# Group Build Clarification - needed for the future.



## Airframes (Feb 10, 2013)

This post stems, mainly, from an e-mail I have received from a member, but also from my own thoughts regarding the organisation, or otherwise, of Group Builds.
The current GB, 'Transport/Recce/Jet' etc, has already prompted discussion, questions, clarification on types, times and so on and is, quite frankly, a jumbled, confused, cumbersome mess of a combination of at least three separate GBs !!
The judges, and a number of members, have, in past discussions, agreed that 'Split' builds are tiresome in their construction, organisation and handling. In addition, they should, in theory, be judged as separate GBs, in order to decide winners in each category.
At present, in these 'split' GBs, there is only one 1st, 2nd and 3rd place per Category, when in reality there should be the same for each section of a 'split' GB - for example, placings for 'Transport', for 'Recce' and for 'Jet'. Unfortunately, this is beyond the realistic scope of the judges, due to everyday commitments, and is akin to running, and judging, three separate GBs all at the same time!
It must be noted that the published listings for future GBs have been drawn up, originally by Dan, and latterly by the kind and generous help of Vic, from opinions/votes, from members, from suggestions put forward by members.
Although there is nothing inherently wrong with this system, it can, and at times has, lead to confusion and uncertainty, as the subject matter, time scales, aircraft types/roles and so on have perhaps not been fully thought through, and guide-lines drawn up to clarify _*exactly*_ what is and what isn't eligible for entry.
I do understand, and appreciate, that, in most cases, discussion among members and judges has, eventually, clarified the situation, but I have to admit that one section at least of this current GB is rather 'clumsy', for want of a better description, and seems to have been included without too much thought or clarification.
I mean, of course, the 'Jet' section, which originally started out as 'The Jet Age'. 
Some time ago, I seem to recall discussion on this subject, where it _seemed_ agreed that the 'Jet Age' encompassed a period from the dawn of jet aircraft, to the first steps into supersonic flight - that 'Golden Era' of jets, from the Me262 up to about the late 1950s to early 1960s, where a _separate_ GB could be included to cover the wonderful, broad choice of models, of aircraft which _actually existed and flew_.

As the listings have been arranged from suggestions put forward by members, could I please therefore request that, when a particular subject is selected for the listings, that the member, or members, who originally submitted the suggestion, submit their thoughts on the subject parameters, in order that all concerned can understand these, and discuss/argue/clarify/modify as required?
This will allow a 'formal' set of guide-lines to be drawn up for each GB, well in advance and, whenever possible, given the required information, I am happy to undertake this task.
This, I hope, will prevent any future confusion, possible ill feeling, and, in some instances, perceived 'manipulation' of subjects, and avoid the extremely cumbersome and irksome possibility of 'split' GBs.
Many thanks, and I look forward to your comment/suggestions.

Cheers,

Terry.


----------



## Wayne Little (Feb 10, 2013)

Agree with your comments Terry, as i understand it we have let the first round of GB's to run their course, however a set of guidelines should be set up to cover each individual GB as was done in a few of the early GB's, at least the first improvement with regards the new series is that there are no SPLIT Builds and each set out with a basic description of content.
Probably a real good idea to set up the formal guidelines to fine tune the content, maybe get the ball rolling at 4-6 weeks before the start, so a final draft can be in place say...at least 1-2 weeks before commencement.


----------



## rochie (Feb 10, 2013)

yup spot on Dogsbody.

must admit i did not think the group builds would last this long and Vic seems to have sorted out the new listings with a bit more detail than the originals.

no offence to Dan as i think we take them a bit more seriously than we did when we started !


----------



## meatloaf109 (Feb 10, 2013)

From what I can see, there are no more split builds on the schedule. That, IMHO, is a good thing. The current build grouping of transport, recon, and observer / jet age did seem a little strange to me, almost as if the jets were thrown in to ensure participation.
In looking over the list of future builds it seems that they are described well, and should present no problems in understanding the parameters of each build.


----------



## Rogi (Feb 10, 2013)

If you look at the current mixed build in 17, most of the participating items are jets :S We would of been totally in the hole if the Korea jets were included and up to 60. 

I think some of us would of found a compromise for the recon/tranport stuff if there was limited to that.


----------



## A4K (Feb 10, 2013)

Agreed Terry - keep it simple I reckon: one subject, clearly defined.

Trying to fool proof my own build clarification (GB 30: Post War Warbirds: new lease of life). Will sleep on it and post it tomorrow.


----------



## Crimea_River (Feb 10, 2013)

Thanks Terry for bringing this up. I agree that setting up the boundaries is a worthwhile exercise and am with Wayne on the when and how. The abolition of the Split Builds will help alleviate some of the confusion but, even so, as was the case with the need to define better what the "Nose Art" build should entail, there is a strong case to be made for initiating the discussion early and defining the parameters before the builds start.

I might add that the recent confusion over the jet age portion of the current GB is a probable result of the contraction of the title of the build. The original title of this portion of the build, initiated by Dan and repeated by Vic, is *The Jet Age 1944-45*. For some reason, probably to save space in the thread title space, the 1944-45 was dropped, leaving just "Jet Age" and leaving the impression that this covers the period mentioned by Terry. Had the intent been to cover up to 1960, this build would likely never have been split as it would have provided so many more build possibilities than the 1944-45 limitation placed on the scope.


----------



## Vic Balshaw (Feb 10, 2013)

Totally agree Terry, I think clarification well before the GB starts would be a good thing. One of the things I did try to do when making up the last list was to try and define the type of build as best as possible not only by the title but also with a brief narrative where possible. Admittedly some of these will need to be clarified and refined.

As for the current GB, this is the last GB of the old list drawn up by our good friend Dan and it's quite possible that it incorporated much of what was left over from the suggestions of that time. Andy has hit the nail on the head by clarifying that it was Jet Age 1944-1945. It is also mt firm belief that as a split build it should only be judged on the Jet Age as one subject and Recon/Transport/Observer as the second subject.

Maybe the lesson from all the confusion of this build are an indication that maybe we should open the next GB header thread a couple of months out from start date with the first thread being specific, giving timeframes and a more definitive description of the builds scope, time period and such. It should also give prospective entrants a chance to input thoughts and questions or seek clarification. Thoughts on this would be most welcome.

Edit:

Like you Terry, I will be more than happy to lend a hand to get the future GB sorted and rolling.


----------



## N4521U (Feb 10, 2013)

Oooooo, that could mean Double the trouble for the judges.............. That in itself would keep the split builds to an absolute minimum!


----------



## Airframes (Feb 10, 2013)

Thanks for the thoughts and observations so far guys, all good stuff.
I've since received a further e-mail, which highlights a number of other important points which need addressing, mainly concerning the Rules as they are at the moment, and I'll be contacting the judges during the next few days, via e-mail, to discuss this.
It has also been pointed out, and I admit that, at times, I have sensed this, that the Group Builds can, at times, seem intimidating to some would be 'competitors', and perhaps give an impression of some sort of exclusive 'club'.
I must state that this is *not*, and never has been the intention, and the GBs are open to any member, regardless of levels of skill, knowledge or resources, with the actual intentions being to help improve skills where required or asked for, to foster and develop an interest in scale modelling, particularly, but not exclusively, of WW2 aircraft subjects, to help each other, in whatever form, to this end, and to have fun, and foster relationships world wide.
In general, in the course of the GBs, and the modelling sections on this forum, these intentions or aims have been achieved. 
However, I can, and do, understand how such an impression can be perceived by some.
Over the last four years, since the very first GB, there have been vast improvements in skills, techniques and general modelling experience by many, and the content of the GBs, both in the form of models and 'enhancements', as well as the tremendous input of historic and technical information has, perhaps, lead to a more 'serious' perception of the GBs.
Although there is nothing wrong in this as such, it should be stressed that the GBs are predominantly for fun - they are not world-changing, tremendously important events- and should be regarded as such, by _all_ concerned.
It is highly possible that this perception, by some, has its roots in the sometimes lack of clarification regarding the Rules and the subject matter, and the occasional 'bending' of these parameters, particularly in the form of trying to make a particular GB fit an available model, rather than the other way around, only exacerbates this problem.

Once I have conferred with the other judges, and given that any anomalies in the current Rules are correctly addressed, and amended as required, I will post a notification so that all can be thoroughly informed of the outcome, and the amended/modified Rules will be posted accordingly.
Given that this can be achieved, then it is hoped that further problems, queries and clarification can be minimised, for the good of all concerned. Please note, however, that the current Rules are loosely based on similar rules used in IPMS competitions worlwide, although nowhere near as strict, and were not 'dreamed up' or 'pulled out of a hat'
Meanwhile, please be assured that the GBs, and the Modelling section in general, is _not_ an exclusive club for unapproachable 'Modelling Gods', but places where you, the members of this grand forum, can take part at your leisure, and enjoy, perhaps learn, without, it is hoped, that 'Look at how good _*I*_ am' syndrome I've often witnessed during (very) brief visits to other modelling forums and clubs.

Cheers,

Terry.


----------



## meatloaf109 (Feb 10, 2013)

Excellent presentation, Terry. The level of help extended by accomplished modelers to any who asked was the reason I joined this forum. There are a few out there that openly sneer at anyone that is of beginner or even average levels. 
My thanks to those that make these G.B.'s possible and fun.
While I make no claim to "Modeling god" or even Wizard status, I kind of favor "Ubermodeler". Can I be that?


----------



## Crimea_River (Feb 10, 2013)

Another eloquently presented topic Terry and thanks for taking the time to state your excellent points, all of with which I agree.


----------



## A4K (Feb 11, 2013)

Yep, echo Andy's and Übermodeller's posts 
The best build starts were the first ones where you wrote the background history of the theme and explained the subject limits.


My opinion for what it's worth: never liked the fact the builds are judged at all. Being a perfectionist (ie bloody self critical) I find that in itself off-putting, and can well understand if others feel they're outclassed and excluded. 
Flip side of the coin, look at the beautiful professional builds that should but don't get votes because of the current system - quite unjust and pointless. I reckon can the judging altogether, and just have a first, second, third members choice.


Clarification of my own build suggestion (GB 30: Post War Warbirds: given a new lease of life):

-WW II aircraft ONLY (1 Sep '39 - 14 Aug '45), in post war use (15 Aug '45 - present). This includes all types in military service at the outbreak of war (from any country, combatant or not), but excludes aircraft under construction at cease of hostilities or post war production of WWII types.

-Aircraft only to be in original form/ function if exported or sold to the private sector, unless modelling a Museum or airshow circuit aircraft which wears a representative original scheme.

-Aircraft in same branch of service must be in secondary form or function (eg, Water bombers, Top dressers, Engine test beds, Converted target tugs and trainers, Meteorological, Aerial mapping and Air-Sea rescue configurations etc). 

-To be strict (and avoid grey areas) the individual aircraft portrayed must have previously served in another air arm or role , not just the type generally. If modelling a composite rebuild/ restoration or racing circuit aircraft, the original must be largely built from a serving aircraft. 

-Aircraft type and role is open. Can be a fighter, transport, Liaison, trainer, anything. The more variety the merrier!

Aims:
To see what became of the aircraft we love when they were retired from their original duties. (spoons and frying pans in many cases sadly!)

Hoping for aircraft in other than usual form or function, in different military and civilian schemes and markings.


----------



## Airframes (Feb 11, 2013)

Thanks for the feed back Ubermodeller, Andy and Evan.
And thanks again, Evan, for presenting your 'guidelines' for your proposed GB. Regarding the suggestion about the judging being scrapped as such, and left to the members, this has some merit, given that it is arranged for voting for placings (i.e. 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc etc) as well as an overall 'Best of Show', should the latter not be immediately obvious. However, there may be a slight problem in actually getting members to take the (sometimes considerable ) time to review and judge each build, and then cast their votes, although there's almost always a solution to any problem - except perhaps lethargy!


----------



## Vic Balshaw (Feb 11, 2013)

Terry, can I also echo Andy, Paul and Evan's comments and say thanks for your thoughts, comments and time on what is a very involved topic. I will be awaiting your email with trepidation.

Thanks also Evan for the clarification of your suggested GB, I have taken note and will append them with that GB so that when the time comes we will have the necessary build details.


----------



## tigerdriver (Feb 11, 2013)

First of thanks to everyone involved for continually trying to improve the experience here on the site, which i think is great .

My twopenneth worth as both a relative newbie and an absolute beginner .

I am trying to enter each group build. Whilst the standards are a little daunting, i dont see this as an issue as for me its a learning process and an inspiration to improve . The fact that my results wont match up to some of the " stars" here is not an issue, and I enjoy watching the skills on show .

I think opening the build forums up well ahead is very sensible . I would almost like to see two early threads. The first a discussion of the detail and expectations for the build from the " powers that be" and a second where people can chat about their plans and seek both confirmation of suitability and some help or additional ideas

I think trying to make things too rigorous can suck some of the fun out and has the additional risk of making the judges task ever more onerous.

It may also be worth making it clear that the standards are different in beginners, intermediate and advanced ... As a total newbie I am just pleased if my kits come out looking abit like the type i have chosen . My skill level is away off getting bogged down in detail errors with individual kits with specific types for example . The advanced guys will be at a whole different level and be working much more closely to their references for example. This doesnt mean that someone like me doesnt care that a certain example carried whatever camo, or different interior or exhaust or whatever. It just means that I am realistic about what I can acheive at my level . I read other peoples corrections mods and scratch built items with great interest and try and store them in the old noggin for future reference.

As ever its a very hard balance on these things , but its always worth remembering that the builds should be fun for competitors judges and interested onlookers


----------



## N4521U (Feb 11, 2013)

Wow, a lot to take in since my little quip about the judges "workload". So my five cents worth.

*First* of all, I joined in her because it's been a very long time since I had built anything of any consequence.

*Second* of all, I joined because of the kind of support that was willingly given by ANYbody who had input to a question asked. This is something that is quite unusual among people with skills in Any craft. Here answers come from far away places. _The old saying "ask and ye shall receive" is no truer than here._

*Thirdly*, When I joined in here, at that time, my intention was to build as many Yorktown serving types as I could. 1/72nd scale, canopies painted white from the inside. All I was interested in was the paint scheme. Accuracy was not even a factor. I have a few in the cabinet.

*Fourthly*, if this is a word, in here I have added the phrase "historical accuracy" to my model building vocabulary. It sometimes gets in the way of completing GB's on time. I am frantic in my finishing the last few days to be on time. It's because of being a part of this forum I have found another avenue of subjects, mainly Davidson pilots of WWII, WWI, and now Viet Nam. It's added purpose to my searches for subjects and I have found I don;t have enough time to do every one I have found.

*Fifthly*, am I discovering new words?, I am doing the kind of detailing because I attended casual workshops in the States with a professional builder. He shared his expertise freely, like them thats in here. It's because of the examples in here that those lessons have been rekindled and inspired me to think outside the box and jump back in to it.

*I am having fun.* it's not a business, it's an absorbing pass time that allows me to keep my sanity in my declining years, I will be 70 in 4-1/2 months. I am fortunate my wife wants to see me active in some way, any way. 

I encourage all the beginners to just have a bl00dy go. We learn more by our failures than our successes. Just remember that. _We post our progress for input and example! Not to show off._

And Join In a GB, we all do it for the experience of Doing it.......... JUST DO IT!


----------



## A4K (Feb 11, 2013)

Cheers Terry and Vic - please tell me if my guidelines are too stringent or narrow on the build! 

You could be right Terry, maybe there does need to be a fixed backbone of judges in the builds, even if just to keep the order. Whatever the majority decides is good for me.


----------



## Rustybugs (Feb 11, 2013)

My two cents..I like the idea of having no judges also or winners or losers. Just do the build, everyone do their best and get help if needed without "judging". Clarification is a must on the rules. I for one, and this will go over like a bull in a china shop, but here goes.. would scrap the current build list after 19. I mean really, everything lined up to 2018???? Half the folks won't be here anymore for what ever the reason. Why tie yourself to a build so far in advance? If the 15 or so folks that actually voted can't come to an agreement in a couple of weeks and they need years to come up with a kit....... Just do 2 builds in advance. At the beginning of the last published build which lasts 3 months do a vote again for the next two builds and so forth. Start a thread for two weeks having everyone state the build they would like to see. After that do a poll for 2 weeks, whatever the vote tally is stick with it. Even if it's only 4 vote for a specific build, if it's the majority so be it. That will give everyone 2 months notice for the next build and five months for the one after that. That should be more than enough time to gather any reference material or kits or aftermarket parts you may need. If it isn't adjust the timing to the start of the first build, that will give them 5 months to get the stuff they need for the build. I mean really, do you need 5 months to gather what you need for a build?

Something else I would like to know. How many of the folks here actually build a kit for a competition outside of the forum, either local club or IPMS or would if there was one close by them. I know Wayne does. Who else? I know some are not located to where they could enter a contest.


----------



## Rustybugs (Feb 11, 2013)

I keep editing this post as I think about things. I for one would like to see a few monkey wrenches thrown into the builds. Change up stuff to make it FUN. Have a build that only covers 1/72 or only 1/48, do a build that has to have a small diorama around it included, Do a build that has to be OOB, no modifications, no additional upgrade, no scratch building of parts, has to be built and painted as is in the box. Do a build that is for the super detailer's out there. But they have to back up anything they do with photos of the real thing. Do a wild paint job build, you know those garish ones some of the pathfinders and rally aircraft had. Do a build where all the kits have to be hand painted. Yes, it can be done. One I would really like to see, is a battle damaged build. All entries would have to have realistic battle damage and not just a few bullet holes. Something that would challenge the builder to have to show his work as to the internal structure of the aircraft.


----------



## Rustybugs (Feb 11, 2013)

double post


----------



## meatloaf109 (Feb 11, 2013)

Well, I, for one, plan on being around. 
Where I live is 90 miles from the nearest hobby store so advance planning is a fact for me. The current list as accepted is what I have bought kits and paint for, not just the two running now, but for the four after that. With any luck by that time I will have sold a few more pieces of furniture and will be able to go buy kits for the G.B.'s after that.


----------



## tigerdriver (Feb 11, 2013)

I think the planning is part of the fun 

Maybe the less mainstream GBs like wrecked, or super detailing etc could be run on the side like the current Dora one,


----------



## T Bolt (Feb 11, 2013)

For what it’s worth, I like having the group builds laid out far in advanced, being able to plan out ahead and look forward to future GBs. In fact I have a spreadsheet listing all the future group builds and the kits from my stash that qualify for each Vic has put in a lot of his time setting up these builds and I think it unreasonable to ask him or someone else to go through that kind of work, although on a smaller scale, for every group build. I am very grateful to him and the other judges who put so much of their time in to run these GBs. I know I would not have that kind of time to spare.

Also, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with including judging as part of the group builds. It’s not as though there’s any prize involved, it’s just for fun and adds a little more fun and excitement to it. I always look forward to seeing the members choice poll come out after a build, and the final judging results in the 3 categories.

I do think there should more organized discussion of the parameters of a build well in advance of the start to make sure everyone is on the same page. Maybe open up the new sections for the particular GBs, two or three in advance, each with a thread for discussion and specific rules for that build. Other than that I think things are fine the way they are now.


----------



## N4521U (Feb 11, 2013)

Can't imagine trying to come up with the next two GB's after two GB's. I personally couldn't be bothered every second build debating for the next two. Look what it took to come up with the list we have. The vote tally has been taken, and agreed upon for the existing list.

As it is we all have the choice of scale. I personally build two and four engined planes in 72nd and singles in 48th by choice. My first GB entry was in 1/72 and found it difficult for my meat hook mits to work in that scale. We work in the scale we are comfortable with. We all have the choice of detailing or not. If you look back, it doesn't make a bit of difference in the final vote. Bad detailing is not going to get a vote, just because there is detailing done. None of my scratch building has been a Members Choice, and I am not compelled to complain. I personally enjoy the effort. 

I've never entered anything in an outside contest. If I did, it would be something I have done here where I get help and encouragement.

I think this forum has got it all right. And I think this is the reason we have so many newcomers, it's why I joined. And I don't think any more rules are going to add anything to anything. 

I think it may scare people off. We complain about Gov'ts and regulations and rules, and now it's suggested to do the same thing in here. Let's keep it simple, just like it is!

***I think we did just that on GB17, a question thread, and a what are you thinking thread and these work a treat.


----------



## Rustybugs (Feb 11, 2013)

It's interesting.. you state that you want new folks to join in and how to increase the participation in forums and builds, but nobody wants any changes. "Oh I think it's a great idea, just don't change anything. I don't want anything to upset the status quo." So everyone's happy to have the same 8 to 12 folks doing the all builds all of the time? Starting to sound like a good ol' boys club isn't it? 

You welcome new folks with open arms and have helped many that have questions and tips. I mean really, some of you need a 6 year lead on builds?? It sounds like you don't want any changes to upset the cart, that you folks that have been here the longest have established. Then you wonder why very few new people stay around.

Now before you start to chew my head off for bringing up the subject, think about it. What has been new, how many new folks have hung around for more than a few months, check it out, there is probably around 30 folks that contribute to the modeling forum on a regular basis, of that maybe half do any of the builds. Some may belong to other forums and modeling places, I don't know. So they split their time and builds with this forum. 

Ok, let the flames begin


----------



## N4521U (Feb 11, 2013)

I've seen the light............. we need...

OOB 1,2,3. 
With scratch building 1,2,3. 
With PE only 1,2,3. 
Weathered 1,2,3. 
Simple Dio 1,2,3. 
Real detailed dio 1,2,3.

AND a Members choice in each one!

And, maybe we should be able to start any time we like as long as it's finished on the closing date? And prize money, could just be credit at a LHS. I'll put in 2 cents, oh, I just did.


----------



## meatloaf109 (Feb 11, 2013)

No flames.
The builds are open to anyone that wants to build an airplane. Can't force people to join. If someone wants to build something other than what is in the current G.B., then there are sections for that, you can show even ships and cars to name but two. 
And, yes, as stated above, I do need to plan ahead. On my last trip to the hobby store I brought a list of the upcoming G.B.'s, so if I saw something that would work out, I could get it. Kits go out of production, and I might end up having the last remaining Lockheed Electra in 1/48 for the G.B.#69, "Planes flown by women". (Suggestion to the judges)


----------



## meatloaf109 (Feb 11, 2013)

N4521U said:


> I've seen the light............. we need...
> 
> OOB 1,2,3.
> With scratch building 1,2,3.
> ...


I want credit at the local A.B.C. store. I don't have a local Hobby store!


----------



## ccheese (Feb 11, 2013)

OK, Lads.... let's calm down. I had planned to stay out of this thread, to just sit and watch. But now I have to put in my two pfennigs worth. First off, I like the judging the way it is. I never expect to "win" a GB, but I do enjoy the kind words some offer. To have someone tell me, "You done good, Pilgrim", just makes my day. So I don't think the present system of judges or judging need to be changed.

I've always thought split GB's were a bad idea. It leaves too much "open for discussion". I see that coming with the "Nose Art GB". That said, I think the GB's as they are, and I mean planned ahead, well beyond my stay on earth, is OK. Some people need to get their stuff together, so to speak, and that takes planning.

As far as limiting a GB to a particular scale, NO.... I don't agree with that. Some people would have a real problem if a GB were limited to 1:72. Me, for one, because I doubt there is a balsa/tissue model out that that's 1:72. Or make a diorama. Again, No. You wanna make a diorama ? Good, just put it in the Start to Finish Build section. Members will look in there and make comments. Some, that have been in there, are quite good.

Can you just picture GB#64, "A Shot Up GB" ? Anything with bullet holes will qualify. Again, NO. I think this would run people out, and I'd be the first to go. 

Putting limits on a GB (other than the rules/requirements of the GB) would not serve any worthwhile purpose. Those that enter a GB should be able to do what they wish and are capable of, to satisfy the requirement of the GB. I love to see some of the efforts that go into detailing a cockpit. I stand in awe at some of the accomplishments that I have seen expressed in the GB's.

As far as experience (or lack thereof), everyone knows that some member's capabilities over-shadow others. Some builders go way out of their way to make a model as near perfect as possible. We all recognize the talents of a few of the members, as, as I like to put it, "museum quality". Others' like myself, are still in a learning mode. These individuals should not be looked down upon, because their work is awe inspiring.

In a word, Gentlemen, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" !

Charles


----------



## T Bolt (Feb 11, 2013)

If some one wants to do a subject different than one of the scheduled group builds they can always drum up some interest and start an unofficial group build under the group build section. It's been done before. The Doras Galoras Unofficial GB going on now with 15 members participating making all posts in one thread -Sometimes confusing, but still a lot of fun, or the Delta Unofficial GB, not as popular with only 2 members doing individual threads, but still fun (I'm still working slowly on my F-102). So there's other ways to go, you just need to work up a little interest in the subject with a few other members.


----------



## rochie (Feb 11, 2013)

i personally don't want the fun taking out of these builds, the level of competition is about right as it is.

it was something i didn't want to get out of hand when we discussed the very first group build and i think the judges have enough stuff to do in their home lives with out more time being spent on these builds.

think we could also discuss the following GB's limits etc once a current build starts, giving 4 months to sort out the scope of subjects.

just my thoughts


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 11, 2013)

Here is my two cents on the subject. 

I was and am supposed to be one of the judges, but have not had time. Since my return to the United States from Europe, I have been swamped with work and all sorts of things. 

No flames here either. This is not a good old boys club. We welcome suggestions and ideas all the time. But here goes..

1. I don't think that having builds set out as far as they do has anything to do with people joining or not? Why would it. Why would someone go, damn they have build set up for next year already. I don't want to join that forum! 

2. I don't see any reason to not have judging? Why get rid of it? It is a friendly competition with friendly judging. If anything it gives recognition. It is not meant to say that someone is better than others. Why do you think there are different levels of skill to be judged. 

3. If it is not broke, why fix it. I think that everyone that is taking part in these builds, is having fun right? That is what this is all about? 

If someone has a great idea, and everyone else (including the judges) like it, and wants to tweak it. Then by all means do so. I just see no need to get rid of setting them out so far and getting rid of the judging. 

*Now having said this. As someone who is not a big modeler (I came here years ago because of the real planes...), I have to say I admire all of your models, and all of your work. Well done to everyone. Even though I do not participate, I take a look at each and every one. I love them all. So again, keep up the great work!*


----------



## meatloaf109 (Feb 11, 2013)

And that is precisely why I like your participation as a judge. A "not a big modeler" who came here because he likes the real planes, is exactly what is needed to look at models to see if they represent the real thing. 
Just sayin'!


----------



## Crimea_River (Feb 11, 2013)

Rustybugs, some great ideas you have there. I'd suggest you start an unofficial GB based on your ideas and see who will join in, as I did with my Doras Galoras GB. So much discussion and work has gone into setting up the next batch of GBs by long time participants, and especially Vic, that I'd personally be very dissapointed if we suddenly chucked all that out the window and started anew. If you were around during the process, you would know that the next selection of group builds was democratically established and considered all ideas equally. Am I worried that we're not getting more participants? HELL NO. As a judge, I think there are plenty of entries to fill my spare time, thank you very much. Having said that, I'd welcome more in a heartbeat, but not at the expense of changing the game every time a newcomer wants something different.

Oh, and I also enter my posted models in 2 local annual model shows, to answer your question.

Replace judging with members choice only? I say no. The member's choice adds another dimension to the judged results and keeps things interesting.

Let's all remember the original reason this thread was opened - to discuss how to improve the clarity of scope of the planned future builds and not to reopen the pandora's box of official GB selections.


----------



## N4521U (Feb 11, 2013)

Too many rules will lead to Someone declaring an infraction of them rules if one doesn't like the result! WTF would That be all about.

Then all h3ll will break lose. The result? Who would want to enter? This isn't Formula One, or Nascar!!!!!!! I for one won't want to participate under this kind of a cloud. I think it's great to see all the entries in a thread. Remember, Beginners are the Advanced builders of the future. We need to provide a place to nurture, not to discourage.

These are turning in to overhaul ideas, not suggestions to improve the system of our GB's.

The judging as it stands, to my untrained eye, is it my eye or ear.....
is the quality of the result submitted by the GB criteria. 
Beginner, Intermediate and Advanced, 1,2,3.
Doesn't matter the sub category in a split build.

The Members choice is the one best liked from among them all. That's the way it is at competitions!

How much more complicated do we want it........
We need to take a bl00dy vote, and get on with building!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 11, 2013)

meatloaf109 said:


> And that is precisely why I like your participation as a judge. A "not a big modeler" who came here because he likes the real planes, is exactly what is needed to look at models to see if they represent the real thing.
> Just sayin'!



I unfortunately do not have the time. Between work, moderating and spending time with family...


----------



## N4521U (Feb 12, 2013)

Hey, no need to feel your not doing enough. As volunteers, what the blazes can we expect of you, ALL of you. I for one am appreciative of every bit that you so kindly do for us in here. This is the most active forum anyone could ever expect, with some of the most energetic people involved.

Kudos to all of you, and the members for making this such a great place to loiter.

Bill

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Airframes (Feb 12, 2013)

I have to agree with Bill there, Chris; you, and the other 'Mods' and Admin and Horse do an excellent job, in your own spare time, and we are all extremely grateful.

So, some great feedback so far, but let me just clarify something.
During a series of fairly lengthy e-mail discussions, Rusty put forward a number of points and ideas regarding the Rules and standards of the GBs, as well as some ideas for subject matter, planning of future GBs and so on, most of which you have now all read and commented on.
As there were so many, and varied, points raised, I felt it beyond the responsibility, or any assumed 'authority' of one single person (i.e. me!) to comment or make decisions on such a variety of topics, and suggested that perhaps Rusty should put his suggestions to the members of this forum.
In this, he has my full support, as I could see, or identify, certain points and suggestions that some members may agree with, or at least have some constructive comment to add, concerning these issues.
I'm happy to see that Rusty's suggestions have been received in good spirit, and that, rather than be 'shot down in flames', explanations, preferences, and alternative suggestions have been offered by the members.
Having noticed myself, over the last year or so, that it does seem to be the same few members entering GBs, I tended to perhaps agree, at least to an extent, with some of Rusty's views, particularly those regarding the possibility of perceived 'intimidation', or a perception, by some, that all of the Modelling Sections were becoming some type of 'Old Boys Club'. However, having done a brief survey of the GBs, Modelling Section forums, and the forum in general, I have realised that, as is the norm in such an organisation, such forums are, by their very nature, somewhat transitory, with members coming and going, some being very active in all things, some in specific topics, some going away due to other commitments and returning at random intervals and so on. Within the literally thousands of members, only a few hundred are active, and out of that number, a relatively small percentage are active on a very regular basis. It is, therefore, inevitable, that in the Modelling Section, and the GBs in particular, this transcience will also be present, especially when one considers that an individual might be full of enthusiasm for a particular subject when first mooted (perhaps by that individual), but, when the time comes, other things have got in the way, or a fresh subject has caught the attention, and the initial enthusiasm has had to be 'placed on a shelf for later', as it were. I know it's happened to me often, is happening at present regarding certain subjects, and no doubt will continue to happen at odd times in the future.
It appears that the general opinion of the members is that they like, prefer (or both), things as they are, concerning the planning, running and judging of the GBs, and I am happy to go along with the majority, just as I would be happy to accept any changes promulgated by the majority.

So, now that this part has been covered, I must point out that Rusty also identified one or two other points regarding the GB Rules and organisation, that I feel _do _warrant attention and / or clarification, and indeed I'd already identified the same subjects myself - available time, things outside the forum, and so on, having prevented me from following up on these so far.
It is these subjects that I will be putting to the other judges over the next day or so (when I have a clearer head and more energy, after, hopefully, getting at least a few hours of pain-free, uninterrupted sleep!) , and hopefully they can be addressed and amended or corrected fairly quickly, and the results posted for all to see.
Please note that none of this is of a particularly serious nature, being more concerned with a few small details within the Rules and any guidelines posted, and should not in any way alter of affect the participation or enjoyment of the members in the current, or future GBs.
Thank you all, and particularly Rusty, for taking the time to respond to this thread.

Cheers again,

Terry of the sunken eyes, palid skin and haggard appearance!

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## meatloaf109 (Feb 12, 2013)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I unfortunately do not have the time. Between work, moderating and spending time with family...


I agree with Bill, Thanks for the time you put in, I know little of the duties of a Mod, but I imagine you read a lot!


----------



## N4521U (Feb 12, 2013)

Sanity reigns!


----------



## Vic Balshaw (Feb 12, 2013)

Once again Terry, many thanks for that informative narrative and for your time and effort.

Up to now I have just sat back and read the comments being voiced. First of all I would like to thank you for the support that has been given over my involvement and the publication of the new GB listing and I think that having a couple of early threads opened up on the next upcoming GB for clarification of its theme and members questions or comments is a good idea. Should it be decided to have this, in conjunction with a moderator, I would be more than happy to facilitate and monitor the threads.

It's a shame you were not around Rusty when the listing was compiled as I'm sure your input would have been most beneficial. Also just to clarify one or two points "the list", though seemingly very long, was compiled from all the member suggestions and the final tally was from the poll taken from members as to their preferences. All this information can be found under either "The New Generation Group Builds Listing" thread from page 12 entry #176 onward or "The New generation Group Builds 2013 onwards" thread which publishes the latest list.

Like many of you I have planned much of my stash around the future GB and as and when the market provides, I also purchase appropriate models to fit the other GBs that may well be a number of years down the track. The market is not always accommodating just when you want it, hence for many of us, the reason for a stash. May I also state at this point that on a couple of occasions in past GBs, I have attempted a diorama and as far as I know, for any of you guys out there who want to have a go at one, be it a battle scene, a crash or whatever, as far as I know, there is nothing in the guidelines (rules) stopping you .

For myself, I like the GBs, they provide a focal point, a target, a goal, something to be achieved, whatever...... But most of all they are a joy, somewhere where I can personally pitch my skills against a superior builder, where I can pick up hints to improve on my abilities and where I can provide help and guidance to other no matter what level their skill. In other words, it's a club or as we refer to it "A Family" where we have fun. It is where we provide information to others, be it in the detailing and showing of individual builds, giving praise or providing information in the form of pictures, building processes, ideas or thoughts, this is pitching in. As is often the case, a lot of information is passed behind the scenes through PMs, email and post where a lot of swapping of spares or sending of models or modelling aids to other members takes place.

I also feel the judging is crucial to the function of the GB and that it should be retained. It's all very well saying let's just do the "Member Choice" and rearranging it so we have a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place, but this would not achieve the function of the GB in its concept of a, all be it a loosely defined, competition. The "Members Choice" is what some perceive as the most attractive, pretty, impressive or stunning build, where as the judged model will be looked at closely for the models construction, alignment, decaling, paint work and detailing as well as the overall accuracy of the build. In other words, the judging of a build is a totally different ballgame to that of just selecting the members best build. However, the two do go together nicely and though as a judge, I'm not party to a placing in a build category, I do enjoy participating in the "Members Choice" and I look forward with excitement to the category results.

I must agree that there is a core of members who constantly contribute to the GBs, but there are also a considerable number of other members who consistently contribute to either the "Start to Finish Builds" thread and "You Completed Kits" thread, many of whom have often stated they would like to do a GB build but are unsure of being able to complete the build within the four month period, because of such things as work, family, social or other commitments. So though we only seemingly have a strong core of committed modellers with a trickle of other contestants popping in from time to time, it is my belief that the modelling section of this forum is very strongly supported through the other avenues open to members and visitors. Still beating the drum, one also only has to look at the number of posts to a build tread verses the number of viewings to realise that there is also a lot of curiosity out there from either other members or visitors.

Okay guys, I've had my say and I hope nobody has been offended, but if you have, please accept my most humble apologies and chastise me if you feel you must!!!.........................and to end, to all of you out there in this big wide world, be you a moderator, a judge, a diehard modeller, a vocal participant or a simple visitor. Thank you for being what you are, for the use of your free time, for your contribution, your knowledge, your humour and your friendship.

THANK YOU

VicB


----------



## Airframes (Feb 12, 2013)

I'm offended - you didn't mention the weather!
Cheers Vic, you've covered a lot of good points there.


----------



## Crimea_River (Feb 12, 2013)

Geez Vic, you're making me cry. 



N4521U said:


> Sanity reigns!



Oh no! Where did we go wrong? That certainly wasn't the intent!!!!


----------



## Rustybugs (Feb 12, 2013)

I told Terry I didn't want to this and everything that has been said I told him would be said, almost verbatim, but he bullied me into it. I still think that a 6 year lead on GB's is too much. But that is an opinion that's all. So relax. The main point that I was trying to get across to Terry and in my post was. Step out the box of this forum, now look at it as a newcomer looks at it. You folks can be intimidating. Everyone of you looks at it as your place, all com-fee and warm. No there will not be any changes, not on my shift! That's what a lot of newbies see. Most modelers are very flexible in their attitudes concerning the hobby, some are die hards. A young modeler, not a kid, but someone new may be afraid to even question anything if he or she sees no flexibility. Now there is nothing wrong with what is going on here. Never said it, never thought it. But a lot of you still come across as tolerant of new ideas as long as they don't upset your way of doing things.

If I was here back in May or June when the new list was drawn up, there wouldn't have been any changes from what it is now maybe when a build would be done in a different order. You folks here have it the way you want it and that's all there is to it. It not wrong, it's just the way you folks prefer it. But I did manage to put it out there, hopefully the new guys will read this thread and know where they stand. They will know what they can and can't suggest with any hope of change.

So I would appreciate the hate thoughts stopping


----------



## Crimea_River (Feb 12, 2013)

Really? "Hate mail"?


----------



## Rustybugs (Feb 12, 2013)

No sir, not a one. I was mistaken there are no mail in my mail box. no sir. changed the previous post to thoughts sorry.


----------



## Crimea_River (Feb 12, 2013)

Actually, it was the "hate" part that concerned me more..........


----------



## Vic Balshaw (Feb 12, 2013)

Not to mention "bullied"....................!!


----------



## N4521U (Feb 12, 2013)

Hate, Bullied?

Perceived mate, not directed.

Now you got me riled up........ now that it is in the open that you contacted a moderator regarding Changes to the way this forum operates it's GB's. I would ask why this subject could not have been brought up in an open thread? Instead of bothering a moderator and judge behind the backs of the general members with ideas for changes? I think this is something that has been gnawing at me. And why would a Member at large suggest Not bringing it out to the general members of the forum???? How many Others have you contacted outside of the forum? This is not the way this forum is conducted.

_You must be able to see into the future if you Knew it would play out like it did. If you did, you must have a motive to bring this up to play out in the first place. Personally I would Not ever suggest change of a forum after a few months membership. No less not even participating in a GB of which you find so unorganized and unfair!_ 

I don't hate you, I just don't understand you.

If a moderator finds this post out of line, feel free to delete it. I won't be offended.

***** Speaking as a Mod, this post is not offensive and actually hit the mark ! ~C


----------



## A4K (Feb 13, 2013)

Vic Balshaw said:


> The "Members Choice" is what some perceive as the most attractive, pretty, impressive or stunning build, where as the judged model will be looked at closely for the models construction, alignment, decaling, paint work and detailing as well as the overall accuracy of the build. In other words, the judging of a build is a totally different ballgame to that of just selecting the members best build.



Cheers Vic - if that is the objective of the judging, then the idea atleast is good. 

I still disagree that builds need to be judged to be interesting or fun though, has the opposite effect with me.


----------



## meatloaf109 (Feb 13, 2013)

"Hate thoughts"? 
Rusty, I re-read the entire thread and cannot find anything close to hate, or even sarcasm directed towards you. There was an effort to address and explain the points you brought up in a manner befitting adults having a conversation. When I first joined, a little over a year ago, I questioned a manner in which the forum was operated. I recieved replies that were straightforward and concise. I did not then assume that, just because my idea wasn't acted on, the members were afraid to "step outside the box", much less that there was a concert of hate directed towards me. I merely confined my efforts to areas that I get enjoyment out of, and avoid the sections that I do not. 
That you can construe unwillingness to restructure an entire section of this forum and the hours of work that have gone into it, just to suit you, into anything like "hate", is unwarranted, and quite frankly, insulting.
Phrases such as "let the flames begin", and "hate" anything, seem like you are trying to provoke issues where there are none.


----------



## T Bolt (Feb 13, 2013)

Could not have said it better myself Paul


----------



## rochie (Feb 13, 2013)

meatloaf109 said:


> "Hate thoughts"?
> Rusty, I re-read the entire thread and cannot find anything close to hate, or even sarcasm directed towards you. There was an effort to address and explain the points you brought up in a manner befitting adults having a conversation. When I first joined, a little over a year ago, I questioned a manner in which the forum was operated. I recieved replies that were straightforward and concise. I did not then assume that, just because my idea wasn't acted on, the members were afraid to "step outside the box", much less that there was a concert of hate directed towards me. I merely confined my efforts to areas that I get enjoyment out of, and avoid the sections that I do not.
> That you can construe unwillingness to restructure an entire section of this forum and the hours of work that have gone into it, just to suit you, into anything like "hate", is unwarranted, and quite frankly, insulting.
> Phrases such as "let the flames begin", and "hate" anything, seem like you are trying to provoke issues where there are none.



well put Paul


----------



## ccheese (Feb 13, 2013)

The posts put up by Bill and Paul were spot on. The only mention of "hate" and "flames" have come from the individual who started all this, and quite frankly I believe it's time for it all to end. I see no good coming from it, and if it continues, either myself or Chris (Der Adler) is going to step in as "a mod" and there will be hell to pay. Rustybugs has made his pitch for changes, which, by and large, have been rejected by the members. Vic and Terry seem to have seen some merit in something he suggested, and I'm sure it will be put forth to the members when they iron it out.

I must admit, I am somewhat offended, too.

That being said, in what I consider a civil and non-threatening manner, I would like the members who participate in the GB's, and who feel offended by the remarks and statement made, to just back off a bit...... chalking it up to perhaps "youth" and someone who feels he is an "outsider", when, if fact, he is not. Comments, when put forth in an respectable manner, are always welcome.

This does not have to result in an ending that none of us want.

Charles


----------



## Lucky13 (Feb 13, 2013)

I'm Just glad that nobody's so far pointed the finger at the character, who started this whole blasted thing  with GB's 

I'm _not_ taking part in any or some of the GB's for the judging as such (still part of the fun though), more for the fun of the whole thing, build your kits (or try to) in the comfort of your own home, instead for having to travel to some local club, this way, you're close to your pu...fridge and kettle etc., the most important 'judging' to me (and this is just me) is when the more 'in the know' members helps out with suggestion for corrections, try this or this, if you want to do this particular version, you need to do this or that.
Back in the day, them there dark ages, well before these GB's, I'd have built anything and everything out of the box, decals that is, all the big names, all those (...and I do most humbly apologise for using this expression here ) poster boys orwhatyoucallit, nowadays (I should have picked another username), I stick with my '13's', USS Yorktown CV-5 and CV-10, USS Coral Sea CV(A)-43, those with Swedish heritage like 'Ira' Bong, 'Bud' Anderson (Old Crow fame), 'Flip' Anderson (VP-33 Black Cat pilot) and more recently, which I've just started doing, look more and more into 'MIA', like the RAAF Catalina A24-13 (MIA since 24th of February '42, _miiiiight_ add her to this GB) which, like many, many other, deserves mentioning just as much as the 'big guns'...for the plain simple and in your face reason, the have still not come home...this sometimes, well, all the time gets to me, most of the time you get the reason, shot down (like my Cat above), mechanical problems, weather, presumed crashed, but then, more often than not, all the reason you get is 'unknown'...

Them there GB's fault, whose blasted idea was it anyway!?

Aye, I know, before someone else say something, I know that I suffer from a severe case of CUFGBS, Chronically Unable to Finish a Group Build Syndrome...

The Cat that I'm thinking of:

RAAF A-24 Catalina;

A24-13, C/N 307; 

Delivered by Qantas as VH-AFN 19/09/41. 
11 Sqn 16/11/41. 
MIA 24/02/42, Rabaul.

Crew; 
SQNLDR Ern Beaumont (Pilot), 
PLTOFF Michael Evans (2nd Pilot), 
SGT Ray Richardson, (2nd Wireless Op/Air Gunner),
CPL Ray Adams (1st Engineer), 
LAC Max Berghouse (2nd Engineer), 
LAC George Formby (1st Wireless Op), 
LAC Clive Grainger (Rigger),
AC1 Leonard Farrands (Armour).


----------



## Njaco (Feb 13, 2013)

Agree with Charles. Whats posted has been done, I would suggest any more personal comments be done by PM.

I would also like to clear up one thing: There appears to be the impression that this is a Modelling Forum. Its not.

Its a Historical forum that happens to have a section on Modelling.


----------



## meatloaf109 (Feb 13, 2013)

Jan, We all know it's your fault, just figured you have enough on your plate without heaping more on you and possibly pushing you over the edge.


----------



## Lucky13 (Feb 13, 2013)

Njaco said:


> I would also like to clear up one thing: There appears to be the impression that this is a Modelling Forum. Its not.
> 
> Its a Historical forum that happens to have a section on Modelling.



It's not a modelling forum!!??  Would explain the lack of 'birds' then! I'm off!!



meatloaf109 said:


> Jan, We all know it's your fault, just figured you have enough on your plate without heaping more on you and possibly pushing you over the edge.



Feck!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 13, 2013)

Rustybugs said:


> I told Terry I didn't want to this and everything that has been said I told him would be said, almost verbatim, but he bullied me into it. I still think that a 6 year lead on GB's is too much. But that is an opinion that's all. So relax. The main point that I was trying to get across to Terry and in my post was. Step out the box of this forum, now look at it as a newcomer looks at it. You folks can be intimidating. Everyone of you looks at it as your place, all com-fee and warm. No there will not be any changes, not on my shift! That's what a lot of newbies see. Most modelers are very flexible in their attitudes concerning the hobby, some are die hards. A young modeler, not a kid, but someone new may be afraid to even question anything if he or she sees no flexibility. Now there is nothing wrong with what is going on here. Never said it, never thought it. But a lot of you still come across as tolerant of new ideas as long as they don't upset your way of doing things.
> 
> If I was here back in May or June when the new list was drawn up, there wouldn't have been any changes from what it is now maybe when a build would be done in a different order. You folks here have it the way you want it and that's all there is to it. It not wrong, it's just the way you folks prefer it. But I did manage to put it out there, hopefully the new guys will read this thread and know where they stand. They will know what they can and can't suggest with any hope of change.
> 
> So I would appreciate the hate thoughts stopping



People are doing exactly what you wanted. They are discussing the ideas you brought forth. 

I see no hate directed at you.

Since you feel that way, please show me and the other mods where hate is being directed at you. Please quote these hateful words.


----------



## Crimea_River (Feb 13, 2013)

I'm moving on. This has gone on long enough.

Terry, if you still have some ideas you feel have merti for the judges to consider via e-mail, I'll gladly respond. Just let me know.


----------



## ccheese (Feb 13, 2013)

Crimea_River said:


> I'm moving on. This has gone on long enough.
> 
> Terry, if you still have some ideas you feel have merit for the judges to consider via e-mail, I'll gladly respond. Just let me know.



Count me in, too....

Charles


----------



## Airframes (Feb 14, 2013)

OK guys, there's been a case of 'Humour Failure' here - having 'spoken' with Rusty via e-mail, it seems the comments causing offence or irritation were meant in jest, but perhaps didn't come across, or were perceived like that by some. It can happen - so as Andy said, let's move on.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 14, 2013)

I agree lets move on.

In the future, please just tell people that it was meant in jest. No one here is an an *******.


----------



## ccheese (Feb 14, 2013)

I also agree to moving on, however, next time you talk to rustybugs inform him he really tic'd off quite a few people with his "humour". 

Charles


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 15, 2013)

Also trying to get people to quit the forum until a Mod resigns is not good business. 

Also insulting members of this forum and calling them Bigots is not a nice thing either and will not be tolerated.


----------



## Njaco (Feb 15, 2013)

the wolf in sheep's clothing. Humour my azz.


----------



## Airframes (Feb 16, 2013)

Now this I didn't know, until now, and after a PM from another member. Not good at all.


----------



## Njaco (Feb 16, 2013)

Its been handled.


----------



## Airframes (Feb 17, 2013)

I believe so. As far as I'm concerned, that particular episode is over. 
The points already identified as perhaps needing amendment, in the GB Rules and any guidelines, are now being examined by the judges, and any amendments or modifications to these will be published in due course, and a notice posted to this effect.


----------



## Wayne Little (Feb 17, 2013)




----------



## Njaco (Feb 17, 2013)

The worst part is that they are all very valid points to take into consideration. I am glad that is being done.


----------



## Crimea_River (Feb 17, 2013)

Worst part? There's nothing wrong with ideas being expressed and we are looking into them. It's the method of delivery of those ideas that needs to be respectful.


----------



## Njaco (Feb 17, 2013)

You are correct. I posted incorrectly - should have said the worst part of all the off-topic hub-bub.


----------



## parsifal (Mar 13, 2017)

arriving late as usual, but I wanted to say a few words at least. I'm new to modelling, but I'm a veteran member of the forum. ive gravitated to the modelling section, because this section has the least conflict of any part of the forum. I feel I'm with friends when I'm in here and producing something worthwhile. I enjoy the support that comes in an environment like this, and winning an odd accolade here and there is the least important aspect for me, but still nice to be recognised by your peers.

I don't mind the planned nature of the GBs, if I cant afford the time, or I don't fancy the subject, I just do something else for a while.....I really don't see much problem here at all to be honest.


----------

