Journal Issues/The New Journal Format

[RCTHEFOX]

I got my copy of the new IUJ the other day. At first I didn't know what it was. When I started reading I found the Front page colorful and Eye catching. I liked the build articles with photos at each stage. I guess I don't understand a lot of the negative comments. I like it.

[Dick Montgomery]

Received my copy Sept 27th ( I am usually several weeks behind those who get their publication rather quickly) I enjoyed the various articles, finding the work being shown exemplary, as usual. The photos were quite good as well.

As for the ease of reading the lighter text, I had no major difficulty with that since I have a bright desk lamp that I switched on. Did I think it was an improvement over the usual darker text? I do like the new lable of IUJ for the Journal? I'd rather leave such details up to the IUJ crew who put in many hours of work on the publication.

Perhaps giving the new crew some time to tweak the publication is a positive approach. Thanks to Editorial Staff for their hard work and dedication.

[noelsmith]

Just learnt that Chris B has resigned his editorship of the Journal.

Well over a year ago I submitted an article about a custom van especially built for the IPMS UK 50th Anniversary as the society as a whole has been going since being founded in London back in 1963. I got a couple of interim emails from Chris to say that the article is in hand, been edited, ready to go etc. etc. Still heard nothing up to recently, so could someone confirm if the article got published in the journal of not. As I am an IPMS UK member I don't get the journal, but asked Chris to forward me a copy that ran my article.I

The Anniversary Van model I built has been donated to and is now on permanent display in the International Model Car Builders Museum, Sandy, Utah.

Any feedback about my article would be appreciated. Thanks

[Moose135]

On 8/30/2024 at 4:40 AM, noelsmith said:

Still heard nothing up to recently, so could someone confirm if the article got published in the journal of not.

Noel, your article does not appear in the May/June issue which was just sent out. Sounds like an interesting build, I look forward to seeing your piece when it is published.

[noelsmith]

John, thanks for your feedback about my article. I have not been on the forum for a long time so my apologies for my very late reply.

Chris B the previous editor e mailed me a short time ago to say that my article has been handed over to the new publication team and might be published in 2025.  Sort of defeated the object  of hoping to see it published in the IPMS 60th Anniversary year unfortunately. Maybe it will make it into print eventually.

I understand that a lot has been going on at exec level in the Stateside IPMS over this last year that possibly may have had a detrimental bearing on the journal, its output and distribution.

Edited December 27, 2024 by noelsmith

[PaulBradley]

Ditto. We shall see what the new team does with our stuff.

[Ron Bell]

I, too, had a rather extensive 'how to' submitted. Chris had asked me to make some revisions, which I did and he said the article was excellent. Then he quit, so now I have no idea of the status of the article and as far as I can tell, there is no way to contact the editors directly to ascertain its status. 

[ghodges]

All I can add to this is I was recently contacted by one of the editors to ASK for an article (which I've since submitted)..... on something beyond my usual area of building that I'd just completed; which infers to me that they're short articles on some subject matters.

What I find MOST disturbing is the lack of communication. IF they need articles, put out a call for them. If they aren't getting enough responses to the calls, offer some incentives for writing and submitting them. If you've submitted something, the staff should have NO reason not to or problem with updating authors about the status of their submission.

Yes.... I realize it is all done by volunteers. Yes, I realize the "new" editorial staff have "lives" outside of IPMS.

The flip side to that is that the Eboard decided to let an editor with decades of experience walk and hand the Journal off to people with a supposedly new vision. The responsibilities of communication AND treating the authors (who've volunteered their work themselves) is part and parcel of the JOB those new people have accepted.

 

Gil 

Edited December 30, 2024 by ghodges

[noelsmith]

Would be interesting to know just why Chris B, an editor with decades of experience walked ??

Unfortunately nobody from the new Journal  team has contacted me since Chris left about my IPMS Anniversary Custom Van article, so I am not really hopeful of any outcome.  Maybe they are simply not interested in using it ? Who knows ?

The article was submitted to Chris B well over a year ago who informed me shortly before he resigned that it was prepped and ready to go, so to a certain extent I have just put a line under it.

I will only have to assume that it has been passed on to the new team, but having still heard nothing back, really could not care less one way or the other if they do anything with it or not now.

Edited January 3, 2025 by noelsmith

[ghodges]

This is the QUOTE from Chris as to why he quit as Journal editor taken from this DF in an earlier discussion:

"I resigned because the process for building the Journal was altered without my input in such a way that I could not exert a positive impact on any aspect of it - timeliness, quality, or content. I was not shy in my suggestions or timid about my cautions. I've been doing magazines for almost 35 years, so I like to think I know at least the basics". 

As to pending articles, I've been told that mine (and all others) HAVE been passed to the new editorial "team". If no one from that "team" is willing to come here and update/reassure the members of exactly what's going on, then IMO the Historian/Publication Ro Annis should be HERE doing so since he's their "boss".

By the way.... Chris Bucholtzc is running for Historian/Publication director in the upcoming election.... I suggest you support his candidacy! 

 

Gil 

[Eric Aitala]

From https://ipmsusa.org/about/executive-board-meeting-minutes/2024/november

Quote

RA: Lead designer of the Journal was in Florida and impacted by hurricanes, RA has taken over the main designer duties for the next two issues. Publication team has 9 members who participated in the most recent meetings. There will be a call for more designers to grow the publication team for a larger volunteer base. Generally positive feedback from the FB post explaining the recent journal design changes, still lots of feedback coming in via the email iujfeedback@ipmsusa.org Journal cover for the Nationals issue was a higher quality paper stock, it was determined that it was worth the cost, and the cost is currently feasible, and so it will be continued.

 

[SkyKing]

16 hours ago, ghodges said:

This is the QUOTE from Chris as to why he quit as Journal editor taken from this DF in an earlier discussion:

"I resigned because the process for building the Journal was altered without my input in such a way that I could not exert a positive impact on any aspect of it - timeliness, quality, or content. I was not shy in my suggestions or timid about my cautions. I've been doing magazines for almost 35 years, so I like to think I know at least the basics". 

As to pending articles, I've been told that mine (and all others) HAVE been passed to the new editorial "team". If no one from that "team" is willing to come here and update/reassure the members of exactly what's going on, then IMO the Historian/Publication Ro Annis should be HERE doing so since he's their "boss".

By the way.... Chris Bucholtzc is running for Historian/Publication director in the upcoming election.... I suggest you support his candidacy! 

 

Gil 

Only the Eboard knows the reasons for the changes in the editorial process which were forced on Chris, and they have not been forthcoming in spite of numerous requests of them. I fully support Chris’s election to the board, and further urge the current board to be completely replaced!

[Ron Bell]

16 minutes ago, SkyKing said:

...urge the current board to be completely replaced!

All we need are 5-6 individuals to step forward and volunteer. I don't think I'll hold my breath 'til that happens. 

[ghodges]

I don't know that there's a need to call for the Eboard to be "replaced". The changes they've made to the Journal are a work in progress going forward. As long as they are willing to actually LISTEN to the feedback they're getting (as in the new title SUCKS in most members opinions); then that responsiveness to the feedback would work in their favor. Some of the other things they've done have been very good (the 3yr membership discount) and others have yet to pan out. I can give them a year or so to get the Journal back on schedule and into what they'll deem as its new "format" and THEN make a judgement rather than calling for heads to roll now.

My real concern lies in their lack of clarity, transparency, and communication about WHAT their vision is going forward. And, just like EVERY Eboard before them, they don't even bother to participate HERE, on our own DF; and this is DESPITE having a newly created "Director of Social Media" board position. Why isn't SHE here doing her job?

There may be good reasons for some things that are going on, such as the hurricane affecting someone's ability to do their job (as mentioned above). But why should we have to "poke the bear" to find things like that out? And this is especially true now that they have that Wild Apricot (or whatever) system where they can email EVERY member with news and updates!

Gil 

Edited January 4, 2025 by ghodges

[Chris Bucholtz]

This isn't the social media platform the Director of Social Media should be monitoring - she's keeping our Facebook and external social media platforms straightened out and social-media warfare-free. The other board members are responsible for their own responses. I think asking the questions is important, though.

 

[Bert]

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

[SkyKing]

24 minutes ago, Bert said:

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

If I were paranoid, I’d suspect censorship.

[Ron Bell]

Heck, I miss when the Wakis (Sp?) complained at the then SUNDAY business meeting back in the 80's that the name of the trophy they had deservedly won was changed. What a kafuffle over trivia. Now that was a fun business meeting. Not exactly divisive nor a real game changer, but fun never the less. 

[ghodges]

Hey Ron.... at least you didn't ride in an elevator with one of them wearing your "Not Up To National Standards" t-shirt like I  did! 😁😁😁 Yeah..... those were the days!

And Chris B.; I totally disagree with you that this DF is not "social media". People post questions and complaints about IPMS here just like on FB, right? People post model pics here just like on FB, right?

Just because it doesn't carry the "numbers" of the other websites/platforms doesn't mean it's not a part of the Director of Social Media's job.

In fact.... since it's mostly JUST members here and the numbers ARE so low, THIS should be her FIRST priority to keep a check on AND take the least time to do so, so you can't even say it's an "added burden"!

Gil 

[Chris Bucholtz]

Well, this particular platform is where members can let it all hang out - it's our clubhouse, while Facebook is like doing it out in public.   I haven't seen anyone acting like a giant douchenozzle on here for a long time, if ever!

[GoldThree]

Hello All, at Gil's request I am posting the IPMS/USA Journal update that I posted yesterday on Face Book. Just for some context, I am the current IPMS/USA Publications Director who is essentially responsible for the IPMS/USA Journal. I have gone back and read most of the comments in this thread, now you are welcome to direct any questions you have directly to the source.

 

Sept/Oct IPMS/USA Journal Update:

The Sept/Oct issue was printed last week and on its way to your mailbox! In addition, the Nov/Dec issue is pretty much wrapped up and the team is hard at work on the Jan/Feb issue. As I explained in a previous post, our plan is to be caught up and on schedule by this spring.

BTW, hopefully you noticed that the cover of the July/Aug issue was thicker. This was a sort of “test” to see if we liked it. We did, and all future covers will be printed on this nicer stock. The Sept/Oct issue has 76 pages (instead of the typical 72) because we needed more room for all the articles. One of them is an article written by Jim Maas about the pre-war markings of Curtiss SOC Seagulls. This type of article was a mainstay of the magazine in the pre-internet days of the 60’s and 70’s. I hope it will inspire people to send us more articles like this. (I am even thinking of writing up something myself about the markings of Narn warships from the 1990’s Babylon 5 universe). We are always looking for articles, so if you have something, contact the Managing Editor Bob Lomassaro at IPMS.Journal.Editor@gmail.com. The majority of our submissions are “build” articles, but we are looking for anything, as long as it is of interest to modelers.

I don't want to give away what's in the rest of the issue, but I think it turned out pretty swell! The team of volunteers did a fantastic job ! Anyway, this is just a quick update to let everyone know we have been working hard to get onto schedule while also adding more bells and whistles to the IPMS/USA Journal. Enjoy!

[SkyKing]

Thank you, Gold Three, for the update. However, what NO ONE on either the Eboard or the Journal staff has been willing to reveal are the reasons for the extensive format change that caused Chris Bucholtz’s resignation. We members are entitled to know. 
So, I pose these questions to you directly and clearly so that there is no misunderstanding:

1. What were the SPECIFIC reasons for the extensive changes in format of the IPMS Journal? Why were these felt to be necessary?

2. What were the SPECIFIC changes in Journal production that caused Chris to resign? Why were they felt to be necessary?

I await your reply.

 

[ghodges]

Thanks Ro... that's a start. Now see if you can't goad other Eboard members a responsibility to be DIRECTLY involved on our OWN DF.

Gil 

 

[GoldThree]

SkyKing,

#1: The magazine changed because a new group of folks were now doing the work. As the lead in this, I wanted the new team to be able to do what they thought was best with out me micromanaging them. Remember, as volunteers, they (like John and Chris before them) will only do the work if they want to. The magazine was ready for change after 18 years and I wanted the new folks working on it to be invested in it. The changes to magazine are not as extensive as you imply, we print articles about models, like we always have, we have the same advertisers, Members gallery and so on. The extensive change I think you may be referring to are the title change (which technically is not a change but a shortening of the existing title) and the gray text of the May/June issue (our first issue out of the gate BTW). The team came up with the title, because I encouraged them to try something new. In regards to the feedback that was sent regarding that issue, there were a lot of folks who hated "IUJ" and there were also an equal number who liked it. The biggest problem was the gray text, and we took quite a beating on that. Ultimately, all of the design decisions that were made are my responsibility (which I took). Finding volunteers with the prerequisite computer and design experience was no easy task and I was very fortunate that a number of folks volunteered. Again, the magazine is produced by your fellow modelers pretty much because they want to. No one gets paid, the only perk is a comped membership, which if you break that down per hour of work would be a few coins at best. 

#2: John left the magazine probably to have more free time. Chris left the magazine because he and I were not in agreement as to how it should be done going forward. I have no issues with either of them, they both did a fantastic job making the Journal. Getting into the details of why they left solves no purpose.

Again, the magazine is made by fellow members who volunteer and can stop working at any point for any reason. The relationship is not the same as a workplace in which employees are beholden to employers. I am not the editors and designers boss, my job is to make it possible for them to do the work if they choose to. They contribute for motivations which are wholly their own. If someone decides to leave, I don't give them a hard time about it (i.e., don't burn your bridges and be respectful) and then figure out how to get the work done. Anyway, that's how I choose to do it. So far the team (of about 10 or so) is working out great. It is huge change from how it used to be done. I hope that answers your questions.

[ghodges]

Speaking for myself, I appreciate the time you took to answer those questions so methodically. As an almost 50yr member I've seen more significant changes in the IPMS publications than most, since I date back to the Quarterly and Update days!

The only question that arises from your post for me is your sentence that "The magazine was ready for change after 18 years and I wanted the new folks working on it to be invested in it."

That sounds like a personal opinion of your own and thus (as Historian/ PUBLICATION DIRECTOR) you decided to implement those changes. WHAT exactly was "wrong" with the Journal that made it "ready for change" and then caused you and the established editor to not be able to come to terms with those changes?

It seems odd that you say you're granting the TEAM of editors a lot of autonomy, but that Chris Bucholtzc as the sitting editor (evidently) wasn't open to having the same? Or, was it that he objected to the addition of the team?  It seems even further strange that since (you say) the changes you're trying to implement going forward are so small, that they should cause such a disruption as they have. Or, are there some larger changes down the road not yet implemented that we members should know about?

I'm looking forward to this next issue with the content you mentioned. The first couple of issues have seemed to just be a "polishing of the old apple" (new title graphics, thicker cover, slicker art work, etc.) and NOT worth the trouble stirred up thus far. I'm hoping the content change you've hinted at perhaps tips the balance in favor of the changes being made. We'll see....... 

Gil