Obviously, Bill is still upset with the previous owner of this publication, which is understandable, but give the new owner credit for pulling this out of the fire and producing a decent publication for our scale. Bob is still learning the business. I am going to try to give balance to Bill's concerns below. I am a current subscriber to the publication. For those who are not, try it.
To clarify my standing on this list, I am a mix of HiRail and Scale with all my structures scale kits, scratch built, or modified plastic structure that are painted running on SHS .125. Currently dismantling my layout in preparton for a down size move, but will still have room for a larger layout with the room being 23 x 8. ________________________________ From: Bill Rigsby <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thu, February 10, 2011 9:43:14 PM Subject: Re: {S-Scale List} S Magazines I don't subscribe to 1:64 Modeling Guide, because under the Richard Bendever administration, received only half of the magazines I had paid for, and I was the first person to buy a subscription. I received all of my issues and I was an early 3 year subscriber. They were not regular and sometimes many months passed without an issue. Was I disappointed in not receiving the magazine on its scheduled printing? You can bet your sweet caboodle on it. Bill, did you contact Bob about what your problems were after he had purchased the magazine? He would have listened and probably made things right. When I have compared the Modeling Guide next to The S Gaugian, didn't seen any real difference between them. What I expected in a "Modeling Guide", is exactly that a Guide, not just another magazine that has the same advertisements, the same photos of Joe Blows layout. I agree some with you here. Again, Dr Ben was not a train enthusiast. His area as a hobbyist was in cars and trucks, structures, weathering, etc. He really didn't have any real idea of what it was going to take to produce this publication. I want to be guided by such things a DCC, layout construction, track laying, etc, not just the some ol', same ol'. Obviously by not subscribing to the magazine, you have not been receiving or reading the magazine as to know what the present day content is. Why is there no way of contacting a featured layouts owner so as to ask question about their layout? Probably could have had a solution if the new owner had been made aware of your concerns. Why is there no section on Tips & Tricks, where people can submit what they have found, and how it works for them? Maybe if you volunteered to help write columns in this area it might have happened. Bob has been open to suggestions. This is supposed to be our magazine. At a Convention, I had shown Dr. Ben some square Toothpicks, with pointed ends that could be used as wire fence post, and some others that had been machined that could be used for stair railing, nada, zilch, no interest. Dr Ben no longer owns this publication. Forget what happened with Dr Ben and move on to the present day magazine. Write an article on it and submit it to Bob. Perhaps that is part of trying to model a dying scale that is full of whoa is S, and filled with people, and manufactures that are non-apostolic about the scale they profess is "the right size" By continuing harboring your anger about the past, this doesn't help our scale much. Subscribe to the magazine, read it, submit your articles and suggestions for the next year and then respond to your post at that time. Better yet, purchase some back issues, if any are still available, and see the difference. How else does the editor know what the reader feel about his publication if you don't communicate with him. This publication is "S" Scale, not Toy Train. Ed E., another Ed Bill --- On Thu, 2/10/11, Richard Karnes <[email protected]> wrote: From: Richard Karnes <[email protected]> Subject: {S-Scale List} S Magazines To: "S-Scale" <[email protected]> Date: Thursday, February 10, 2011, 12:43 PM Gentlemen/Ladies -- At the considerable risk of stirring up a hornet’s nest, I feel the need to comment on the S magazine situation. As some of you know, I am a regular columnist in two magazines: “Model Railroad News” (“S Curves” column) and “1:64 Modeling Guide” (“Engineering Department” column). My effort in MRN is largely promotional. I can certainly understand why very few of you would subscribe to MRN just for a small monthly column in a magazine devoted entirely to new model railroad products, the lion’s share of which are not S. But I cannot understand why more of us aren’t supporting Bob Nalbone’s “1:64 Modeling Guide.” Readers may complain that the content is somewhat anemic, and I sometimes agree. But that can be fixed. We have several authors on this e-list that regularly contribute to the “S Gaugian” instead of 1:64MG. I know you have your reasons. While the SG publisher does not pay for articles, you regular contributors out there do get something in return, in particular free kits to review and keep – and perhaps other things I do not know about. On the other hand, Bob Nalbone actually pays dollars for articles. He has a per-word rate, per-photo rate, and a per-cover rate. My experience with 1:64MG is that each page is worth about $35 in my pocket. Please keep in mind that 1:64MG contains no toy-train stuff. It is focused entirely on the S scale modeler as opposed to the toy-train runner. Bob Nalbone, its editor-publisher, is an experienced model railroader, unlike former editor-publisher Richard Bendever, who once characterized himself in an editorial as unknowledgeable about model railroading. (I know that one of our e-list members will not subscribe because of the previous editor-publisher.) Bob needs more good material – and more readers/subscribers. Why can’t we support him a little better? Writers and readers both, please examine your motivations. Before I sign off, let me add a couple of observations: 1. Several topics that appear from time to time on this e-list have already been covered in 1:64MG by yours truly. Ed Loizeaux asked about whether Easy Riders would work in S. Others are currently debating easements. Couplers keep coming up again and again. While you may not always agree with what I have to say about these (and other) topics, I have covered them fairly thoroughly in my 1:64MG “Engineering Department” column over the past few years. 2. Bob Nalbone has not exactly figured out that he needs a more active presence among us. For example, thus far he has not had a table at any NASG national conventions. He needs to get to know us, and vice versa. While I can understand that he may not be able to justify the expense of traveling to St. Louis or Duluth, I cannot understand why he does not ask the help of other New Jerseyans who do display at these shows. Don Thompson and/or Mike Ferraro (SHS) are always there, and Jeff Wilson is at most. I would think that any of these NJ gentlemen would be willing to baby-sit an adjacent 1:64MG display if only they would be asked. Dick Karnes [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/S-Scale/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
