Jump to content

Nick Filippone

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Nick Filippone

  1. Rusty is right. The membership should be polled about every five years to assess any change in opinion. The details about how to implement such a change are moot unless or until we know we are mandated by membership consensus to do it. I have my ideas as many have had and have expressed on this Forum. But we need not bother ourselves with them until we know we have to. Nick
  2. I am looking at this from a different angle. Now this is just a hypothetical situation I am sugggesting for the purpose of making a point: We have held a survey. Of c. 4000 members, 3500 members cast a ballot. Of that 3500, 3200 indicate that they want open judging at the Nationals - a clear and overwhelming majority of the membership. What would we do? Well, since this a democratic organization- you know, “By modelers, for modelers,” we would, as such an organization, be obligated to give the membership what it wants. We would have to do a lot of work, a lot of experimentation, trial and error, ( you know, like we did when we started out 50+ years ago at the first National) to give the dues paying members what they say they want! Now, personally, I do not think that will happen. And in some ways, I hope it does not because of all the work that would need to be done. But there is an important principle at issue here: if IPMS is a democratic organization, then the membership informs the leadership what kind of contest it wants, not the other way around. Power to the people, baby. Nick Filippone, Senior National Judge, President, IPMS Northeast New York
  3. I am on topic. The topic is Public Relations - how IPMS is perceived by members and non-members. What could possibly be more important in cultivating a favorable perception of this organization than our members demonstrating sensitivity about such an important episode in history as the Holocaust? Nick
  4. I would be more careful in the use of the “Yellow Star” allusion! The subject matter of this discussion hardly rises to the level of The Holocaust and to suggest such is grossly disrespectful of its victims. It is simply not appropriate! Nick Filippone
  5. If you google “Jim Baumann” it can be easily found. It is really remarkable! Nick
  6. Vegas! Great! I can see where Moe Green got shot.
  7. Omaha did not present a bid at the Bid Presentation in Phoenix. But they had prepared a flier that representatives from Omaha were distributing in the Vendor Room. I think it was to drum up support for the idea of returning in 2021 to Omaha. I assume that that is the bid referred to in the recent E-Board minutes. Certainly, if any other potential hosts were planning a bid for 2021 or 2022, they had better done some of the ground work by now. The National is only six weeks away! And, while it would only be two years between their last National and the bid, it would be four years between the two actual Omaha shows- not unreasonable!
  8. Given the excellent Nationals that Omaha has put in the past at a great venue, and, if they are the only bidder, I would say it is is fair guess that we will be going back to Omaha. And that is just fine with me. Nick Filippone
  9. If anyone believes the British are not very competitive by nature, a review of Tudor history alone should disabuse them of that misconception! Whose Empire was it that the sun never set on? Regards, An incurable Anglophile💂‍♂️
  10. Another point ( I can’t let go of this thing!) all the kits either with trailers or on launchers are pretty good representation of the real thing. Dick’s model’s trailer does not look anything like that in any photo of the real Snark. I think the trailer does not belong with the missile. To solve the mystery, we need to identify the source of the trailer.
  11. Dick’s model has a “USAF SNARK” on the nose. If you look at pictures of the box art of all these kits, only the Mongram kit has that marking. The arrangement of the white stripes is almost the same as the Monogram kit. If Dick’s model is small scale (c. 1/135 scale) could it be some combination of the Monogram kit and a different trailer. It is worth noting that the missile is pointed backwards on the trailer. The Lindbergh and Monogram kits have it pointed forward. Is it fake? Cobbled together?
  12. John Burn’s “ Plastic Aircraft Kits of the 20th Century” while exhaustive, covers only manned aircraft kits. Specifically, the listings for Northrop do not mention any Snark kits. So that is a dead end. Looking at Dick’s model, and comparing it to images of the Lindbergh kit, it is apparent that there are differences in the markings. So both Snark and trailer are something entirely different. Dick, did you calculate the exact scale?
  13. I googled “ plastic Snark kits.” I found two more. ( They may both be from the same mold. They are both the same scale- 1/135.) Comet and Kleerware are the brands. Kleerware apparently had a reputation for re-issuing others companies kits. But the kits are very simple- at least based on the pictures of them. They consist of just the missile and a very simple launch cradle. The plot thickens. Dick, is this a photo of a kit in your possession or a photo of someone else’s? Could we see additional images? Could it be a scratch built trailer? Perhaps a trailer modified from another kit?
  14. It’s not the Lindbergh kit. The trailer is not the same. Most obviously, it doesn’t have enough wheels. For the same reasons, it is not the Monogram kit. The Revell kit is not mounted on wheeled trailer. (This can easily be checked by googling these kits if you do not have them in your stash.) It would appear to be a kit unknown to us all. I will check my plastic kit directory tonight. I love these mystery detective adventures in our hobby. I offer a first prize/ no prize to the first person to solve this. Nick Filippone
  15. I will end my participation in this pointless and exasperatingly familiar conversation where it started. They insult IPMS and we say: ‘Thank you sir, may I please have another?’ I am heartily sick and tired of our members apologizing for the largest, oldest, most successful plastic modeling organization in America-an organization that, I might add, has always welcomed figure modelers. Nor need we waste anymore time explaining our judging system that has been wrought over years of trial, error, and careful and exhaustive assessment and reassessment- a system that is, additionally, plainly posted for anyone to see, read and understand. This enduring obsession with our need to be different, to change, to beg people who can’t stand IPMS to be our buddies to “grow the organization” does us no credit. We owe them no explanations. Consider this: sadly we lose several faithful, life- long members annually. Yet, our membership numbers have been steady and even slowly growing. This is because we have a quality product for sale to anyone intelligent and perceptive enough to recognize it’s value. IPMS is an organization whose honour and reputation is valuable enough to stand up for- if we have the R.O.’s to do so.
  16. And we do not “done judge” (sic) on accuracy in IPMS competitions. We judge on craftsmanship. No wonder you couldn’t change his mind. Good grief!
  17. My comments were no more silly or ignorant than your friend’s. They were intentionally, purposefully and equivalently rude! When he and his ilk are ready to encounter IPMS members with the respect that Mr. Kimbrell feels we are obligated to afford them, then perhaps my comments will be less silly and ignorant- although probably no less sarcastic!
  18. Ditto what Rusty and Ron said. Besides, if this guy is some great figure modeler, what the heck does he know or care about rivets! He would probably be the first to squawk if he saw some military figure with too many stripes on his shoulder insignia or some soft porn figure that is being passed off as an “artistic nude” with too few pimples on her derrière!”
  19. And yet again, when some low performing modeler berates one of our members with the painfully monotonous myth of IPMS rivet counters, our knee- jerk reaction is to rend our garments, beat our breasts, and fall on our xacto knives in shame. People will believe what they want to believe whether it is written on a bathroom stall wall or on the idiotnet. Nothing we can say or do will change that! Nor should we change. All IPMS has done over the past 50 years is give credibility to a hobby that was not taken seriously, help plastic modelers increase their skills and enhance their enjoyment of the hobby, demand that kit manufacturers take this hobby as seriously as we do and organize competitions that are as scrupulously fair as human integrity will permit! We have NOTHING to be ashamed of or apologize for. My personal experience of the people such as those whose uninformed comments you had to endure is that they are poor modelers whose work will not stand up under the most cursory of assessments. What we should be ignoring is the whining of these cry-babies whose skill level is so low that they are simply not competitive when faced with the standards of excellence that IPMS encourages and rewards in it’s members. Let’s all show a little more spine! Why should we seek an association with such narrow, hateful little minds? Regards, Nick Filippone, Senior National Judge
  20. Best in Class Awards and Best in Show would continue to be chosen as they are now. Team leaders would nominate candidates (obviously Gold Medal recipients ) from the categories they have judged and a vote would be taken. The Judge’s Best in Show would be chosen by vote from these winners. Nick Filippone, Senior National Judge
  21. I must say, Ron, that I am always impressed with (and not a little jealous of) the results you achieve with these venerable kits. Well done. Nick
  22. No, indeed, they were not intended to be arrogant. They were intended to serve as a reminder that if we will have competition, we will have winners and losers- regardless of what methods and criteria we use to evaluate quality in craftsmanship and regardless of what system is used to dispense awards. All may join IPMS and enter our contests. That has never been an the issue. Young people do not enter our contests because young people do not build models. But if you think they are not competitive, watch them salivate over a video game contest! But if anyone is arrogant, I fear it is all of us in America (and the Mother Country?) We assume that because we do not see modelers in our countries in the same numbers as 50 years ago, the hobby is retracting. Somebody is buying all this stuff. In China, Japan, South Korea? Modelers in the now resurgent Central and Eastern Europe? More power to them! They may be supporting the industry that entertains us all, even as we no longer can by ourselves. Nick
  23. Comments that are critical of ‘finding the flaws’ and ‘ignoring the bigger picture of what the model actually represents’ ( I don’t even know what that means) frustrate me as an experienced and scrupulously objective judge. As long as we as judges are required to identify three winners and X numbers of losers in a finite amount time, we will need a system that is efficient while also is able to be fairly applied to all entries. While theoretically you could compile all the things done correctly on each entry, that would be too time consuming. So efficient knowledgeable judges will start be looking for where most builders make common mistakes. These are craftsmanship competitions NOT an assessment of how much enthusiasm the modeler has for his or her subject. Likewise, the judges are not trying to answer the question: ‘What is the artist trying to say?’ In modeling contests, as in war, the winner is often the one who makes the fewest mistakes. There is a very simple way for the builder to get past this first cut of common faults. Read the Competition Handbook and do what it tells you to do. Despite this, the common errors appear with predictable frequency- admittedly more at the lower level shows than at the Nationals- but they are always there. Most categories will thankfully contain the gross misalignments, the wide-open seams, sloppy paint work, the silvered decals. Once these are out of the running, the really hard work in a 1,2,3 system begins. Now comes the necessary nit-picking. Now some of the virtues of a G,S,B system become apparent. But under either system, there are going to be disappointed entrants. If you do not want to be one of them, you have two choices: build better models or keep your models on the display-only table. Nick Filippone, Senior National Judge
  24. Gil, Do you know that they are making brewed de-caf now? LOL! Chill, man. It’s only a hobby. Peace out! Nick
  • Create New...