Rusty White

David, FWIW, this survey has nothing to do whatsoever with IPMS/USA switching to GSB. It is merely an informational survey that the E-board asked several members put together to provide an accurate and up-to-date accounting of the memberships' judging preference. It's been a good five years since the last GSB/123 survey was done and the E-board felt it was time for another. IMHO, it should be done every five years since the membership constantly changes.

Michael, IMHO, the E-board and I have gone above and beyond to make this survey as well advertised, successful, and accurate as possible. Ron Bell contacted me to tell me that the survey had been posted on-line (SURVEY) with the election ballot. A pleasant surprise I was not expecting. The E-board guaranteed the survey would be published (a mail-in card inserted) in the April/May election issue of The Journal. The E-board gave the survey a full page in the April/May issue of The Journal explaining both systems of judging you will see at the URL I supplied above. Mike Moore (convention chairman) has allowed me a table at the nationals registration area in Chattanooga for members to fill out the survey. Mike also has allowed the survey to be printed at the bottom of every registration form at the IPMS/USA nationals, so if you enter, you can make your preference known. Eric Atalia has allowed the survey to be pinned at the top of the forum contents on the News and Announcements page, to give the membership a constant awareness of it's presence there. I have posted the survey announcements on the IPMS/USA Facebook page as well. I and the E-board have done everything possible to put the word out and make the survey known. The only thing we have not been able to control is "word-of-mouth" which I am hoping you and the membership will handle. SPREAD THE WORD! Every IPMS/USA member has an opinion on GSB and 123. Here's your chance to make that known. So to be honest, I don't how much more could be done to promote the survey.

Michael, Everything you will want to know about the survey is here: SURVEY

You will receive a printed magazine.

Their dealings with you so far should raise some red flags. Having said that, he sounds pretty honest in that he won't accept pre-orders or guarantee availability (which he probably doesn't know), but does communicate well. The ship modeling community is pretty small. I would suggest checking on Hyperscale ship forum, Modelwarships.com and steelnavy.org and post your question there. My advice until you hear from someone who has dealt with them....BUYER BEWARE. This is why I HATE dealing with outside vendors. Your business literally depends on them. I personally do EVERYTHING start to finish on my products from drawing the instruction sheets to molding and casting, to design and print the box art. I only depend on TWO outside vendors (mold rubber and photo etch) and they are VERY reliable when they give me a delivery date. Just my opinion.

I am also speaking of actual circumstances. It happened twice when I was category ship head judge for IPMS/USA where I broke two ties. Point being, the answer to the problem is simple.

You guys are making way too much of this hypothetical scenario. IF there is a tie in judging, the head category judge (or Chief Judge) breaks the tie. The point being, there are a dozen ways to solve a hypothetical judging "tie".

Dave, I do recall the last survey, but I had nothing to do with that one. If you are speaking of the G-S-B proposal pitched before the NCC some time back; I was not involved with that team. You may be confusing my participation with the MAP that I spent over a year designing.

A few observations here. There is nothing new or old about the SURVEY. It has nothing to do with changing the judging system we currently have. The E-board decided to conduct another SURVEY to keep a hand on the "pulse" of the current membership. IMHO, a SURVEY of this sort should be done every five years as the membership is an ever changing soup of preferences and people. With this SURVEY, the E-board will have current and pretty accurate info of the current membership's preference of G-S-B and 1-2-3. This SURVEY will be the most extensive ever taken of the membership since it will be printed at the bottom of EVERY registration form at the Nats this year, a SURVEY card will be included in the April/May issue of the Journal, it will be mentioned in a future President's Message in The Journal, survey cards will be made available for voting at the nats, and the discussion on this forum should result in a pretty well saturated SURVEY of the membership. This is important to alert the E-board IF a change is ever warranted, because it will begin there. Once a written proposal has been accepted by the E-board, I can foresee pretty much how this should go. Any change to our existing judging system will take at least three years of regional contest trials before being readied for the nationals. The three yearly trials will allow a "breaking in" period to get many of the unforeseen problems ironed out and familiarize the membership with the new format. EVERY aspect of those regionals should be extensively scrutinized by IPMS/USA from registration, record keeping, database design, to how photos appear in The Journal, to awards ceremony slide shows, noting specifically what worked and what didn't. Those notes must be shared with the E-board and NCC so they can suggest any changes needed (or not) and passed on to the next regional. Pick one regional (a different region) every year to run the new judging system while the rest of IPMS/USA would be business as usual, and maintain the current system. With three years of real life experience, after action notes on file, database construction after making improvements to the new format, the new judging format would be ready for its' national debut. Last, but certainly not least, IPMS/USA should offer a minimum financial guaranteed profit for the next three years to encourage chapters to bid on future nationals. The break-in period would take three to five years, but in the end it would all be worth it. Just my opinion.

I have considered many of the potential problems going to GSB would create for IPMS/USA as has many others out there, but that's for another thread. IMHO, there are answers to all the problems, but some will be learned the same way we did when 1-2-3 was used the first few times. That is, fix unforeseen problems as they arise. As I said, no one has contacted me; probably because I'm too difficult to work with. 😉

I guess I am not making myself clear. There are NO proposals I am aware of by anyone. I have made it no secret that I would support the switch to GSB, but I have NO plans on the table for a push in that direction. The E-board (Ron Bell) only requested an up-to-date survey because it has been at least five years since the last one. The "1-2-3" folks you speak of are the NCC members that support 1-2-3.

Dave, I encourage everyone to read the first paragraph carefully. " THIS IS A SURVEY TO SUPPLY CURRENT INFORMATION TO THE E-BOARD, NOT A PROPOSAL. " Any questions about the GSB method will need to be answered by the folks (whoever they may be) who want to propose the system.

The survey is up and free to all for discussion.

Interesting subject. Not something you see every day.

I think any constructive remarks left by the judge(s) are meant to apply to future builds.