This sums it up perfectly

[ghodges]

Ian (and all): As a well known and bonified enemy of the NCC for the last decade (despite my position as a senior Nats judge), I can unequivocally state that your view of the NCC is dead wrong.

As someone who has publicly railed against their past lack of transparency and resistance to change (here, on this forum) I can state that they STILL put IPMSUSA and the Nats Contest first, above their own personal interests. Their decades of contest experience, even if it does lead to their complacency, should NOT be discounted and ignored; which is exactly what this Eboard has decided to do. And it was a CHOICE to do so by the Eboard. They 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.

Most all of the criticism of them has come from people who have little to no experience or knowledge of how judging is done or even how to organize a show and contest. It's easy to say and support a "changing of the guard" and to throw the NCC into a waste basket of disgruntled judges when you haven't had the experience nor the opportunity to work with them, know them, and even personally butt heads with them. The ignorance in some of the statements above is staggering.

But.... it's water under the bridge. Whether they resigned or not the Eboard is forming a "new NCC". They're calling it a different name, but it's a committee to review, reform, and run the Nats contest. However, they don't specify what will be reviewed, nor what reforms will be made, nor who these people are who will do this. Will they have the same experience at running a contest with 2000-3000+ models that need judging? Will they be able to call on the same number of experienced judges going forward in order to get the job done? Will they be able to get all of the judges in Madison, the old ones who continue out of a sense of duty and any new ones who volunteer to support the changes made, all on the same page and trained to implement whatever they come up with, providing they can come up with the changes they want by then? The Eboard has thrown the baby out with the bath water, and we can only hope that the consequences are less dire than they seem at this time.

Most of the NCC may have quit, but it wasn't because they're "not getting their way" anymore. It's because they've been spit on by the current Eboard. It's because despite offering some compromises to the Eboard they've had that hand slapped away and been handed edicts instead. It's because they've essentially been told their experience and knowledge is no longer needed or wanted AND that their years of past service to IPMS (in some case DECADES of service) doesn't count for anything with this current Eboard. They're not getting mad and quitting because they're in a snit. They're washing their hands of a situation where they no longer have any say.

I've always said the NCC needed to be changed, if only to be more open to change itself. I've never been stupid enough to think they should be disbanded or overruled by a group who themselves will be out of power in 2 years. If you're glad to see them go, you're just displaying your ignorance.

 

Gil 

 

[Bert]

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. 

[patd]

"Most of the NCC may have quit, but it wasn't because they're "not getting their way" anymore. It's because they've been spit on by the current Eboard. It's because despite offering some compromises to the Eboard they've had that hand slapped away and been handed edicts instead. It's because they've essentially been told their experience and knowledge is no longer needed or wanted AND that their years of past service to IPMS (in some case DECADES of service) doesn't count for anything with this current Eboard. They're not getting mad and quitting because they're in a snit. They're washing their hands of a situation where they no longer have any say."

                                                                                                                                                                                      ^THIS^

There is a lot of corporate memory among the senior judging people: How the split methodology works, `How to assemble the judging teams, How to handle Q/C problems, How the paper work trail to Eileen Persichetti  works, to name a few.

20 years ago, the A/C judges were judging until the early morning hours, now with the exception of the Best A/C the judges are finished by 10 P.M. or so. All this has happened while the conventions have become more and more successful, and with larger model turn outs (IIRC 800+ A/C alone in San Marcos) so they have to be doing something right. If the EBoard does not get a handle on this and enough of the senior people go then a lot of the knowledge as to how and why the conventions work as well as they do is going to go with them. I wish that a reset could be done and this could have been handled out of the social media environment. I have been judging since 2005 and IMO judging have improved by a factor of magnitude. Yes there have been Q/C problems and as Jim alluded to above if we had to the category was re-judged and Q/C'ed again.

6 judges moved a probably 300 models Thursday night setting up splits and putting misplaced models into the correct spots nothing was broken to my knowledge. One of the secrets why the A/C judges finish early-all the splits are done and waiting for the judges to get to work after the judges meet at 6P.M. A lot of good people volunteer their time and effort in all the categories to make these things work seemly are being told now that they have been doing it all wrong. I think this is a slap in the face to those who have worked really hard to make the conventions successful.

Pat Donahue IPMS 5261

 

                                                                                                                                                                                      

Edited October 4, 2023 by patd

[ghodges]

Pat mentioned: "How the paper work trail to Eileen Persichetti  works, to name a few "

Eileen was supposed to be retired from the contest record keeping, but she worked in San Marcos to cover for her "trainees" who failed to show up. In short, she graciously volunteered to help out her husband Mark and to keep the contest AND the awards presentation from FAILING. Now that the Eboard has treated Mark so badly (let alone the rest of the NCC), how gracious do you think she'll be inclined to be if there's no one to take over the record keeping in Madison? Who could blame her if she told the Eboard to pound sand and solve the problem they created themselves?

Even IF the contest gets judged.... will it be judged on time? If the judges have to work til 2-3 am to get it done, how willing will they be to come back in 2025 facing the same circumstances? And, If the judging runs late, then the record keeping runs late too, especially if they're new to the job and not as efficient. And THAT could impact the ability for the awards presentation to be put together in time for the banquet. How loud do you think the complaining will be for those who paid for a banquet ticket/seat for the awards only to find out there IS NO awards program because it all ran late and couldn't be prepared in time? 

All of this is just another one of the possible unintended consequences of going into Madison with an untried Nats committee implementing new rules and failing to use the decades of experience they had at their fingertips for running such a large show.

Anyone want to discuss possible vendor table sales fallout going forward under the present iffy circumstances?

 

Gil 

 

Edited October 3, 2023 by ghodges

[66Foxtrot]

2 hours ago, ghodges said:

Pat mentioned: "How the paper work trail to Eileen Persichetti  works, to name a few "

Eileen was supposed to be retired from the contest record keeping, but she worked in San Marcos to cover for her "trainees" who failed to show up. In short, she graciously volunteered to help out her husband Mark and to keep the contest AND the awards presentation from FAILING. Now that the Eboard has treated Mark so badly (let alone the rest of the NCC), how gracious do you think she'll be inclined to be if there's no one to take over the record keeping in Madison? Who could blame her if she told the Eboard to pound sand and solve the problem they created themselves?

Even IF the contest gets judged.... will it be judged on time? If the judges have to work til 2-3 am to get it done, how willing will they be to come back in 2025 facing the same circumstances? And, If the judging runs late, then the record keeping runs late too, especially if they're new to the job and not as efficient. And THAT could impact the ability for the awards presentation to be put together in time for the banquet. How loud do you think the complaining will be for those who paid for a banquet ticket/seat for the awards only to find out there IS NO awards program because it all ran late and couldn't be prepared in time? 

All of this is just another one of the possible unintended consequences of going into Madison with an untried Nats committee implementing new rules and failing to use the decades of experience they had at their fingertips for running such a large show.

Anyone want to discuss possible vendor table sales fallout going forward under the present iffy circumstances?

 

Gil 

 

So....Eileene Perschieti is stepping down? Who's going to record for 2024?

 

[66Foxtrot]

What makes me upset the most, is that the San Marcos chapter busted their asses for 3-5 years because COVID , and presented one of the best Nationals I've attended, and they're getting s**t on because of unrelated individuals pulling judging bull!.

[ghodges]

James: Good question..... Eileen had ALREADY retired at Omaha, being given recognition/flowers/thanks/etc.. She worked San Marcos because evidently some or all of those who were suppose to take over weren't there (don't know why not... maybe perfectly valid/unforeseeable reasons). However it happened, it casts doubt on the reliability of her successors after decades of NO doubt as to the record keeping.

As for San Marcos.... I've yet to see ANY bad word spoken against them, their efforts, or their show, here or on social media. In fact, I've only seen praises like yours as being one of the best in recent years. It is ashamed that there's been judging controversies that arose from the contest, but I've only seen the NCC, the judges, and the Eboard all referenced in those discussions, with NO aspersions cast on the San Marcos crew who deserves only kudos.

 

Gil 

[Bert]

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

[CaptainAhab]

2 hours ago, 66Foxtrot said:

What makes me upset the most, is that the San Marcos chapter busted their asses for 3-5 years because COVID , and presented one of the best Nationals I've attended, and they're getting s**t on because of unrelated individuals pulling judging bull!.

I haven’t seen anything against San Marcos, as for the judging those types of things have happened at every national, I remember two different years where a judge was asked to leave during judging for improper actions, once the person was banned from judging for life. The only difference is before now those issues were addressed and handled in-house, if you want to blame someone for the current drama it would be the people that thought facebook was the place to air their grievances, justified or not, and stir up the keyboard warriors to create drama and outrage. 

[Highlander]

12 hours ago, Bert said:

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

I wouldn't use the word "stupidity", but both?

Edited October 4, 2023 by Highlander

[VonL]

"Can't we all just get along?"

Am truly sad to see the social media tempest-in-a-teapot erupting into something that damages this fine organization. Speaking from the cheap seats: IMHO, EVERYBODY in this chain and in the IPMS leadership cadre is deserving of the benefit-of-the-doubt, regarding their motivations, methods and efforts to conduct the events, inform the membership, sort through questions and problems, etc. Accusations of power-plays and nefarious intent frankly sound ridiculous, compared to the real stuff that happens in DC, for example. To whit: The reason various board members and such run unopposed is that most IPMS members, including yours truly, are unwilling to take on the administrative workload, much less the slings and arrows aforementioned. I am willing to stipulate that they are all doing their best and for the right reasons.

"...in short, she graciously volunteered to help out her husband Mark and to keep the contest AND the awards presentation from FAILING." Now this is the true spirit of the thing; our best selves, if you will. Hence my most profound thanks, to all who step up to lead this org, conduct the various events, contests and administrivia, that modeling and the sharing thereof may remain my personal escape system from 'all that' in the so-called real world.

Now, let's put on some relaxing music and go build a model.

Edited October 4, 2023 by VonL

[ghodges]

That would be nice Bob.... but have you been paying attention for the last year? If you need to, go down to the THIRD DF AREA "members only section" (you'll have to sign in to see it and participate there) and scroll down for the last 12 months to look at the various topics related to the Eboard's actions...

1) They initially tried to ram through amendments illegally last fall, including an ethics clause that would have enabled them to summarily suspend members for bad mouthing IPMS on social media. Thankfully the backlash made them observe the IPMS Constitution and put the amendments to a proper, legal vote, as well as drop the ethics clause (for now).

2) The reaction and consequences of President Dave Lockhart labeling all non-IPMS members who attend our contests and club meetings as "freeloaders". That says a lot about how they look at anyone outside of their own group.

3) The discussions, warnings, and concerns on each of the amendments (that were just legally passed) that now hand the Eboard more power than ever before, including DIRECT supervision of the NCC, which no Eboard in the last 50yrs had ever required, or even sought.

4) Their reaction to the social media to-do over handling the models (which an Eboard member had a hand in starting on social media) and their handing down edicts on the controversy to the NCC BEFORE they had the amendment that gave them the right to do so, and their decision to not even ask the NCC for their input on the subject, even though at that point the NCC was still the governing body for the Nats.

5) Their outright dishonest "joint statement" about the Mecha judging incident, which was not only incomplete in its initial investigation, but also was NOT fully agreed upon by both parties.

6) Their willingness to ignore and disregard the decades of judging and administrative experience the NCC had for the NATS, rendering them impotent so that most have quit since they would have no ability to govern the Nats; only to be "employees" of the Eboard. AND, understand that the current NCC would NOT have cooperated with the Eboard for most of the upcoming changes you will see for the Nats contest over the next 2-3 years, and thus they HAD to be replaced.

And ALL of this started last fall, JUST when they were putting out their bid for re-election and too late in the year for any opponents to be able to have the time to get the signatures needed to run against them. They COULD have done ANY of the above in the first year and a half of their administration.... but didn't take any such actions until they knew they'd be running unopposed and have two more years to implement their changes.

Perhaps you're right..... those of us who have been down in that 3rd DF area paying attention are simply over reacting and all of the above is merely coincidence.

Then again.... it does give one pause.....

 

Gil 

Edited October 18, 2023 by ghodges

[Highlander]

As of this moment, I'd like to present my view of where IPMS now stands in relation to the upcoming National Contest.  IMHO, the Law of Unintended Consequences is in full swing.

1.  There is no NCC.  The combination of resignations, possible future resignations,, statements made that the remaining incumbents will have to compete for their former positions, and the ongoing process to create a committee to oversee and direct the future NCC have resulted in a title without content ... the word NCC is being used for a body that has no members, no charter, no operating procedures, no scheduled activities or products, and no capacity to plan or execute a National Contest.

2.  The resigning and deposed former NCC members, who have the corporate memory and experience to pull off a National Contest, have been alienated and will not return.  Their collective experience and network of working relationships are gone.  They will not be replaced by judges who are immediately equally knowledgeable and competent.

3.  The future NCC will have no experience in data gathering, analysis, preparation, and reporting, particuiarly under the time constraints of Friday night.  It might not have the tools used by the former NCC.

4.  The clock is now the enemy of the upcoming National Contest.  The former NCC would have already been into the planning process.  It would have been incorporating and educating new head judges, addressing categories, reviewing and revising rules, incorporating lessons learned from the prior Contest, finalizing issues that came out of the previous Contest, and coordinating with the host chapter and EB.  None of this is happening and there are no resources identified or scheduled to do so.

5.  The former NCC has been tarred and feathered with blame for any imperfections in the recent National Contest.  In particular, its members have been labeled unethical and castigated in social media -- with no distinction between any of the former NCC's members.  And with silence from the EB.  The result has been a loss of confidence by the general IPMS membership in the NCC, its members, policies, processes, and judging results.

That's my read on the current status.  The future is more important, so let me ponder Unintended Consequences we might experience:

1.  It will take more time to create the new NCC than anticipated.  The documents governing it and the National Contest will (1) be slightly modified copies of the current documents, (2) be delivered late in the Contest preparation timeline, and (3) have content which will be confusing, create additional issues, and result in criticism similar to that aimed at the former NCC.  Key language will be aspirational, not operational.  Recruiting and placing Head Judges will take longer than anticipated.

2.  The Host Chapter will be impacted by late delivery of the rules and categories required to prepare for the Contest.

3.  The process by which the EB will interact with, direct, and manage the new NCC will range from dysfunctional to unwieldy to unworkable.  The result will be a new NCC that acts in much the same way as the former NCC.  Making decisions when it can't delay any longer.

4.  Gathering and analyzing and reporting Contest results will range from poor and late to a disaster.

5.  There will be several incidents involved in moving models.  Incidents might include models which were not judged because they were not moved, models that were not appropriately judged because they were not moved, judges refusing to touch models that ought to be moved, confusion over the rules for moving and not moving models,  constant running to various head judges for permission to move models, and conniption fits by entrants who learn that their model was moved.  The Moving Models Police will intervene, causing further issues.  Or the Police will ignore the movement in the interest of getting through the night.

6.  Based upon current complaints about judges' conduct influencing results, there will be other complaints about the same.

7.  After kicking the reform can down the street from San Marcos to Madison, there will be consideration of kicking the can further down the road to Virginia Beach.

8.  Friday night will be somewhat confused, more than usually inefficient, noticeably disorganized, and frustrating for most. Because Madison will be judged by the new, inexperienced NCC.

9.  There will be increasing appeals for members of the former NCC to "help out for the good of the organization".  The appeals will claim that, unless the help is proffered, Madison will be the victim and the former NCC will be the reason.  "Just this one time" might be an element of the appeal -- for the second time.  Such appeals are already underway.

10.  Any blame for negative experiences will be laid at the feet of the former NCC.

Edited October 5, 2023 by Highlander

[ghodges]

The only thing I can see that Dave might have missed is the effect on the judging corp as a whole.

We know how the NCC has reacted to all of this because most have resigned. But how many regular judges may decide that:

- with the Eboard supporting the portrayal of the judges as bumbling buffoons who paw the model entrees at will with no regard on social media

- with the new "no handling" rules which are sure to at least be confusing, if not impossible to work under

- without the reliable guidance of an experienced set of Head Judges

Simply decide to NOT volunteer their valuable time? 

I'm sure that MANY will indeed give in to the idea that "Madison needs them" and it'd be unfair to the Madison crew and show to not do their regular duty. 

But will it be enough to get the job done in a reasonable time frame, if at all? And there's NO way to gauge this until convention time.

It's easy to forget that this is an ALL VOLUNTEER SOCIETY THAT RELIES ON THE GOOD WILL OF ITS VOLUNTEERS. Take away that sense and feeling of mutual good will and you at least lessen, if not take away the feeling of the need to volunteer.

 

Gil 

[Bert]

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

[SkyKing]

6 hours ago, Bert said:

 

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 always going to be a contentious issue, just as it has been long before the most recent judging controversy. 

I see no reason why a combination of G-S-B and 1-2-3 cannot be implemented, if the G-S-B system is as easy and fast to apply as some claim. After all entries have been assessed for their G-S-B classification, then judges can pick a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place winner in each category from the top-ranked G-S-B entries, using the same criteria as in the past. So it would be entirely possible for a category with a large number of entrie to have some Gold entries not receive even a 3rd place, or a 3rd place go to a Silver entry or even a Bronze in a category with few entries. If this combined judging system doesn’t please a majority of contestants, nothing will.

[steev]

  From what I understand there are no "participation" awards in the G-S-B system. An entry must meet certain standards to even win bronze. It's possible that nothing in a category wins gold. I've read of a figure show they called "The Bronze Age" because few or no gold awards were given. In some local shows there are categories where nothing would win bronze although under 1-2-3 they get awards simply for being there. I think the manpower for judging would be a problem with G-S-B. It's apparently very time consuming as each entry is judged by a team before it goes to the table. I also wonder how the logistics would work out for the awards if they were "event specific."  I'm not advocating for one system over the other although I would probably like G-S-B if they could adapt it to a big show. I see that Wonderfest did it with over 1000 models so maybe there's a chance. Of course I would enjoy an NNL style show too and not have to strain my back judging!

  Steven

  

[RJackson]

7 hours ago, Bert said:

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

 

1 hour ago, SkyKing said:

This always going to be a contentious issue, just as it has been long before the most recent judging controversy. 

I see no reason why a combination of G-S-B and 1-2-3 cannot be implemented, if the G-S-B system is as easy and fast to apply as some claim. After all entries have been assessed for their G-S-B classification, then judges can pick a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place winner in each category from the top-ranked G-S-B entries, using the same criteria as in the past. So it would be entirely possible for a category with a large number of entrie to have some Gold entries not receive even a 3rd place, or a 3rd place go to a Silver entry or even a Bronze in a category with few entries. If this combined judging system doesn’t please a majority of contestants, nothing will.

Going to GSB won't 'solve' anything, especially in the first year(s).  It will take some time for the judges to adapt to the new system.  The result will be some models being 'undervalued' and some 'overvalued'.  When that happens, social media will erupt again with the same vitriol wanting to know why, comparisons between models that got different medals and general dissatisfaction and calls of collusions, 'brother-in-lawing', etc.

Same song, different verse.

[CaptainAhab]

2 hours ago, SkyKing said:

This always going to be a contentious issue, just as it has been long before the most recent judging controversy. 

I see no reason why a combination of G-S-B and 1-2-3 cannot be implemented, if the G-S-B system is as easy and fast to apply as some claim. After all entries have been assessed for their G-S-B classification, then judges can pick a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place winner in each category from the top-ranked G-S-B entries, using the same criteria as in the past. So it would be entirely possible for a category with a large number of entrie to have some Gold entries not receive even a 3rd place, or a 3rd place go to a Silver entry or even a Bronze in a category with few entries. If this combined judging system doesn’t please a majority of contestants, nothing will.

You are probably right, the two systems could co-exist in some form, that has been proposed and rejected. I highly doubt the standard would be set high enough to chance that grades(G-S-B) or awards (1-2-3) would not be given out though. And you are partially right that nothing will please some people, but it’s not the majority that have done the complaining in the first place, keep in mind that about 15% of the membership voted in the changes to the constitution that’s allowing the e-board to make these changes, no where near a majority.

33 minutes ago, RJackson said:

 

Going to GSB won't 'solve' anything, especially in the first year(s).  It will take some time for the judges to adapt to the new system.  The result will be some models being 'undervalued' and some 'overvalued'.  When that happens, social media will erupt again with the same vitriol wanting to know why, comparisons between models that got different medals and general dissatisfaction and calls of collusions, 'brother-in-lawing', etc.

Same song, different verse.

Very true words!

[ghodges]

Good points made above about changing the Nats contest...... and although I am a "GSB supporter", I do not advocate changing the Nats from its very successful 1-2-3 system.

THE TYPE OF CONTEST AT THE THE NATS IS NOT THE PROBLEM IN IPMS! Even if the "times have changed" and more people think they should be recognized, GSB will NOT solve that problem. It COULD be implemented and work, BUT there will still be the same complaints, if not MORE of them. In fact, if someone got nothing under GSB they'd probably complain even more bitterly because they can't even point to a "better" model that beat them; not understanding how they failed to meet the standards being imposed. 

Even if GSB worked, would THAT attract a lot of new members who had not joined before? Very doubtful.... and even if some people did join, others would drift away because they preferred 1-2-3 and don't like the change to GSB. If the Eboard thinks they can actually increase IPMS membership significantly by changing the Nats contests (or maybe even by edict ALL IPMS contests in the future); they're at best naive and at worst willfully ignorant of their own membership.

IPMS MEMBERSHIP CAN ONLY BE INCREASED BY INCREASING THE PERCEIVED VALUE OF WHAT PEOPLE GET FOR THEIR MONEY. This has ALWAYS been the case. MOST people view their IPMS dues as little more than a magazine subscription for the Journal. It's much more difficult to say what IPMS gives them for their money besides the Journal. We who are members KNOW the benefits we perceive and enjoy by being a member, such as group participation and new friendships formed, but these are more esoteric and less concrete things that are hard to convey and convince non-members of. Also, MOST model builders build only in 1 or2 areas or genres and very few build ALL types of models. IPMS on the other hand HAS to try to cater to ALL types, and thus the articles in the Journal that are not about whatever they themselves build seem uninteresting; which in turn makes the Journal and IPMS less appealing to spend their money on. I believe there may be ways to make the Journal a bit more desirable and thus make joining IPMS a bit more desirable, but that involves change and some financial risk to start with.

The last thing that's needed to make people want to be a part of IPMS is much harder. We need to somehow overcome our ELITIST REPUTATION among non-members everywhere. Those of us who are members KNOW how false that rep is. We KNOW how many of us are average and below average builders and are NOT any part of any special group who is better just because we're IPMS members. Changing the Nats contest MIGHT help soften our cut-throat nit picky reputation over time, but again, that's just a hope and not a proven fact. There's an intimidation level that needs to be overcome, especially at the LOCAL level that keeps people from even checking out the local IPMS group. Once we figure out how to do that, more people will join local clubs. Once they join the local club and see how IPMS members are NOT really different from themselves, they're more likely to be open to joining IPMSUSA. But until we change our rep, don't expect others to flock to IPMS just because of changes made to our contests, and THAT is the mistake I believe this current Eboard is making to begin with.

 

Gil 

Edited October 5, 2023 by ghodges

[EFGrune]

1 hour ago, steev said:

  From what I understand there are no "participation" awards in the G-S-B system. An entry must meet certain standards to even win bronze. It's possible that nothing in a category wins gold. I've read of a figure show they called "The Bronze Age" because few or no gold awards were given. In some local shows there are categories where nothing would win bronze although under 1-2-3 they get awards simply for being there. I think the manpower for judging would be a problem with G-S-B. It's apparently very time consuming as each entry is judged by a team before it goes to the table. I also wonder how the logistics would work out for the awards if they were "event specific."  I'm not advocating for one system over the other although I would probably like G-S-B if they could adapt it to a big show. I see that Wonderfest did it with over 1000 models so maybe there's a chance. Of course I would enjoy an NNL style show too and not have to strain my back judging!

  Steven

  

The responses received from GSB contest to the NCC local/regional judging practices questionnaire (a dozen over a three year period, including two from me) showed that one contest awarded 90% of their entries with something.  No data on the breakdown of the awards.   That sure sounds like a participation trophy to me!

[693514V]

There is not an intimidation factor, there is an arrogance factor, as Gil put it, an Elitist Reputation. At the 2019 Nats, other then the nice folks manning the entrance tables, not a single member, or an officer of this group greeted me. I was wearing both the show supplied name tag, plus my own home club hard plastic, engraved tag. Not a single, " Hello, Hi, thanks for coming.."  nothing.  On the flip side, my girlfriend was allowed in free of charge, and they printed up a name tag for her !  She was sadly verbally assaulted by a women in the ladies room out side the display room because how she was dressed. Which was very conservative and nice, being a long skirt and a blouse and flat dress shoes. Weird that....

Now, I did reach out to several people, including Barry Numrick, Robert Steinbrun , Joe Youngerman, Paul Boyer, and had some nice conversations about modeling. Also met Bert Kinsey at his table, plus caught up with Roy Sutherland. Made the president of Zoike Marua laugh, as I asked why the new tool 1/144th Ho-229 didn't have the same level of detail as it's 72nd counterpart ! Slapped me on the back and said I was crazy !  My girlfriend bought coffee for the Wingnut Wings guys on Saturday, as they had been up late enjoying the adult spirits...

We used to make fun of the guy at the door at Walmart, but at a venue like this, it might not be a bad idea. We have a huge train show every winter, and they always have folks in train caps handing out directories to the vendors, and saying " Hi , thanks for coming " with a smile, every year.  I know this doesn't pertain to the current judging/power play, but any change that will cause the IPMS to be in a better light, can't hurt. IPMS USA needs to stop assuming every one knows who is who, when most of us do not.

[Highlander]

it seems that the eternal topic of GSB vs !23 has magically reappeared anew, all over again, once more,  afresh, one more time.  It is indeed a noble topic, however I'd like to respond to Bert's comment that the motive to dismantle the former NCC is to introduce a GSB system.  Since it was perceived that the former NCC opposed that, it had to go.

I offer that the former NCC did not fall on its collective sword because it opposed a GSB judging structure.  It rode off into the sunset because of (1) the methods that were being used to discredit it, (2) overt animosity from some, and (3) the movement and consolidation of all Contest related decision making with the EB or some committee created by the EB. 

Item 3 is the important one.  It ignores the necessity of continuity, combined with a degree of autonomy, to prepare for, coordinate, and conduct the Contest.  To have a successful National Contest, there had to be continuity in people, processes, knowledge, collective experience, dedication, and working relationships.  Two years of continuity is not enough.  Please note that I did not say that continuity equaled static and unchanging; it meant a relatively smooth path from Contest to Contest to Contest.

The former NCC actually had to pull off a credible Contest ... on a specific Friday night. On that Friday night, it couldn't postpone, couldn't revise rules and processes and standards, couldn't reorganize, couldn't shift responsibility, couldn't finally start to move entries into the proper categories and begin to think about splits, couldn't begin to coordinate details with the Host Chapter, and couldn't decide that it just didn't want to have a Contest that night.  It had to be off with the starter's gun and had to perform adequately from the start of the Judge's Briefing on Friday afternoon to the final certified results being handed over to the Host Chapter on Saturday morning,  The former NCC faced about 10 hours of intense, tiring, focused, hectic activity full of mini-crises, unexpected twists and turns, and the organization and management of a horde of volunteer judges who ranged in attitude from fully on board to bored and figuratively or literally absent.   The former NCC Judges had to make on the spot decision after decision after decision.

To pull off the marvel of a successful Contest each year for 50 years, the former NCC had developed and used a continuous thread of knowledge, experience, refinement, change, and personal relationships.  Any member who wanted to judge was welcome ... and encouraged.  Any judge who wanted to learn and become better could create a track record of competent judging and be a candidate for team lead and then check judge.  And, after years of notable and reliable performance, that judge could become a candidate for a Head Judge position.  These weren't guys off the street.  These guys were volunteers who sacrificed a lot of enjoyment at Nats to serve IPMS.  They also put in a lot of hours between the end of one Contest and the beginning of the next.

Note that I have not said the the former NCC was perfect.  Nor that it conducted perfect judging.  Nor that all of its member were spotless.  But it managed to address its problems and crises, some more smoothly than others, for 50 years.  Relations with some EBs were better than with others.  Poor judges were trained or asked to leave; unethical judges were banned -- the actions just weren't put up in photos or spread over the interweb.  The former NCC managed to make changes and handle criticism ... if not as fast and as responsive as some demanded.  If things had played out differently, one of the changes that the former NCC might have made, in cooperation and coordination with an EB, was conversion from 123 to GSB.  We'll never know.

But things change.  It was made abundantly clear to the former NCC that it worked for the EB, that all National Contest decisions were to be referred to the EB, and that the former NCC was to do as it was directed.  The tools of cooperation and compromise and goodwill were removed from the toolbox.  Things like continuity and experience and relationships were now irrelevant. The 50 year run is over.  The continuity is gone.  The personal relationships are in tatters.  The former NCC is gone and a new, improved NCC will rise from the ashes.  Its relationship to the EB will be significantly different.  We'll all find out what that means for the National contest.

The reason the former NCC had to go was, paradoxically, its continuity and experience and relationships.  They did not fit into the brave new world.  Look up the Romanoffs.  Or, better, the Old Bolsheviks.

As we have been informed and as was pointed it out some years ago, but presented in a Celtic punk idiom.  After all, if 'tis nae Scots, 'tis crap:

 

 

 

Edited October 5, 2023 by Highlander

[Highlander]

Hey, Scott (my elder son's name, and spelt correctly) come see me at a Nats.  You'll regret it , but say "Hi" anyway.

[patd]

Tangential to this conversation, but I have felt for a long time that if the IPMS membership wants to give out more trophies then raise the entry fee slightly and buy more trophy packages hence more splits equals more trophies. If you have 30 models in a category with 1,2,3 obviously only 3 will win but do a split to 15 and you have doubled the 1,2,3 chances-ASSUMMING one can do a meaningful split-not an easy task in many cases. 1/72 axis inline =probably no problem.  1/48 civil, sport and air racing= not so sure. Having said THAT as a member of the splits team I might regret it.😜

I also have doubts how an GSB can work on a scale of the Nationals, right now judges are volunteering to do 3 hours of judging on a Friday night however will they also be sanguine about doing 3 or 4 sessions lasting 3 to 4 hours over the 3 days of the convention? 3000 models is a lot to look at and I think our current winnowing out process works well in the 1,2,3 awards.

I quite agree going GSB vs, 123 is not going to stop people complaining about the judging that will be with us till the end of all contests. It is good to remember that EVEN if you do everything right you may still not win--ask Drew Brees!

Edited October 5, 2023 by patd