|
|
Forums - News / General |
For General modelling or hobby-related topics that are not covered by any other specific forum. Please keep to topics concerning the hobby. |
| Topics | 2966 |
| Messages | 21989 |
|
|
| Subject: | I'd respectfully....... |  |
| Date: | Apr 18, 2006 |
| From: | Alex Hill | |
.......ask you to re-read the earlier posts Kip. There's no critism intended of OOB builders or anybody else. As you point out, everybody has fun building in their own way. Personally, I wouldn't pretend to have the skill to correct or detail every kit I build to perfection, but I'd like to be able to- and that's where those reviews come in handy as a point of interest if not as a direct reference.
Your point about production variations is a good one, but a thorough and knowledgable review should take this into account.
The heart of the original post (I think) wasn't about anyones building style, it was the use, by some folks, of the 'duck' phrase to de-value accurate reviews, which aren't relevant to their personal building style anyway.
To stretch your house metaphor a little, if person 'A', as a point of historical interest, studies his blue prints and produces a hundred page report detailing all the differences and listing the modifications. Person 'B' reads this and thinks 'I'd love to restore my house to it's original condition, I won't be able to make it perfect, but it will be fun trying and this report will be a great help.' Person 'C' is happy with his house the way it is, which is fine. However, for some inexplicable reason, he reads person 'A's report cover to cover, then writes to person 'A' to tell him he's just being anal and the report was a waste of time.
I repeat, there is no critisism of peoples building styles intended. It's a critisism of some peoples need to de-value the work that others put into their research.
Al |
| |
|
|
 | The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - Paul A. Owen - Apr 17, 2006 |
| . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - Marc Brandes - Apr 17, 2006 |
| . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - David Bridges - Apr 17, 2006 |
| . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - Damon Agretto - Apr 17, 2006 |
| . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - John F. Steinman - Apr 17, 2006 |
| . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - Alex Hill - Apr 17, 2006 |
| . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - David Manning - Apr 17, 2006 |
| . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - Eric Scurlock - Apr 17, 2006 |
| . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - Mike Tittel - Apr 17, 2006 |
| . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - Kip Rudge - Apr 17, 2006 |
| . . . . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - Roy A. Schlicht - Apr 17, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - Dwayne - Apr 17, 2006 |
| . . . . . . I'd respectfully....... - Alex Hill - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: I'd respectfully....... - Kip Rudge - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: I'd respectfully....... - Paul A. Owen - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: I'd respectfully....... - Kip Rudge - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: I'd respectfully....... - Paul A. Owen - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . . . . Re: Interesting - Paul A. Owen - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - adam lehmann - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - Geoff Steer - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . . . . Re: Model shop customers - Paul A. Owen - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: Model shop customers - Dwayne - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . ....the greed to get the mighty dollar! - Glenn Bartolotti - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - David Bauer - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - frank forster - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - Steve Frost - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - Steve Frost - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: Glibberish [IMG] - Paul A. Owen - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Glibberish - Andrew Herbert - Apr 20, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Glibberish - Paul A. Owen - Apr 20, 2006 |
| . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - Brian J Tears - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - Paul A. Owen - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - Mike Harmon - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . Paul - Glenn Bartolotti - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Glenn - Paul A. Owen - Apr 18, 2006 |
| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Paul.... [IMG] - Glenn Bartolotti - Apr 19, 2006 |
| . . . Re: The "It looks like a [tank]" argument - Michael Wawrow - Apr 19, 2006 |
|
|
