Jump to content

BWScholten

IPMS/USA Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    124

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Posts posted by BWScholten

  3. More Resignations

    in News and Announcements

    Posted

    "Noel, the one hour early access is what I was trying to get at. Unfortunately, the norm here has been all have access from the start so to now put a limit on the first hour would be the restriction of their customer base that you so correctly said they'd resent. It is a Gordian knot for sure and we don't currently have our Alexander in position to solve this particular problem. "

    It would be interesting to see how much push back we'd get from Vendors if the first hour was dedicated to members.

    How many general admissions do we get in the first hour?  That is probably one statistic we can't get.

  7. More Resignations

    in News and Announcements

    Posted

    On 1/29/2024 at 4:25 PM, steev said:

    I was looking into railing to Wonderfest from here in Tidewater, one state away to avoid the 11 hr. drive and what I came up with was that you can't even get to Louisville by train. You can transfer to a bus and it's a 27 hour total ordeal. A plane is about 3.5 hr. and that includes a stop or two. LOL

    I,ve stopped flying altogether.  I'll bring one or two to Madison, and my son will bring some.  I'd be concerned with TSA breaking them during an "inspection".

    Two days to Madison. 2-3 to Virginia.

    • Like 1

  10. More Resignations

    in News and Announcements

    Posted

    17 hours ago, WasatchModeler said:

    So telford gets about 10,000 over the weekend not over the week.  I was looking at more of memberships as a per capita. Not the show.  But it would be interesting to overlay the uk over Madison and see how many attendees attend.  

    Still an apples to oranges comparison.

    Distances is one of the main drivers for our attendance. Texas end to end is a longer drive than someone going to Telford has.

    Madison will be a hard two-day drive for me, longer for Virginia.

    We started saving for the trip; but I am in a position where I can shift money, a position not everyone is in.

    • Like 1

  11. More Resignations

    in News and Announcements

    Posted

    17 hours ago, ghodges said:

    Hmmmm... much to ponder and a lot of good thoughts above.... and one not so good thought....

    FACE BOOK AND SOCIAL MEDIA: establish 1 or 2 new PRIVATE pages; 1 for the Eboard/NCC/RCs and anyone else interested in the "nuts and bolts" of running IPMSUSA and have admins approve every member in order to join. Create a second private page for model posting where admins also must approve joiners but for MODEL posts/CONTEST updates only. ADVERTISE ONLY THE 2nd ONE! Keep them separate as far as content goes. Let the current FB page die if it cannot be deleted through FB administrators (tough to do in my experience without codes). That's the only way I can see to establish some "control" over what's posted in the future, and it doesn't involve deleting anyone already on the old page. Also, MOST IPMS members don't/won't go there anyway, so it's not like the admins will have to check all 4000 names to be sure they're members, AND they can delete/suspend people who prove to be uncivil.

    I read the 2030 Vision for IPMS proposal with very mixed feelings. Overall, I have to say it is NOT a vision I can support. While it does have some good basic ideas at heart I can support like softening IPMSUSA's approach to competition and focusing more on the ART of model building; I CANNOT get behind the idea of any kind of Ethics Committees nor even its proposal to give every member "periodic training on the Society’s brand, ethics, and vision". Most of the proposal seems to be the solidification of control and power through an expanded Eboard with Socialistic overtones. It would create MORE work and more duties at an executive level and require more volunteers in a hobby society already strapped for qualified leadership. 

    I'm not even sure I can support its stated idea to expand IPMS to include ALL modeling types. In fact, I have to disagree with it. We are not train modelers, nor RC control modelers, nor paper modelers, nor wooden ship builders. We are PLASTIC modelers! I can understand redefining and expanding the definition of "plastic" and the various mediums used in building models, but it's all in order to build PLASTIC models, and not other types. I'm sure that's one of the reasons our membership is less than its potential among ALL model hobbyists... BUT in my mind our target members are PLASTIC model builders who thus far have shunned us, and not the entire world of model building enthusiasts. In trying to appeal to ALL, we'll bite off more than we need to and create more work and problems in the long run.

    There are things that can be looked at and perhaps done to improve the "value for your buck" in joining IPMSUSA without reinventing the wheel, expanding the Eboard, or trying to control our membership anymore than in the past. IPMSUSA can rehab their image and interests without radical change, although CHANGE is needed to give people a reason to look at us in a new light. Keep it simple, set concrete goals that are easy to comprehend, try to use the decades of experience already within our membership, and do it all in a series of small, manageable steps instead of trying to jump ahead all at one time and become something we were never intended to be.

    Gil :cool:
     

    I suggested a members only FB page during the e-board meeting in San Marcos.  The e-board shot it down (it's in minutes from a quarterly meeting).

    I'm active in two local clubs, I'll volunteer to Judge at Nats, but that's about it.  I'm going to start signing up for seminars and tours, something I haven't done in the past.

  13. OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT DAVID LOCKHART

    in News and Announcements

    Posted

    2 hours ago, ghodges said:

    I was merely defending him on the grounds that as Journal Editor he has an obligation to the membership to put things in his column, and the right to do so, including his own personal opinion. Also keep in mind that IF he happens to want to agree and support the current Eboard he has both the right and ability to do so in the Journal, even if others have a contrary opinion to his op-ed.

    I too missed the Nats this year and thus have written my opinions based solely on what I've read here and on the IPMSUSA FB page. My comments and positions are easy to find and I'll stand by them based on the information I've been aware of as of today. I do not support the Eboard, their actions over the last year, nor the direction they've decided to hijack and take IPMS towards. That's why I've been vocal here on those issues. The fact Chris has a larger "bully platform" is something he's earned through decades of service to IPMS, so I will not begrudge him that advantage.

    While it's always nasty to have dirty laundry aired publicly, that doesn't mean it should be shied away from. If Chris did indeed print only one side of the story, got some facts wrong, or only gave part of the picture then he should indeed be called out for that. As I mentioned above, there is no "letters to the Editor" anymore (and I agree with that policy) so it seems that THIS DF and the IPMS FB page is where members will have to fight back if they feel the need to do so.

    Does his column serve a purpose other than to start a pot that was simmering boiling again? We'll see. In my own opinion, I'd like to see these issues confronted and solved NOW instead of letting them fester for 6 months only to have them ramp up again just before the Nats. THAT has more potential for a larger disaster than getting things in the open and tackled now when we have the time to do so.

    I fully agree that whether we get the problems solved or not, NONE of this will make IPMS look attractive to non-members. But it IS an opportunity, IF we were to handle this in an open and fair way, to show others that IPMSUSA is an organization with integrity that is worth supporting and being a member of. We can only hope we can do so.

     

    Gil :cool:

    As editor, he has the right to do what he did.

    As Members, we have the right to criticize him.

    • Like 1

  17. This sums it up perfectly

    in About the IPMS/USA National Convention

    Posted

    19 hours ago, CaptainAhab said:

    I think it matters if the complaints came from IPMS Members or not, 13,000 people belong to the IPMS/USA Facebook page, yet we have less then 5000 members, so 7000+ non-members are complaining? And IPMS should change the society for them? With no indication they will join and help with the changes?

    If there were plenty of emails and phone calls from members maybe the e-board could practice some of the transparency the NCC was accused of not having and prove how many, is it hundreds? Thousands? Less then a hundred? I doubt it was that many, compared to the membership, if it was then prove it.

    I belong to a handful of Military Groups on FakeBook.  Some groups have a public page and a second members only page, while the other groups are members only.

    That could eliminate the non-member screams.

    IPMS-USA also needs to add moderators to the page.  My understanding is we have a single admin/moderator for the page.  That's too much for a single person (FWIW, I am a mod on two FB pages).

    Going back to the current debate.  I am going to Madison, and will volunteer to Judge.  I doubt I will volunteer for other areas as I want to enjoy the convention, and volunteering every day can be a killjoy.

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...