MR construction articles

I see... So instead of actually arguing the point, you simply equate WGH to a cartoon character? I still cannot see how the WGH campaign is a "sham":

sham (sham), n., adj., v., shammed, sham*ming. -n. 1. a spurious imitation. 2. a person who assumes a false character. -adj. 3. false or counterfeit. -v.t., v.i. 4. to put on a false appearance (of). -sham'mer, n.

So, there it is. Just what part about the WGH is a "sham"? How is it false? WGH is and always has been about growing the hobby. Any manufacturer with any modicum of intelligence will realize that efforts to grow the hobby will only increase their bottom line. Any model railroader will also realize that. Healthy, growing hobby companies can make better models more often if there are more people buying them.

Where *is* the problem? What, is it illegal or immoral for manufacturers to make money on a hobby or something? Should they only be run so as to break even, for the good of the hobby? Puh-leaze.

As far as I can tell, model railroaders that are against WGH are cutting off their nose to spite their face. Their slogan might as well be "We have met the enemy, and he is us!" - Pogo

Paul A. Cutler III

************* Weather Or No Go New Haven *************

(big snip)

Paul, obviously all you wish to do is re-argue the same points already covered here, which is not of interest to me nor the intent of my original response to Mike T, who had asked for an explanation as to why so many hobbyists, both on rec.models.railroad and elsewhere, are so unsupportive of the WGH campaign. I provided a response echoing what I've heard espoused over and over again by so many during the past couple of years. And, yes, it is an opinion with which I fully agree after carefully examining what's transpiring on the industry-side of the hobby today myself. Try looking in to it deeply yourself, it's very enlightening but not exactly uplifting with regard to the modeler's side of our hobby's future.

CNJ999