Obviously, I'm vastly outnumbered on this list and I'm getting flamed pretty
good. You would think that the NASG had a new logo with the couplers coming
apart if you read all these posts. We are all in the same scale boat, but you'd
never know it. I remember people getting angry because the sub-ads in the RMC
joint ad had those "lobster claw" couplers in them as if someone reading the ad
would write off converting to S because of them. This kind of hysteria hurts
us, not helps in spite of what the critics think. Everyone on the same page
pulling for S is the only way we''ll survive and perhaps even grow.
But, I don't think I'll live long enough to see it.
When I compared the SG to MR, I just meant that the appeal of the two magazines
was broad-based and was not comparing toy trains to "serious" model
railroading. Of course the magazines are different.
As to the way I conducted my "scattershot approach" when I wrote the S Curves
column for 8 years, the magazine itself covers highrail and tinplate as well as
scale. You are liable to see three-rail O guage on the cover. I saw no harm in
covering ALL of S scale in the column. Model Railroaders are grown up enough to
know the difference.
I'm a model railroader who happens to model in S and want to enjoy my waning
years by being active in the NMRA. They don't seen to worry about rail height a
whole lot there.
Roy
------------------------------------
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/
