Bert

I've attended more than 20 Nationals. The last 2 I missed. I'm surprised to hear there is no more Bill and Aris show. It was always the highlight of the award ceremony. What happened? Why are they no longer involved?

Very clever Chris. I never would have thought using the real thing.

From the terrifying Hell Pig diorama to this sweet mother with cubs vignette. Quite a difference. What will you use for the wickers? Stretched sprue or some type of wire. Good looking model.

Well, my tounge in cheek remark was not meant to disparage you in any way or the job you're doing. IMHO I don't care for the new Journal logo, but hey that's just me. My take is on the way the Society handled the IPMS/USA FB page controversy concerning the so-called cheating event at the San Marcos convention and decisions put into place resulting in many longtime head judgers resigning their position and......... so on and on. I'll leave it there ...... really no point in rehashing all that. This fiasco is what prompted my remark of older members being put out to pasture.

It seems to me the older members are being put out to pasture.

I've noticed the IPMS/USA FB page lacks the drama that caused so much divisive behavior.

IMHO, and FWIW, it missed the mark and was hardly accomplished.

Respectively, neither do I.

I'm sorry, but that's just freaking weird.

But, what does the acronym mean?

Somehow, I seemed to have missed it. What is "IUJ"?

Another attempt at weeding out the boomers. lol

And which one would that be?

FWIW, Jim Clark requested that his account be wiped out. Quote "I requested Eric ,the webmaster, to wipe my account .He replied back that it may wipe all my posts"

From Jay Andry. Jay Andry is awaiting his approval to post on the IPMS Forums. The following is the letter he sent to the e-board in response to their decision of October 1,1023 regarding the category 608 issue. To the Executive Board of IPMS/USA: I have waited some time to reflect after reading the E-Board’s letter to the membership dated October 1, 2023. Rather than leave this without having commented, I thought it best to let you know that I disagree strenuously with your decision. It is unfortunate that the E-Board has reversed itself without further interviewing or questioning the now-censured parties or the NCC. It seems to me that those people directly involved – Manny, Kal, and I – would have been questioned by the E-Board’s appointed investigator, John Figueroa. Previously, both Kal and I called John to answer any questions he might have had, but he declined to ask us any. Additionally, Manny was never contacted by John. However, when I did speak to John, he said that he had read the letters of all the parties and taken statements from the other individuals. He went on to say that he was confident that I would be cleared of any wrongdoing. I realize that he was not the final arbiter in the decision-making process; however, I feel his comments are telling. Furthermore, if the E-Board’s vote was unanimous, he must have changed his mind. As I hope you read in my written response, I was the assistant head judge at this year’s national contest in the Space and Sci-fi Category. As such, I did not participate in the actual judging. Instead, I assisted with assignment of judging teams, check judging, oversight of the judging process, and clerical work. Of all these responsibilities, overseeing the judging process is where I spent most of my time. While overseeing the process, I recognized a change in the table set-up. This year, the tables were on risers, elevating them approximately eighteen inches. The risers had the effect of making the tables less stable than they normally had been. Several times during the contest, I noticed that there were individuals who were bumping the tables. In fact, numerous Gundam models fell over due to judges bumping into the tables. As to the proximity of the tables, Category 608 was abutting the Gundam category, 607. One individual, while judging Category 608, had to be told three times about bumping or leaning on the table. I told him to stop twice then asked another, more-senior judge on his team to tell him the third time. I later learned that the judge who was bumping and leaning on the table was Chris McClain and that the more-senior judge was Dana Smith. Both Dana Smith and Richard Robison, another member of the judging team in question, have confirmed that from a distance of two tables and one aisle, I advised Chris McClain about bumping the tables. At this distance, I was never near the team during the judging of 608 except when I was check-judging Category 607. I never discussed the models on the table with any of the judges of Category 608 nor did I overhear or oversee their comments. I would also note that I had similar comments about bumping the tables to an entirely different judging team on the opposite side of the contest room. I cautioned those judges from a similar distance. That judging team ultimately damaged two models despite my cautions. None of the other Space and Sci-fi teams were bumping the tables. When speaking to the 608 team as well as Chris McClain, I was doing my job as assistant head category judge. I did it from a distance to protect models and not interfere with the actual judging. As Dana Smith said in his letter of August 14th, to the NCC “Jay did come by several times while we were judging, and Kaliste also, but I see that as their job to supervise. He did not interfere while judging his model. No issue there for me. “ On the night of the contest, I was made aware that there was an issue with Category 608. I was not initially told what the issue was. Regarding the issue, Manny informed me that 608 had to be rejudged. As soon as he said this, I turned on my heel and made my way to the other side of category 600, some 25-30 feet away. I wanted to make sure that I was not in the vicinity of discussion of a category in which my model was entered to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. As I see this, my moving away from the category is in keeping with the goal that the E-Board now plans to adopt. I did not return to the area until after the judging sheet had been turned in. Manny Gutsche and I are friendly; however, we are not what I would call friends. We have spoken for ten or fifteen minutes a few times each year for the past decade or so. In the past year, however, our communication has increased. Last year, Manny told me that he was suggesting my name to take over as head judge in 2024. He told me it was because I have the most national judging experience of anyone in the Space and Sci-fi judging cadre. Additionally, I had acted as head category judge several years ago when Manny could not attend the contest. He said that he thought I was both decisive and would stand up for my decisions - skills he said I would need as a head category judge. That is the extent of our contact prior to this incident. I have known Manny to be a fair and reasonable head category judge with great insight who rigorously enforces the check judge system. Prior to this event, judging teams have been overruled a handful of times, and at least twice, Mark Persichetti was brought in by Manny to settle a disputed judging issue. In those cases, Mark assigned new judges to resolve the issue. All these situations were resolved without further incident. My understanding from other category head judges is that they have had similar incidents - all resolved without uproar. As to Kaliste Saloom: he and I are good friends. We went to law school together and, some ten years later, became reacquainted when we saw each other at an IPMS Nationals. Kal has been a senior national judge for approximately five years so he has over 25 years of National judging experience. He has also judged at scores of local contests, all without issue or complaint.Further Kal has acted as the lawyer for IPMS/USA numerous times advising them on contractual issues. Recently he was asked by Rob Booth to assist him with issues regarding the Maddisaon WI Nationals next year. Rob has also sought Kal out numerous times to judge at the Alamo Squadron’s annual local contests. I know Kal to be a fair and honest person. Without hesitation, he has told me flatly when he has found fault with my models. Though we are friends, we have never gone out of our way to either judge or avoid judging each other’s models. Sadly, this issue and the E-Board’s last decision has cast a shadow on his character. Kaliste Saloom is a man of integrity. Within the past few weeks, I have re-read Chris McClain’s indictment. In it, Chris referred to the scope of work aspect of judging in quotes, as though that term was singular to this incident. As we all know, Mark’s pre-judging slide show explains that scope of work is a major tenant of the judging criteria. Additionally, I listened to Chris discuss this matter on a podcast, Sprue Cutters Union. During his comments on the podcast, Chris said that he was angered about being told to stop bumping and leaning on the tables. Considering the incident in which a model tank being held overhead, I think preventing damage to models would be important to the E-Board. I also heard him say on the podcast that he did not attend the mandatory judges meeting prior to the beginning of judging at the national contest this year. I’m not sure how many of those meetings he has attended, but apparently not enough of them for him to know the correct course of action the night of the contest. He should have presented his concerns to Contest Head Judge Mark Persichetti. Mark emphasizes the reporting procedure every year in the judges meeting, including this year. He also emphasizes that waiting until after the contest is too late to change the outcome. Chris also said on that podcast that he did not know who Mark was. Mark, in his leadership capacity, identifies himself as Head Contest Judge and head of the National Contest Committee every year during the judges meeting. Chris should have gone to Mark with his concerns. He was standing less than fifteen feet away from Mark before judging had concluded. Additionally, Chris could have approached Mark after he was in the photo of the Space and Sci-fi judging team taken the night of the contest. The group was less than two table lengths from Mark and the scoring table. These opportunities presented themselves long before the judging was over. Instead, Chris said he was off taking pictures of models. Another important rule Mark emphasizes at the judges meeting is that members of the same club are not to judge together in the same team. The Category 608 judging team included another member of Hill Country Modelers. If either Chris or his club mate had attended the meeting, they should have known not to judge together on the same team. There is no way Manny or I could have known they were in the same club. It is my understanding that Rob Booth, Chris McClain, and a few others are all in the Hill Country Modelers from San Antonio. I am now aware that they are in the same club because they have posted photos of themselves on Facebook showing their weekly or monthly build sessions at someone’s home. It appears to be an intimate group. If we are now to be held to the standard of avoiding the appearance of impropriety, E-Board Secretary Rob Booth should have recused himself on all aspects of this issue. I do not believe that recusal happened, but I am willing to stand corrected. By taking away my ability to judge for a year, you have tried and convicted me without giving me the opportunity to defend myself. Despite this, I value my membership in IPMS, my judging experience, and my position as a senior national judge. Please accept this letter as my formal request to be reinstated to the judging corps in 2025 or sooner, if this body feels it appropriate. I am making this request even though there has never been a procedure for requesting to be a judge at Nationals other than showing up. I make this request out of an abundance of caution. Let me conclude by stating that I do not believe that I did anything wrong. If a category head judge or assistant cannot caution judges about potentially damaging models in categories in which they have entered models, you will eliminate all the head and assistant head judges. Judges build and judge subjects which they know. That is what makes them good head, lead, or line judges. I was not hovering over the category as Chris accuses. I was protecting the models. As Dana Smith said in his letter to the NCC, Chris takes the facts and comes to all the wrong conclusions. Jay Andry Senior National Judge IPMS#27033 -- Jay Andry 504-495-8814 5645 Bellaire Dr. New Orleans LA 70124

I noticed one post directing all to a podcast has been removed from the FB page. IMHO, it should never have been posted to begin with as it put IPMS/USA judging in very bad place. -Bert

The unanswered queation.....why? Because of complaints on the internet? It makes no sense to me. But what do I know? Plenty things now make no sense to me.

I'm sorry to say this but, IMHO I believe the overall purpose is to implement a GSB award system and relegate 1st, 2nd and 3rd place awards obsolete. This has been an ongoing topic for quite some time. I believe the now defunct NCC would have advocated against this which is the reason they've been dismantled. It's true that mostly some of the same model builders are constantly winning awards every year. It's perceived unfair that a consistent group receive the top 3 awards. Today it's all about "feelings". Everyone should get an award so no one's "feelings" are hurt. Build a better model if you want to win an award. The 1st time I placed higher than a consistent winner, I was overjoyed. Due to health-related issues I most likely will not be able to attend next year's Nats. The first I attended was in 1997, competing in them all, and have not missed many since. If what I believe is going to happen, I'm glad I was able to enjoy all of those I've attended. If this would become the new judging system and if I were able to attend another, I would no longer enter the contest or continue being a judge. It is sad to witness this conflict in a society I've enjoyed participating in for a so long. -Bert Reynaud

Was it just stupidity with the eboard's decision making, or do they have a specific agenda? Does anyone really know?

Unfortunately, this will all affect the upcoming 2024 Nats negatively and could all have been avoided. As you say and I agree, The eboard could have tried to change the "touching" rules, or taken further action against the Sci-fi judges THROUGH the NCC, instead of handing down edicts. They have purposely decided to bypass the NCC making them impotent, at first unconstitutionally, and now with the voting in; constitutionally from here on. It makes me wonder why they chose this action.

I've read the post by the member of his accusations of bias, conspiracy et. all. in the mentioned category. It's obvious, well at least to me, his feelings were hurt which resulted in his decisions. Read his post about how he "felt". -Bert Reynaud

I'm not sure where to place my model. What's the difference between a diroma and vignette?

Thanks for the info guys. FWIW, having a B-25 and P-38 in the same category competing against each other is weird. But that's just me.😄

Will there be a separate parking fee at the Convention Center? What are the differences between Medium Prop Aircraft and Large Prop Aircraft? I'll be entering a B-25 and am not sure where it belongs. Thanks -Bert

Exemptions have already been be granted: This will pave the way for others to be requested. "Decals: Decals other than those included with the kit may be used. They may be used to replace old/damaged/missing kit decals. They may also be used to provide alternative insignia and markings to those originally provided with a kit. More problems will follow as contestants will ask if this is allowed why not that?