Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Circuitrider

  1. Friends, let me jump in right here and remind us all of this very important rule regarding the use of these forums: Prohibited behavior: Trolling. Do not annoy or provoke other members or forum staff to "stir the pot" or encourage discord (see Wil Wheaton rule above). Do not "flame" or incite other members to perpetuate an argument. Personal attacks or name-calling are not permitted and will get you kicked from the forums quicker than any other action. Thus far this thread has been relatively civil with the exception of a couple of posts that skirt the line of violating the above listed rule. Keep it civil. Let's look at this thread as a way to share our ideas (peacefully and respectfully) with our fellow modelers, particularly those making decisions related to The Nats, in an effort to help them make the best choice possible. Thanks for your support.
  2. Mike, we continue to keep you and your family in our thoughts and prayers. Thank you for reaching out to us and allowing us the honor of helping you through a difficult time.
  3. Patrick, follow this link for that info: https://calendar.ipmsusa3.org/chapter-map
  4. I forwarded this to our office manager. Perhaps she can get things moving in the right direction.
  5. Thank you, Ralph. I'm grateful for your help.
  6. Thanks for understanding, Daniel. BTW, excellent work on that kit!
  7. Folks, this is the Aircraft Build section of the forum. In order to keep this thread about the excellent build that initiated this thread and not a history discussion that can become divisive, please confine your comments to the build, itself. History, opinion, discussion of Operation Paperclip is better suited for the Bullpen section of the forum. Please edit your posts accordingly. Thanks, David
  8. Welcome, Keith! Glad you've joined us!
  9. Welcome Julio! Glad to have you with us!
  10. Folks, a couple of comments have been deleted from this thread because their content was more socio-political and less modeling in nature. The comments would have been better suited for "The Bullpen". Follow the forum rules, and model-on.
  11. Welcome, Rick! Honored to have you join us!
  12. Welcome back! Glad to have you rejoin us!
  13. IPMS/USA PO Box 1411 Riverview, FL 33568-1411
  14. Gents, Sorry for the delay in responding. I've been down due to a relocation to a different state. Are these issues still occurring, or have they resolved?
  15. Honored to have you with us, Robert! Make yourself at home!
  16. Loving the opinions and the input! Keep it up!
  17. Rusty, would these folks (or the 1,2,3 folks) be willing to chime in to this discussion? I'm talking about the people you got to put these proposals together. I'd love to see each "side" extol the virtues of their preferred system and answer questions without trashing the other side, of course.
  18. Welcome aboard! Glad to have you with us!
  19. And on yet another note...without a doubt, the single most important and beneficial thing that I have done to better my overall skill as a modeler, increase my enjoyment of the hobby, and improve the quality of the models I produce is to apprentice as a judge under an experienced and accomplished modeler/judge, and then judge in my class (armor). In my opinion, the more you judge alongside competent, "non-b-hole-ish" judges, the more constructive and valuable your feedback is (when shared/sought), the better builder you develop into, and the less subjective and more objective your judging becomes.
  20. The 1-2-3 description is being edited by the group and the discussion will soon resume with the update. The thread will be locked until then. Thank you for your input thus far, and for your patience moving ahead.
  21. Thank you, Mr. Filippone! I did, in fact, sail through my civics classes with flying colors! So, I'm putting your post down as one vote against using my response as toilet paper. 🤣🤣🤣
  22. Just spit-balling for fun here…based on my limited experience, the “Modeler’s Guide”, and previous responses to this thread, this is what I came up with as a brief “definition” of our 1-2-3 System: Current Form of Judging IPMS/USA National Contests (1-2-3) Model entries are evaluated based only on the entries in the categories of that year’s contest. They are compared only to each other, and judged irrespective of any perceived personal expertise of the entrant as the entrant is anonymous. The best model in the category on any given day is just that: of the models entered that day, this one is better than that one. Judges are IPMS members who volunteer their time. They follow the guidelines in our Modeler's Guide To IPMS Contests. According to that mandate, judges look at the whole model and determine how well the modeler did in bringing the whole project to completion, focusing first and foremost on “the basics”. While there will be class-specific (aircraft, armor, etc.) nuances, the overarching “basics” that will govern each class are construction, painting, and decaling. Judges only dig deeper when the basics do not allow for a clear-cut ranking. Judges are grouped in odd numbered teams to prevent a tie, and to provide balance when a judge may have a preference/bias. Currently, any judge can leave comments on any entrant’s model-entry sheet. Because the 1-2-3 system uses no “national standard” to compare all models, nor does it use a numeric system to present an unknown number of awards per category, inherently it defines the maximum number of awards to be purchased and presented. **Portions (if not all 😀) of my post are drawn from The IPMS/USA Modeler’s Guide To IPMS Contests, and previous responses in this thread. This is in no way meant to inflame, "one-up", or provide commentary on any other post in this thread. It is simply my stream-of-consciousness regarding this subject. Feel free to laud it, rip it to shreds, or print it out and use it as toilet paper.
  23. Interesting exchange of ideas, for sure! Regarding the issue of how to order what would be an unknown number of awards in the Open/GSB style of judging, I have heard of organizations handling that conundrum, thusly: Design and order one set of awards (GSB medals for instance) for each category to function as publicity sets (pictures for press, publication photos, etc.) to be utilized the day of the contest. After the contest is completed and with the number of winners of each level and category known, order the known, well-defined number of awards and mail them to the recipients. Some “pros” for this method…no waste with unused awards; utilize smaller winner’s medals, or professionally printed paper awards instead of plaques to minimize postage costs; allow sponsoring club members to volunteer to mail awards for individual categories; allow winners to opt for pics of their models with the publicity medal only and forego receiving an actual award. Regarding “Open” versus “1-2-3” forms of judging: having competed, won, lost, and judged at IPMS events, I can tell you that I would appreciate the ability to give and receive a small bit of feedback and rationale regarding the judging of my work, and the work I evaluate as a judge. Also, the ability to judge in shifts as the work comes in to the contest is quite attractive, as well. Regardless, I’ll still compete and judge in IPMS events, irrespective of the manner of judging.
  • Create New...