Jump to content

Dakimbrell

IPMS/USA Member
  • Content Count

    569
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    22

Posts posted by Dakimbrell

  1. 9 hours ago, noelsmith said:

    We will have to agree to differ about whether modelling from kits is art per we or not.

    LOL. Noel,  I don't see how you can disagree that model building is an art form. The terms art and craft are synonyms. The basic process a modeler uses to create a finished model is no different than a photographer, painted, or sculptor in in choosing a subject and bringing it to completion.

    Not every picture or painting are great masterpieces. And not all artists achieve lasting fame. And not every model is world class. That some prefer Picasso and Pollock over Rembrandt and Wyeth is no different than those who prefer 1/35th armor models over 1/25th cars, or figures over ships, dioramas over prize cow models. Model building has a wide range and subjects and the techniques vary just like a painter or sculptor. Any tourist with a mobile phone can take the same picture Ansel Adams did. What makes Rembrandt's Night Watch real ART and a diorama of surrendering German soldiers NOT art?

    Dak

    IMG_5184.JPG

  2. Noel,

    I can see you did not look up the definitions as I asked. The to key terms ART and CRAFT overlap each other and show as synonyms. While we may start with a kit, the final result is a product of the individual builder. Even when doing the exact same subject and kit, very rarely do the models come out precisely the same, hence showing the creativity of the individual.
    I say we should promote our conventions as exhibitions of model art. Many would come to look out of curiosity, if nothing else. When we say model contest, to many this evokes the image of a child's activity and dismiss it as something cool for children. (What's in a name....well no restaurant serves spaghetti with marinara fungus sauce; it is always called marinara mushrooms sauce.)

    When I took my father to the 2104 national at Hampton, and he was stunned at the level and quality if the work. (his own words) He had seen my stuff for years, but never been to any of the events and never grasp the range and level of the wok that can be achieved with a model kit.

    As I said, not all art is great art, nor are all models great work. Many seem to perceive ART as GREAT ART; that to be art, it somehow must be in the range of those like Rembrandt. Remember, Churchill was a painter, even though he did dabble in politics.

    Dak

  3. Noel and others,

    This is going to anger a few people, so please go and look up the definitions of the key words before telling me I am full of it and insane.

    If we truly want to see the society grow as well as model building in general, then we need to start thinking of what we do as art. For some reason, many act like it is something to do alone and in secret; as if they were mildly ashamed of what they do. Perhaps they are afraid to admit they indulge in a so called "childish" hobby.  Many will agree it is a craft, but run from the idea that a well done model kit or diorama in an art. Many still seem to think our organization is more for children than adults and thus we can only do things appropriate for children to see. And many constantly re-enforce this attitude.

    Much of liking art is based on personal tastes, the same as model work. But the fact remains, very few people.... even a trained artist....can do what we do. There is no reason a well done model of an F-15 cannot be viewed and enjoyed as well as a still life of a fruit bowl. Or the nude figure of a pretty girl any different than a painting of the same girl. All representational art is created much through the same methods we use to build a model and the end result is always a product of the mind's eye.

    Nor is every model great art, any more than every painting is great art. For some reason which I can't understand, some feel like all ART is always GREAT ART. Not every mural is the Sistine Chapel; some just decorate the wall of the local restaurant. Not every artist is Rembrandt or Frazetta and not every modeler is Shepard Paine or Jim Wechsler.

    By stating we see our work as art, we move it into an area where we would be taken more seriously. Instead of promoting it as a model contest, promote it as an exhibition of model art. It would become something people aspire to see and do, even if it offends them on occasion.

    Dak

  4. Having been studying the various methods of awarding models, I note that the GSB system (as used by AMPS) basically says your model is only this good. Where as the 1-2-3 system (as used by IPMS) says your model is this good out of a specific group, on a specific day. In theory, the GSB system would render the same award regardless of when or where the contest occurred. The 1-2-3 system would allow the model to win better another time. Both systems have their merit.

    However, if we change to a GSB, we will have to accept that it will create a change in how we view winning models and how we choose them. Presently, we choose the "winners" based against the others in a category. The GSB system will be telling the builder what judges think of a model rather than its standing within a group. I suspect this will truly upset some people considering some think we are to nit picky as it is now.

    With the large numbers of models at a National, any system which relies on points will be too cumbersome, so the awards will have to be based on the opinion of the judges. Even if a point system can be made to work, I have my doubts we can easily agree how to award the points.

    Still, I like the idea of more awards (far too many good models go unrewarded), but people will say we are setting standards and those which do not place are not up to those standards.

    Dak

  5. 7 hours ago, noelsmith said:

    IPMS has to be all things to all modellers unlike specialist modelling groups

    This is the one point so many forget when they start complaining about IPMS. It is much easier for specialty groups like AMPS to tailor their rules and judging to conform to a much smaller field. Yet, as has been noted, they still rely on the same basic criteria as IPMS to judge the work and a large percentage of them will flock to an IPMS national. Some even belong to both groups so they can enter the contests. That would suggest contests are important to a large number of model builders.

    In more recent years, IPMS has begun to take other groups into consideration and tailor the rules to better fit these specialties. If the car guys, for example, don't want to participate, there is no reason to create categories and rules more suited to the type of model. So, the idea that IPMS doesn't care about a particular subject is re-enforced by lack of participation which feeds the opinions of our detractors. Sort of a self fulfilling prophecy thing.

    Dak

    • Like 1
  6. 2 hours ago, Ralph Nardone said:

    The criteria AMPS uses is identical to the criteria IPMS uses to evaluate models--it is all based on craftsmanship and how the model builder dealt with flaws.  No more, no less.

    Basically, this is true. However, AMPS makes a judgement about the model, not its standing among a group, as IPMS does. Amps tells a person "your model is only this good"; IPMS tells them "your model is not as good as that one, today." In theory, a model judged by AMPS method would get the same award at any AMPS contest. With IPMS the model might not place one year and get a 1st the next. The sole entrant in an AMPS category might only get a bronze...maybe not that, while the sole entrant in an IPMS category would get a 1st place. That is why AMPS is far more picky than IPMS. Both systems have their merit and I simply say I like the IPMS system better and feel it is far less critical of an individual's work.

    FYI, I enter several models and some I have no expectation winning an award, thus they are by default a model for display.

    13 hours ago, rcboater said:

    their perception is that the Society is mostly about contests.

    And what do you base your opinion. Mine comes from witnessing first hand the people who show up at contests. Many of those who won't join IPMS are the types who have been ostracized from clubs because of bad behavior. They got angry or weren't treated as they thought they should.  We have had many come to meetings who seem to expect some special treatment. Literally, if you didn't gush over their model, they felt insulted. Other were asked to leave for disrupting the meetings, or even bad hygiene. I welcome anyone that wants to come and build models, but there is a certain level of civilized behavior expected. When I lived in Virginia, one member of the local club would call up members and call them racial slurs, when he was drunk; not the sort you wanted around, IMO.

    And I ask, what is you proof the Society is "all about contests"? I hear this a lot, but see NOTHING to support it beyond my earlier statement. And that is my point: it is in reality a myth that has been spread by people as and excuse to dislike IPMS, because it sounds much better to say that rather than admit you were asked to leave because you constantly stank of beer and cigarettes.

    As noted ALL the other major groups have or offer as many contests as IPMS. The difference is they tend to be subject specific. If you build cars, you would rather compete and be judged by people most familiar with car models. All these groups have criteria particular to their genre. That is one of the reasons AMPS got started; IPMS had become heavily aero-centric, in the 80s, and it often seemed like they were trying to drive out the armor guys. They enacted some really stupid rules which effected mostly just armor. Fortunately, enough of us stuck around to see that change.

    Dak

  7. In response to Ralph's question about my AMPS remark.

    The AMPS judging I have participated in consisted of teams that looked over the individual model in fine detail. Each aspect was awarded points based on the individual team members opinion. The team was required to all look at the same aspect or area at the same time. I found it to be a much more regimented approach and personally, did not enjoy it. It was a much more intense examination of the work than I have experienced in IPMS methods. While there was no set standard, it is much more like judging against a standard than in an IPMS contest.

    Of course, the objective is different. In AMPS the model is judged on its own where as in most IPMS events, the model is judged against other models in the category. A model that only gets a bronze at AMPS might get a 2nd or possibly a 1st at IPMS, depending on the competition.

    Dak

  8. There are plenty of people that believe they are building fantastic models, but really aren't and when they do not win, they become bitter making excuses that have nothing to do with the quality of their work. The pictures I posted are a perfect example, because up close, you could see seam lines on the figures.

    I believe the idea that many say they aren't interested in competition is a fanciful claim. I see many who make the claim, but they show up at the contests and happily accept awards. I believe most who make the claim are simply doing it to sound humble. (Locally, we just had the head of the IPMS haters group.....who openly state they don't like contests...show up at our local show and win awards.)

    Nor do I accept the premise that IPMS is all about contests. That to is a myth created by those who wish to denigrate the organization. ALL the other modeling groups have contest on a national level. Two years ago, the figure guys held a world wide level contest shortly before our National and many of our members participated in it. One of the first things AMPS ever did was to have a National level contest. All these events get called conventions, but there is usually contest which attracts a big turn out and many attending them also attend IPMS events.

    Reading these posts, I feel you make IPMS sound like we are trying to seduce people to contests like a guy with a windowless van and candy. Or perhaps we turn people into pariahs if they will not or can't attend a National.

    In forty-two years, I have never seen anything which pushes people to attend enter contests. Certainly, the convention/contests get promoted because a good bit of effort and money has been expended to put them together. And yes, we tell people to attend, if they can, because the event is a learning experience on many different levels.

    It is important how people perceive us because just as some of you have bought into the falsehood, non-members are even more likely to accept the myth without examining it closely.

    5 hours ago, rcboater said:

    As John pointed out, people in our area (New England)  have a variety of clubs they can join.

    Generally speaking, these other clubs are specialty groups, cars, only for example. That's fine if you have a narrow interest range, but if you are the renaissance type and dabble in many areas, IPMS is the better place. That is what I have come to enjoy the most about IPMS; the variety. That variety makes me a better model builder because I learn techniques in one area and carry them over to another area. In the past year alone, I have provided information with a number of single subject builders who never thought how something from XYZ could be used in ABC.

    So, If you think IPMS emphasizes contests too much, what do you suggest? Should we completely eliminate the contests on all levels? How would you promote IPMS? What do you think would happen if we quit having contests and other groups continued having them?

    Dak

     

  9. Model building is an art and nothing emphasizes this than the anger people exhibit over being told their creation is poor or not good enough. There have always been those who resent not winning and they are never going away. However, the myth that IPMS is all about contests and excessively nitpicky really got started in the 90s by Bob Letterman of VLS. At that time, the VLS products were getting a bad reputation for bad detail, fit, accuracy, and generally being a poor product, which they were.

    In the monthly VLS flyer, Letterman ranted on numerous occasions about how their products were sound, but IPMSers were getting to picky and demanding; IPMS simply didn't get how grand the VLS products were. This is when VLS created Mastercon, what has now become Eaglequest. This contest was a superb place for those who want to build grand, but with not worrying about reality or even close scrutiny of their model. See the pictures (FYI, 1/35th scale) as an example.

    If IPMS is guilty of anything, it is trying to be fair. (Now, if you want picky, look at AMPS judging) That is the biggest reason models get looked at so tightly. There is always good work there and some are so close, it is extremely difficult to decide which is the best. This means, from time to time, the judges will get something wrong.

    John is correct that new more specialized groups have effected the membership. Additionally, the internet has spawned greater communication and splinter groups. Some find it is more fun to hang with only those of similar interests. It is also true people develop new or different interests as they mature. I had dropped out of IPMS back in the 80s when the aircraft lobby was seemed to be trying to make the IPMS a strictly airplane club. I came back because I have many interests and found AMPS too restrictive in subject.

    It is true many just build for whatever pleasure they get and have no interest in contests. Some don't see any use in being a member. Those are not the problem. What is the problem is the continued repetition of the picky myth and the myth we are only about contests. And they are myths. Yet, we...IPMS.... don't seem to be making any concrete effort to oppose them and that will hurt us in the future.

    Dak

    IMG_1316.JPG

    IMG_1317.JPG

  10. I strongly disagree. I have found 99% of those who call IPMS to picky and ad all about contests to be people that mediocre at best and must find a way to justify not winning. They don't win because they have visible seams, glue and miss aligned parts. They then get angry because others do a better job. Jealously, pure and simple. I have seen them do this for fifty years and I find it sadly amusing to hear them make complaints like " I can't afford the good kits", or "look how much work I put into this model, the crooked parts shouldn't matter." (These are literally two statements made to me.)

    Many do not join IPMS simply because they are cheap and lazy. They do like to win, but are not willing to do even basic work, nor are they willing to learn and improve.

    IPMS is not perfect, and I for one have seen some really stupid rules over the years. But given some of the stuff I have seen win and been FORCED to give awards to, I know we are not picky.

    Dak

    • Like 1
  11. 14 hours ago, noelsmith said:

    Thanks for the geography lesson Dak.

    Having driven in the US, Canada and all over Europe at different times, driving Mid West in sparsely populated Oklahoma is a different proposition to driving on our poor road  congested isle. If you get to the UK, we have some marvellous museums, galleries, castles and stately homes to visit. You may get a bit frustrated with driving to them however!

    LOL You should try Africa and Pakistan for bad roads and traffic.

  12. How is being competitive in model building any different than soccer, golf, tennis or horse racing? The only difference is modeling building tends to be a personally creative and people tend to feel personally hurt or offended when others don't reward their work.

    Human beings are by nature competitive. Competition breeds innovation. There is no doubt the desire to win has improved the art of model building and help drive manufactures to make better models. Is all competition good, certainly not. Some take it too seriously and that requires more and new rules every year.

    Everything has certain inherent standards which some ignore or refuse to acknowledge. For example, a guy I know steadfastly refuses to address seams. He either leaves them open or filled with globs of glue. Otherwise he does basically good work. Yet, he doesn't understand why IPMS puts so much importance on filling seams. I have explained it to him, but he doesn't think it should matter.

    Dak

  13. 28 minutes ago, Rusty White said:

    too much or too little weathering shouldn't be a consideration when judging.  The realism of the technique is what should be considered.   If the modeler chooses a factory finish or rust dripping to the ground, what matters is how well (or not) it was done and how realistic (or not) the weathering looks.

    How realistic a technique is done is a question of accuracy. Which is what I am saying, the two often go hand in hand. We may not judge how many rivets are accurate, or the shade of paint, but a big glue glob along the wing root is both poor craftmanship AND (generally) not accurate. However some glue globs in some places might be. Fogging around the edges of some canopies might also be accurate.

    My point is the builder needs to let the judges know if this is done deliberately. Encouraging more people to fill out the comments box is something which could pay us back with happier entrants and better informed judges.

    Dak

  14. Back on topic, I have been doing a little local research and found those who grinch the most about IPMS being too picky, etc, also don't make much effort to fill out the comments/note section on an entry form. One guy said he didn't understand what the box was for? When people do weird things, they need to note and explain them.

    We talk about only judging craftsmanship and not accuracy, but these things often over lap. We don't like seams and globs of glue because the are not accurate. I recently had some AMPS guys say the weathering was overdone on a model, yet all the weathering was based on specific photos which I should have included with the entry sheet. Or is heavy weathering poor craftsmanship?

    Dak

  15. 18 hours ago, ghodges said:

    "There'll be a resentment to being "ranked" by your building ability within IPMS"..

    Actually, any ranking would be by the individual entrant. It would be a personal choice same as in other groups. There may need to be a provision for those that need to be move to a high skill level, but like winning in the shallows. 

     

    18 hours ago, ghodges said:

    "Creating  a MASTER CLASS of builders will create resentment among the lesser members"

    Why? If the choice is a personal one, why would you resent others who whish to play in deeper water. The real problem will be those who think they are grand masters when they are actually dilettantes. Those will be the types the most resentful.

     

    18 hours ago, ghodges said:

    "The awards costs would be too much"....true, if you simply tripled the standard Nats awards.

    I have always said the OOB stuff is outmoded and should be eliminated. This would absorb some of the cost, if any. OOB would no longer be needed because there would be a place for those to enter without having to swim with the big fish.

     

    7 hours ago, Ralph Nardone said:

    We all know that people won't read the rules.  So, that's on US?  No, it should be put on THEM.  They don't "win" and want to grouse?  "Hey, read the rules.  If you had read the rules, you would know how we evaluate models."  Done often enough, the point will be made. 

    While I agree with the basic premise, I have found in application it doesn't hurt to remind people to do things. Like making sure the breaker is tagged out before working on a system. Some people always need that reminder. If putting up a sign at a show, or a paragraph in the newsletter, helps reduce the unhappiness of those that enter the contest, it is a cost effective why to go.

    Dak

  16. 6 hours ago, Ralph Nardone said:

    The problem, as it has always existed, is that people don't bother to read the rules--even when doing so could greatly improve their chances.

    Absolutely true, but there is a difference between putting something in the rules which a large number of people NEVER read and say posting a sign at the registration desk telling people to note out of the ordinary stuff, or the judges may consider it a mistake. This needs to be a deliberate public campaign within IPMS, not just a note in the rules.That is my point.

    6 hours ago, Ralph Nardone said:

    Dual national insignia, King Tigers in North Africa--those are all accuracy issues, not craftsmanship issues (modeling aspects).

    This all depends on your point of view. I have always viewed such things as part of craftmanship because we....IPMS.... are predominately historical in our subject matter. Even the Sci-Fi types will have fits if you mix Star Trek and Star Wars. If you are going to allow anything anywhere, then why consider "craftmanship" at all. Go ahead, let the builder do crude, hand painted markings....maybe the ground crew was in a hurry and didn't have time to do it properly; maybe the stencils were blown up in an air raid. Maybe some other pilots painted a finger print on the canopy as a joke and the builder is just duplicating that effect. What if an extraneous decal got place in an odd spot.....like a RAF tail flash slipping to the horizontal stabilizer? Is that something to give the benefit of the doubt? I have a picture of a real drop tank with the FWD arrow pointing to the rear. If I saw this on a model, as a judge, I would like to know if this was deliberate or not. A good friend of mine recently put some fuel tanks on his Mig-21 backwards. He did a smash up job and they looked very nice. Do we just ignore things like that?

    Many things are to strange to be believed, but nothing is too strange to have happened. It is not just quality of the application of parts and markings, but getting them in the right place going the right direction, which is good craftmanship.

     

     

    4 hours ago, crimsyn1919 said:

    Rather, I think it is more important to include details of the build on the entry form.

    Sure, I want to know what was scratch or modified, but I have found many seem to believe giving a rivet by bolt account of the construction is helpful, which I don't find the least bit helpful. If someone is doing a Type 21 Zero in Defense of the Luftwaffe markings, I'd like to know the origin of the markings. Particularly, if it is up against a perfect Fw-190D in the same markings.
     

    4 hours ago, crimsyn1919 said:

    the issue of skill level that was raised, could be both addressed by going to GSB, but that's a whole other topic.

    It could be done within the current system; there is no reason to go to a GSB system to address skill level. 

    Dak

  17. I have participated in three types of judging methods in the past two weeks. In one, Oklahoma's SoonerCon, I was also a judge. One thing I noted as a judge was the reticence of many entrants to fill out any notes on their model, even when the model exhibits out of the ordinary features like duel national markings. This always puts the judges in a difficult position....if the model is well done, but grossly incorrect in a big way.....the judges must decide how that effects craftsmanship. If they ignore the faux pas, then many will think the judges are no-nothing idiots. If they figure it in as a demerit, then the builder says they were elitist and rivet counters. While I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt to some areas and subjects, certain outrages are too far out. Things like Tiger II tanks at El Alamein, A6M5 in Russian markings at Stalingrad. I have no problem with weird stuff, but there are categories for that.

    Encouraging contest entrants to let the judges know what they are looking at and what the builder was trying to do, would go a long way towards helping the judges make better decisions.

    Another thing I noted was that the non-IPMS groups often take into account skill level. When everyone starts talking about GSB vs 123, they don't seem to mention skill level. I am positive this effects some people. A newbie who enters for the first time and gets thrown in the deep end with the old hands can feel really worked over when they don't place. (Sometimes they win big, which is even worse.)

    So, perhaps rather than try to change our awards system, we should look at modifying it to take into account skill level. Novice, advanced, and master, for example. Less ridged judging for the newbies and tighter for the masters.

    Thoughts?

    Dak

  18. Lets make something clear, I was not apologetic in my conversation with my acquaintance. I told him we never did judge like he suggested and never had. His remark was based on what he was told by a head judge where he was judging. I have been continually telling lackwits who insist we are rivet counters that they are full of it enough to make their eyes brown.

    The big thing is different groups look at different points as to what is good craftmanship. This in turn makes some think other groups are too picky, or not picky enough. One thing that would help is stressing to contestants that they should NEVER assume the judges KNOW EVERYTHING about the subject being judged and note things like deliberate gaps, seams crooked markings, etc. I have lost count of the times I saw something that did not look correct and found nothing in the remarks box. A simple comment like....the marking on the left side is deliberately crooked....would help. Many do excellent work, but based on craftmanship, it looks bad. This in turn would make it easier for the judge to make better decisions.+

    But in the end, any award is based on the opinion of the judges and that is still only an opinion of a small group, a mere handful of people.

    Dak

  19. Nick,

    Why do you feel the need to just be rude? Do you just sit at the computer looking for some way to be mean nasty to people? No wonder people get down on IPMS. I posted here to discuss what is a problem I feel we need to address, yet you immediately start calling people names and insulting them. Your remark was silly and bigoted, because you automatically put this person into the lackwitted I hate IPMS group, and he is not. He was simply repeating a silly myth.

    The individual I was talking to is familiar with IPMS. He is also a top level figure painter. What I was trying to point out was that there is still adherents to the stupid rivet counter myth among top quality, experienced model artists. No, I don't give a negative clank about what the sour grapes wannabes. They do nothing but sit and whine rather than try to get better. But this man was not like that and has plenty of experience, probably as much as you.

    I agree we judge on craftmanship, but as I noted, what is good craftmanship depends a lot on what you consider the proper style. I have learned there are numerous styles and can judge models based on the style of the workmanship. Some cannot. To me, a un-weathered model is poorly done. I also feel the same about a model without a figure with it. Super clean models are boring to me and come across as amateurish, but some feel differently which is fine.

    Dak

  20. The guy I was talking with was not some sour grapes loser. In fact, one of his group was a was a judges award winner at an IPMS National a few years ago. This is why I see it as a PR problem that needs to be addressed. I engaged him and pointed out we done judge on accuracy and gave him my general view of the Chicago school of judging. I don't think I changed his mind, but he had something to think about when we were done.

    Part of the problem is style. Figure painters. car guys, track heads, etc, all see craftsmanship differently. I have been often criticized by aircraft guys for making my airplanes too dirty for their taste. But when I look at an F-15....for example.... with foot prints all over the upper services, I tend to think most airplane models are under weathered and thus poorly crafted. I also feel the majority of figures are over shaded. This doesn't mean they aren't pretty and well crafted, but just that they are done in a different style.

    Nick's last comment is exactly the kind of silly comment that puts many off, rather than engaging in dialogue which can find common ground. It also implies he has no understating of how the figure judging works.

    Dak

  21. 6 minutes ago, Nick Filippone said:

    And yet again, when some low performing modeler berates one of our members with the painfully monotonous myth of IPMS rivet counters

    Nick,

    You over step here. This particular model builder....a top level figure painter.....is DEFINITIVELY not a low performer. (I would post images of his stuff, if the stupid system allowed me to post more than 0.002mb.) Nor am I suggesting we apologize for anything. I simply think we need to address the misperceptions many seem to have about IPMS Judging instead of ignoring them. I blame a lot of this negativity on Bob Letterman of VLS , back in the nineties. VLS put out a lot of mediocre products and Letterman got very defensive and began making extremely negative statements about IPMS being too picky, etc.

    I spend some time explaining we don't count rivets, or hang up on detail points. I still think our system needs simplification and modification, but I like it infinitely better than point systems used by some groups. Unfortunately, some chapters use their own system disregarding the National system. Many people perceive these to BE the IPMS system having never seen a National convention.

    Dak, National Contest Judge 

     

  22. I was at a non IPMS style contact yesterday.....one I attend annually....and got into a discussion about judging methods. These guys are primarily figure painters and view models differently than most IPMS members.

    My acquaintance remarked they were admonished not to be like IPMS when judging; "don't count rivets!". I told him we don't do that and I never have, nor have ever been at a contest where I have seen judges apply such stringent measures. However, he and other still believe this silly myth. They are firmly convinced IPMS are insane for accuracy and will throw out a beautiful work for some trivial point.

    This is a public relation problem we need to address if we want to sustain or grow the membership. It is not something that can simply be ignored in this day and time with in the age of the world wide web. Like all those internet myths that keep making the rounds, it keeps building until it becomes an established truth in the mind of people who should no better.

    We ignore it at our peril.

    Dak

  23. 10 hours ago, Highlander said:

    Well, I guess this settles it.  I suppose one could discern these traits from the models they constructed.

    I am not sure what this statement has to do with the conversation. It is not about the quality of their work, but about why they hate IPMS. They are oblivious to their personality problems and how they effected others in the group. These "haters" tend to lash out at anyone that doesn't want to play their way or takes exception to their actions and they are incapable of grasping their social awkwardness.

    Dak

×
×
  • Create New...