up in the "to do" box!
I have been keeping tropical fish for 40 years and a member of a specialist club for 38 of them. You get the same brand of, for want of another word, extremism with fishkeepers who belong to specialist clubs. We all keep fish yet a suggestion of sharing a venue and resources is so often met with hostility. It baffles me as together groups can become stronger, share cetain costs, and benefit from combined buying power. It's almost as if a certain element of people flourish by being insular and damning of others who share a very close interest, but not 100%. It's a bit like two schools in close proximity, where for no real reason the pupils of each are in conflict with each other!!!
Quote from: NinOz on February 23, 2016, 10:51:12 AM
Quote from: queensquare on February 23, 2016, 08:46:20 AM
I have no intention of contributing further to the debate other than to say ...
<Snip a lot of text>
Jerry
Classic!! :smiley-laughing: :smiley-laughing: :smiley-laughing:
What's classic about it??? I was not offering a subjective contribution to the debate, with the narrow, entrenched views that would be pointless. I was offering a correction of a factual error.
Jerry
:locked:
Thread now locked. I would appreciate that posts are reported if they are deemed offensive or negative, before bringing the forum name into disrepute.