Group Build Poll 2017

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Pin's suggestions all seem eminently sensible to me.  

 

I'd suggest that all future GB proposals should be required to demonstrate their capability to cater for multiple modelling categories, before they are accepted for the vote.  

 

I do think that modellers of other categories should seriously consider a boycott, just to give the forum a foretaste of the boring monoculture it will become into if these selfish individuals are not held in check.

 

As for the differences between Mirages, I couldn't care less.....You lot have had the run of the place for far too long.  Given the repeated requests for broader GB categories, that particular example is just taking the proverbial.

[Pin]

While I understand your frustration I cannot agree with you. What will be a point of a boycott?

[CedB]

On 10/31/2016 at 19:53, Sgt.Squarehead said:

How come 'Dassault Mirage' isn't classed as a STGB.....It's not exactly massively broad in scope is it? 

On 10/31/2016 at 20:04, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Oh come on.....We get SIX GBs, to cater to the whole membership of BM and you think that one qualifies as having scope?  Which version should the AFV modellers build?  How about the sci-fi and ship modellers?  

 

Utterly ridiculous!  

On 11/1/2016 at 05:21, Sgt.Squarehead said:

I still fail to see how this is significantly different from the M3/M4 Medium Tank STGB? 

On 11/2/2016 at 20:39, Sgt.Squarehead said:

None of these posts display the slightest consideration for modellers interested in other categories.....It's utterly thoughtless & selfish IMHO.  

 

On 11/2/2016 at 21:25, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Quite.....That one is merely the most blatant offender.  

59 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Pretty disgusted with this whole thread TBH.....Rather than broadening the scope of BM GBs, the exact opposite has happened. 

 

I propose that builders of subjects other than aircraft should boycott these GBs until BM makes some effort to cater to the wider modelling community.  

34 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Exactly what I posted Above.  

 

Last year we had slots reserved for non-aircraft GBs, but this year the 'wingy-brigade' have been given free reign (allegedly on the grounds that they would be more considerate in future) with the inevitable consequences.....Total lack of consideration for anyone else.  

 

 

Andy I've bitten my tongue for four pages but I really must ask you to tone it down a bit old chap. I can understand your frustration but as stated here almost 80% of the GBs will allow non-aircraft subjects. It's a poll to select from GBs that were freely proposed and required support from the members - sounds pretty democratic to me and I can't see how forcing the scope or boycotting is going to help  

[JackG]

Was wondering why there is a cap on the GB calendar?

 

The non aircraft builders will always be at a disadvantage due to the demographics of this forum.  Maybe have a separate calendar for the other genres and those themes that are more inclusive?

 

regards,

Jack

[Sgt.Squarehead]

 

Ced, you are as Jack points out, completely ignoring the effects of the voting.....Wingy types can push through whatever the hell they like, by sheer weight of numbers.  

 

The fact that the number of completed builds rarely reflects the voting is apparently never taken into consideration.....The GPW GB made it through the voting by the skin of its teeth last year, but resulted in one of the biggest and most interesting GB Galleries we've seen.  

 

Many of of the more inclusive GBs this year are repeats or close variants of earlier GBs and this too can lead to loss of interest.

 

At the end of the day, the voters will have their say, but based on the current polling I might very well find myself boycotting by default.....Only two of the current top six hold even the remotest interest for me.  

 

PS - Any suggestions for sci-fi or ship modellers?  Looks pretty bleak on those fronts to me.    

[CedB]

Apologies Andy, I don't wish to lessen the problem for non-aircraft builders but we're all influenced by the vote; I was co-hosting the NMF build which I don't think is going to get in   Perhaps as Jack suggests a separate calendar for each subject area might be the answer?

[Sgt.Squarehead]

No worries Ced.....I value your input as I know you are an even-handed sort of chap.  

 

I'm also quite aware that some of my posts have more than a hint of the 'coarse-rasp' about them.....It isn't unintentional, over the years I've found that it's often the quickest route to achieving a smoother finish.  

 

Please accept my apologies for any incidental abrasions.  

[Mancunian airman]

Actually the sound of 

"Maybe have a separate calendar for the other genres and those themes that are more inclusive? "

 

should be worth considering ??

 

I dont just build aircraft you know so I for one would welcome a 'new' calendar

Ian

[Pin]

Is it my phantom memory or we used to have a separate "non-aviation GB" poll ?

[CedB]

Thanks Andy

[Antoine]

2 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Total lack of consideration for anyone else. 

 

2 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

As for the differences between Mirages, I couldn't care less....

 

Well, it took me at least a few minutes to gather the pics and post them with comments....

And all for nothing...

 

Total lack of consideration....

 

I think I'll boycott.... Well, boycott what, by the way?

[TonyTiger66]

I still can't see where to vote for Hillary or Trump and I've got to get my vote in today . 

 

T

[Col.]

Am I missing an important point here? Had a quick count through the list and can see 7 GBs which are aircraft-only whereas there's 18 that are inclusive of non-aviation subjects to some degree. Furthermore if we put a 3 year ban on repeat GBs that removes three of the most inclusive (What-if, Made In GB, NATO Vs Warsaw Pact 70's) that can easily and already have in previous editions seen land and sea subjects featured.

[whitestar12chris]

Sarge i think part of the problem is that people arent reading the GB entries or sign up then dont vote.

 

As propsective host of Big screen Little screen GB which encompasses everything including sci-fi and maritime, i had 40 signees but its only received 28 votes so far!

 

Considering a membership of over 17,000 its a pretty poor showing.

 

Chris

[TonyTiger66]

Tallyman?

[gingerbob]

Tally me banana... daylight come and me wan' go home!

[JOCKNEY]

Blimey talk about entering the Lions den !

 

Gents

 

To be completely objective if you look at the forum votes (forget the GB for a moment) airplane builds outnumber all other areas. Therefore the GB voting tends to follow this trend.

However, I took part and actually finished a build in the recent Great Patriotic War (Russian) GB and the variety of builds was fantastic. This included bizarre snowmobiles, amazing armoured vehicles etc.

i wouldn't have known these things had even existed had it not been for this GB, and it has encouraged me to build out of my comfort zone going forward.

For my part I have tried to vote for GBs that offer as much scope to be as inclusive as possible, for purely selfish reasons in that I really enjoy seeing all the different builds / techniques etc.

If you have voted already you can't change things until our next opportunity to vote, however if you haven't voted yet think a little differently, go on you know you want too  and who knows you might be pleasantly surprised 

 

Cheers Pat

 

 

[Enzo the Magnificent]

9 minutes ago, JOCKNEY said:

If you have voted already you can't change things until our next opportunity to vote

 

Actually, you can!

 

Click on the "Show Vote Options" button and you can vote again.  Just be aware that only your latest vote will count.

[vppelt68]

The Duel is very inclusive...

[Enzo the Magnificent]

There are a number of issues which need to be dealt with.

 

Last year, we did have a "non aircraft section".  It only gained two entrants, one of which went through and became a great success.  But here's the thing...   that "non aircraft" GB had two aircraft entries, plus one aircraft related entry.   If we are going to insist that a GB be non aircraft, the scope will be relatively narrow which in turn may exclude other genres - exactly what we are trying no to do.  

 

Last year there was also some concern that the non aircraft GBs would get through with very few votes, which seems contrary to the very concept of a poll.  I felt that our experiment , while not exactly a failure, wasn't something we could comfortably sustain.

 

The suggestion that GB proposers should demonstrate their GB's capability to cater for multiple modelling categories has merit.   We can run a consultation over the next year.  There are some things that need to be clarified however.  How many constitute "multiple"? for instance.  Two?  Three?  

 

We also need some consultation on the "three year repeat ban" proposal.   Once the poll is completed, I'll start a thread to discuss these issues.

 

It has been asked why we have a "cap" on the number of GBs.  That's simple. Experience has shown that having large numbers of GBs running concurrently tends to lead very quickly to GB fatigue.  During 2017 there will be 19 GBs.  Two of them are regulars - KUTA and Blitzbuild.  The Blitzbuild GB won't make the fatigue problem worse though, as it only lasts one weekend.

 

That leaves 9 GBs and 8 STGBs.   They have to be planned carefully to ensure that we don't have too many GBs running at the same time.  Currently there will usually be five or six concurrent GBs and I think that is enough for anyone. 

 

I understand the frustrations of those who do not model aircraft, but please don't let the frustration cause any bad feeling on the forum.  As has been pointed out, about 80% of the GBs in contention are very inclusive.  The fact that some aircraft related GBs are doing very well in the poll just means that those subjects are very popular indeed. It doesn't mean that people are going out of their way to selfishly exclude non-aircraft modellers. 

 

I'd also like to point out that there is a good possibility that next year we will have a non-aircraft STGB for the first time ever.  I think that speaks volumes as to the inclusivity of BM.

[JackG]

Thanks for the above, Enzo. 

Was under the impression only six GB's from the poll would make it through, because we could only vote for a maximum of six - so there's some hope yet.

 

I've noticed too that a number of themes are slow out of the gates, even though they had 30+ members sign up as interested.  So I think yes, adding past suggestions back into the mix does potentially water down the voting potential of new themes.

 

regards,

Jack

[Enzo the Magnificent]

1 hour ago, JackG said:

Was under the impression only six GB's from the poll would make it through, because we could only vote for a maximum of six - so there's some hope yet.

 

My apologies.  I see I didn't make that clear.

 

to confirm, there will be 9 GBs next year.  You may vote for your favourite 6

[Sgt.Squarehead]

1 hour ago, Enzo Matrix said:

The fact that some aircraft related GBs are doing very well in the poll just means that those subjects are very popular indeed. It doesn't mean that people are going out of their way to selfishly exclude non-aircraft modellers. 

 

Regardless of whether they are excluded selfishly or not, they are still excluded.  

 

I'd strongly suggest that BM's first ever non-aircraft STGB is less a cause for celebration than it is a rather stark reminder of just how badly the forum has been monopolised in the past.  

 

 

[Mike]

14 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

 

Regardless of whether they are excluded selfishly or not, they are still excluded.  

 

I'd strongly suggest that BM's first ever non-aircraft STGB is less a cause for celebration than it is a rather stark reminder of just how badly the forum has been monopolised in the past.  

 

 

 

Andy - you're losing perspective here matey, and your rhetoric is getting somewhat OTT .  How about you walk away from the keyboard, and come back tomorrow. 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

It's step away from the iPad at the moment Mike.....I'd probably be rather less grumpy if I was using Beast (I haven't shot anyone in weeks)!