"Pat Hammond" wrote
With your self-professed fear of litigation if you publish anything which the manufacturers might potentially dislike, I would have thought that some checking of the contents of emails might not be a bad idea.
I'll check back through various emails and let you know.
But if you don't know what you're looking at how can you review it?
John.
"Pat Hammond" wrote
it isn't always! The moment
I don't see that having the confidence of the manufacturers is a requirement to the ongoing future of MREmag. It might be handy I suppose in getting advance news, but with the hobby rumour-mill being fuelled by some of the manufacturers I wonder how much of what some of them say is worth reporting anyway.
If MREmag were my baby, which fortunately it isn't, I'd want to be as independent from the manufacturers as feasibly possible.
John.
"Pat Hammond" wrote
I've now found the offending emails and will supply you with copies direct.
John.
Couldn't the e-mail section be on a separate page so keeping the useful news and the alledgely questionable e-mails separate.
Mike Parkes snipped-for-privacy@mphgate.removetoreply demon.co.uk
Croeso !! You're welcome !!
Regards,
Colin.
I'm sorry to disagree Adrian, this is/was not intended personally and/or aimed directly , but some people do buy for the sake of buying and for many reasons.....some people are most definitely like sheep, being unable to make-up their own minds.
Colin.
Probably engine and handling.
"Pat Hammond" wrote
Firstly, if the manufacturers kept quiet about their plans until they could be reasonably sure of their production schedule then no-one would be able to criticise how long it took them to get their projects into production.
Secondly, the errors (where they occur) must be arising at the design, not the tool-making stage. Consultation should be taking place at the time the initial drawing are completed, this would eliminate much, if not all of the need for tooling modification.
John.
In article , John Turner writes
MREmag takes between 4 and 6 hours a day of my time - sometimes even more.
If I lost the confidence of the manufacturers and publishers because I was being unjust to them, there would be no review models or books and no advanced information I could pass on. What would be left would not be worth my doing. There would certainly be nothing in it for me to justify the huge amount of time that it takes.
For the record, advertising revenue is very small and in no way influences content of reviews as you suggested earlier.
The only times that manufacturers get angry with me is when I publish emails that they feel are blatantly unfair. Look back at the high volume of criticism I have published for other people. Incidentally, I very rarely fail to reproduce an email unless the sender (like you have done, John) has asked me not to. I calculate that in excess of 95% of them are published. And, I never change the meaning of the email. I do sometimes take out reference to people by name and shorten long and boring ones which appear to go nowhere and I spend a lot of time correcting spelling and punctuation. I also sometimes soften unnecessarily aggressive ones as an alternative to not publishing them. I often don't agree with the content but I still publish them.
And, yes, I know my reviews are tame for the reasons I have previously given but I understand that there are plenty of non-rivet counters who find them very useful as a database because the cover most of the models produced in the last 18 months.
If there is so much wrong with MREmag, why do around 1,500 people a day read it?
Pat
"Adrian" replied to
"John Turner" who wrote
constructively)
This is where a site like MREmag could be offering a truly useful service, rather than the *it's got the right number of wheels and the manufacturer says the livery is right* type of review.
Now I know that's a bit unfair on Pat, but to me the model railway enthusiast really deserves better than what much of the model press are offering, and the *relative* freedom of the internet should be providing that facility.
I want a source of critical review (not necessarily negatively critical) which I can trust and use to give my customers sound advice.
that the Yahoo groups
Yes, my point exactly, but at the moment that facility is just not available, other than on the various email groups.
John.
"Pat Hammond" wrote
I didn't say it did, just that it could. That you have *adverisers who sell this product* listed on your review pages doesn't encourage criticism of that same product.
Is it blatantly unfair to say something is wrong if there is information to back up the claim as in the case of the wrong livery on the Bachmann InterCity liveried 37? Load of "Bullidae" in my opionion.
Emotive word - "rivet counter" as is "whinger" of course - "informed or knowledgeable" doesn't quite irritate in the same way does it?
Because there's no alternative??
John.
Pat,
Why don't you just show an obvious disclaimer that you don't necessarily agree with the contents of every email. As far as I can tell, every other readers' letters page has a similar disclaimer in any paper or magazine I can think of. That means that any possible criticisms on detail would be directed at your correspondents, and not at you.
Jim.
"Jim Guthrie" wrote
According to a solicitor friend of mine, a disclaimer doesn't negate responsibility for spreading of libellous statements.
It certainly doesn't help those researching facts if incorrect information is published. You know the scanario - "it was in the Daily Bugle so it must be true!"
This really all sounds like I'm having a go at Pat, but that's not really the case, this all started when "Adrian" was critical of comments which have been made about MREmag elswehere, and I simply have been trying to explain why some people find it to be less than credible and get quite irritated by it at times.
John.
I do. It is at the bottom every page, every day.
That doesn't stop manufacturers complaining when they disagree with what readers say in their emails. They feel that I shouldn't publish emails 'containing incorrect claims'. The trouble is that I am not in the position to know whether the information in the emails is correct or not. If I am the slightest bit doubtful I try to soften it a bit but I get complaints just the same. Some writers naturally don't want me to censor what they have to say and manufacturers don't want unfair criticism' in a magazine that 'promotes' the products of their competitors.
The emails section can so easily become a battleground and with only one victim - the magazine itself! That is why both sides have to trust me to handle the content in a way that keeps the service going and makes as few waves as possible.
If they want to blast away at the manufacturers, critics have the chat groups in which to do it and no one gets hurt. There is nothing to stop one of my critics starting their own review website if they want - but they don't.
Why people want to risk destroying MREmag, and thus take away a service enjoyed by a lot of people, is beyond my understanding - unless, of course, there is a hidden agenda I am, as yet, unaware of!
Pat
In article , John Turner writes
So why don't you, John?
You are already doing the pictures. A critique to go with them would be just the job! I know that with you well proven knowledge of the prototypes you could easily provide an excellent service which is clearly needed.
Or might it create bad relations with your suppliers which you could not afford?
Pat
In article , John Turner writes
Sorry, but to me that implies that I am holding back on criticism for fear of losing advertising - which is what I was denying.
Quite right, but what if you don't have the information in the first place. You forget that when I had fresh information about the Bullidae livery (from readers) I altered my review. Incidentally, Bachmann are still standing by their earlier statement on that issue as far as I know.
No less than your constant dig at 'collectors'!
So how about it John? You have the means but do you have the will?
Pat
"Pat Hammond" wrote
Because I believe something like that should be independent of the trade, which is why I reckon an operation like yours is best suited to handle it.
I'd only get flack if I praised a model - people would say I was just trying to sell more.
John.
"Pat Hammond" wrote
I've answered this point earlier. Even if I had the will I don't have the four to six hours daily which you say it takes.
On the other hand I'd be more than happy to assist anyone who took it on board with photographs and or prototype knowledge where I had it.
John.
A tad of an exaggeration, I may on the odd occasion refer to "collectors", and bear in mind that many of my customers fall into that category, but constant dig - I don't think so.
Incidentally, I'm a "collector" myself - of pre-war Hornby O-gauge - and my acquisition of models for my 4mm British and HO scale American layouts certainly exceeds any realistic needs, so why would I unduly knock "collectors"? :-)
John.
Why should you get *flack* for praising something which you believe in.....I'd admire you for standing your ground if you were correct.
I praise many aspects of my business but I've never been accused of saying it because I'm trying to sell it, even though it may well cost the individual....it's because people trust me, something which my business is built upon.
You run a good business and offer advice accordingly, people learn to trust and respect you...but you still have to make a profit to exist.
Colin.
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.