Nick Filippone

According to Scalemates, it is not. It was a new tool in 2011. The Hasegawa kit dates back to c. 1992. Nick Filippone

This organization, with the exception of Marie, is entirely run by volunteers. And, in fact, an embarrassingly few dedicated volunteers. The word “should” in describing how they carry out their work should be used with greater discretion and consideration. Anyone with access to our website either already knows about the show or, with a little effort and thinking, can find out all their is to know. Every year, a small handful of members arrange the National for the rest of us who, comparatively speaking, just sit on our duffs and enjoy it. It is always a great time. The least we can do is not hassle them with chippy little grousing and whining. Yet, each year, it is repeated with exasperating regularity. Enough already. It is like a broken record of a sour tune - painful to the ears of appreciative members. Nick Filippone

Every citizen must take moral responsibility for what he does in the name of his or her country! “I was only obeying orders” didn’t get Eichmann an acquittal. Governments-I.e. the rich- have been seducing it’s citizens to fight their wars for them by appealing to their patriotism since Homo sapiens started walking upright. War will never be over until the individual applies the courage he or she has shown in uniform and use it to defy his or her own leaders when they drum up some reason to kill. “War is over if you want it” ( John Lennon) A fantasy? It Is unless we begin to problem solve as nations and individuals better than we do now. Wrestling with our consciences over building the implements of old wars pales into insignificance when compared to the moral quandary of how to avoid new ones. “Who wants to die? “ (Marvin Gaye) Nick

How many enemy aircraft are you allowed to shoot down before you become a serial killer? The Red Baron was just better at killing people than most assigned to carry out the same task. The painful reality is, artists or not, most of us are fascinated with these instruments of destruction and death. They are emblematic of humanity at it’s most base. I suppose we deal with it by just not thinking about it too much, but modelers who build cars and dinosaurs and Gundams can do so with a much clearer conscience. Nick Filippone

Rusty, Actually, it was no effort at all. I rather enjoy writing. But I have been accused of literary loquaciousness. It helps to keep one’s writing skills sharp. Nick

Jim and Pete, That was mostly an exercise in creative writing with a little satire. Jim’s summary was much more appropriate and, dare I say it, Judicial? Nick

I agree with Jim. And to take it a step further: if we achieved the consistency in judging ( which we must do under a GSB system, for it to be internally logical from local to National), then once a model has won Gold at a local show, the entrant would not even have to bring the entry to the National or even attend. He or she could simply submit proof of his local Gold to the NCC, and the award could be mailed. The postage expense to the National Organization would be offset by not requiring rental of all that display space. Eventually, we could, in keeping up with the times, evolve into a virtual National. Everybody stays home in front of their computer. You would cruise the virtual vendor room- which would be limitless, and purchase items on line for home delivery. Seminars could stream from all over the world, with computer provided translations. A hologram of your entry could be transmitted to the virtual display room- but since you have already received IPMS Gold at the East Schnipetze, New York local show, even this effort would be unnecessary. And no more anxiety provoking transport of models. Holograms of Aris Pappas and Bill Devins could deliver their annual awards presentation which could be paused anytime to go to the bathroom or fast forwarded through the categories in which the viewer has no entries- even though you know you have already won. When one’s name is announced a computer link to your 3D printer would produce your award, which could be produced in the size, colour and material of the recipient’s choice. Simultaneously, a picture of the winner could be sent via his or her computer camera to be displayed for all to see. ( So please keep your clothes on!) No bar would be needed. One could get safely bombed in one’s living room without the need to drive or even walk anywhere. The attendee could prepare any meal he or she wants, or get something delivered- no more complaining about IPMS National Convention rubber chicken banquets. No question about it- eventually no one will need to subject one’s self to the stress of building the best model one can and then put his or her honour and reputation as a craftsman on the line by facing down strong competition and proudly displaying that model - win or lose. The future indeed looks bright. Nick

Losing is actually a good thing- it teaches humility and builds character. It is an incentive to improve one’s skills. Nick

There is nothing wrong with being a loser, because, having been one plenty of times, I know it feels soooooo good when you win! There is also one other benefit of competition. It is a powerful incentive to actually finish something. Nick

Are we overlooking an important possible explanation for the lack of interest in changing to GSB at the National Contest? Maybe most members do not want such a change. Perhaps that explains the lack of enthusiasm for such a change. If we do the survey again in two years, and the result is the same, nothing will happen perhaps because nothing should happen. Nick

But if GSB is what members truly want, why were those caring 10% so evenly split? When I proposed this survey, I did it primarily out of curiosity and a scientist’s desire to know the facts. Unfortunately, some involved in writing the wording for the survey already had a desired result in mind. There was even speculation that, as a result of the survey, in 2020 we would be using GSB at the Nationals! Their disappointment may be understandable, but their lack of objectivity reflects poorly on their scientific open-mindedness. Whenever this discussion has taken place, those favouring GSB have frequently taken the position that GSB is what most members truly want. But this may not be so. The GSB supporters are more vocal, perhaps, but so what? The GSB supporters are convinced that GSB is better, but how many members agree? Hence, the survey-that says either 90% of members do not care OR of the 10% that do care, they are evenly split between GSB or 123. This was hardly a ‘to the barricades’ demand for action or change. Of course, the conversation can go on. But for the time being, the people have spoken and have made it clear there is not sufficient support for change at the National Contest. Nick

Brian, Excellent point. I did not want to get into the lack of randomness, but you are quite correct. But then, this was a poll, so it is not like comparing randomly, say, the efficacy of a new antibiotic in a double blind study. When I proposed this survey last year about this time, I had suggested it be done as part of the model registration process at the Nationals for three years because I thought that it was National Contest attendees whose opinion should matter most. By doing it for three years it might be a good cross- section of contestants. But that has bias also. Of course, the debate will continue. The NCC and the E-Board have now heard the same thing we have all heard: There is still no compelling polling data to suggest that such a significant majority of the membership is so dissatisfied with our current judging system at the Nationals that it should be changed to GSB. Nick

If I am interpreting this correctly, what this survey shows is that there is 95% certainty that this result is no better than a coin toss. Or there is a 95% chance that possibly only 45% of members prefer GSB. Or that possibly 55% of members actually prefer 123. Or that 55% prefer GSB, and so on. If one reflects on the attitude of the NCC and E-Board about 10 years ago, when they refused to sanction any IPMS event at any level ( and thereby withheld insurance coverage) that was GSB, I would say that their attitude has changed significantly. But given the outstanding support that the membership gives to the National Contest in its present format, I think it would be reckless of the leadership to risk screwing it up based on this data. It might be said that while less than 500 people bothered to even render an opinion, every year 700 or more vote with their feet (and pocket books) and say we enjoy this show and contest in it’s current form. Nick

This tally has all the drawbacks I and others anticipated.(1) Of a 4000+ member organization, only a little over 10% even bothered to vote. (2) Of those who did vote, there was no statistical difference in the result. Given these two facts, this hardly represents a clear and unequivocal mandate for change. Were I on the National Contest Committee, I would be saying something like: ‘Yes, this is interesting, but it is not a clear demand by the majority of the membership for G,S,B at the National Contest.’ Given the logistical and cultural upheaval such a change would represent, I do not see this feeble response and ‘flip of the coin’ result as making it either desirable or necessary. After all, one way of looking at this result is that, what: 6 or 7% of the membership want this transformation and that 94 or 95 % either do not or do not care enough to even vote on the matter? The NCC and the E-Board would competently be exercising their fiduciary responsibilities as the leaders of this organization to say that the voice of members has been heard and that, practically speaking, it is “full of sound and fury, (but) signifying nothing.” Nick Filippone, Senior National Judge

If a MiG really did carry such markings- as in a captured example- it would not be hypothetical. It is only hypothetical if the aircraft ( or any aircraft) was never in reality marked as the modeler chose to mark it. Nick