Hi all. My comment about the review rules was a paraphrase. I belong to quite a number of forums and one forum's rant is another forum's mild disagreement while another it would be nothing less than heresy. I haven't read more than a few dozen reviews and none really seemed all that nit-picky (in a good sense) and some did not mention issues I saw with the same model, both good and bad. Having some 200+ AFV and soft skin kits and almost as many detail and accessory kits in my stash I often can compare what's written to what I can actually see. The absence of this information can mean that there is no desire to tick the kit manufacturer off and risk a potential loss of advertising revenue or products donated for review by manufacturers. I don't think this is too outlandish to believe. A member can gripe because he/she is speaking for themselves and not necessarily thought of as speaking for "management" as it were. I once made the mistake of starting a thread here wherein I raved about a recently released aftermarket part that I had read many modelers were wanting. When I posted about it I did so because I was excited about it and did it in absolute good faith. I received a PM from an editor shortly after and was taken to task, albeit gently, for doing it because a feature had been recently written about it. I was also openly criticized for doing it in the thread as well as I recall. Needless to say, I will never do that again! I did write a column for a PAC newsletter many years ago and learned the peril with writing opinionated evaluations and critiques, regardless of the facts backing your premise, is that it's often hard to know when you've crossed the line until you step on a landmine.

As an avid PC gamer I can tell you without question there is huge power wielded by advertisers over the publications that review the products. I can show enough evidence to support this I can convince the most hardened cynic. But, I digress. I did not say it did exist here but it could be interpreted that way.

Some time ago I made simple base with scratchbuild piece of bunker.

Quoted Text

---

As an avid PC gamer I can tell you without question there is huge power wielded by advertisers over the publications that review the products. I can show enough evidence to support this I can convince the most hardened cynic. But, I digress. I did not say it did exist here but it could be interpreted that way.

---

Jim,
I am a 20+ year computer gamer and I have always thought that magazines like PC Gamer and such were pretty tough in their reviews. Ironically our ratings system was inspired by theirs because I (unlike some) like the idea of being able to rate a product from 0-100 and not simply good or bad, 1-5 stars, or 1-10 stars. As for the reviews by contributors of this site I can emphatically claim we have never told anyone how to rate a product. We have encouraged reviewers to expound on their text, include more photos, etc. but we have always let the reviewer say whatever good or bad things they desire. Do some reviewers concentrate on the good and ignore some of the bad?... probably. Does this happen in all areas of product reviewing on the planet? Again probably. Do some reviewers think they need to write a glowing review no matter what because they are getting a free kit? Sometimes I am sure, but the reader has it within their power to see this and react, by commenting, reviewing it themselves or simply tuning out future reviews by that reviewer.

For the record these "free kits" cost us/me money. Today about $50 in shipping and tomorrow another $70 most likely. The reviews themselves are a time-consuming chore to do and personally I don't envy anyone who does a lot of them. As for the advertisers I have never had an advertiser pull their ads because of a negative review. And in almost 8 years of operation we have had only one or two instances where a manufacturer complained about a review. And never an advertiser.

The bottom line is it's your choice to contribute or not, but not contributing out of some fear you are going to be censured seems a little odd to me. If you did have a problem wouldn't you simply not contribute in the future? Problem solved.

Cheers,
Jim

Marcin, that's some really nice grass,how did you do it?

When you guys get kits, are they always preproduction or initial productions (no pun intended)? If so, does this have any effect on what you will see in such a kit compared to something one would see if it was the 3rd or 4th thousandth produced?

I've been on this site now for more than a few years now, and while I enjoy it, it has to a point, fallen into what I personally call "my disfavor". This is the only site I've never contributed too, and for the longest time, had a hard time deciding what I wanted to contribute.
There are alot of individuals who seem to jump on the all-knowing bandwagon, and I for one don't care for it. I could care less what someones model looks like, the fact that they built it in the first place is good enough in my book.
There are many so called armchair experts here, and while some are legit in my book, others are outright morons. Even those who have contributed heartedly can be the biggest gimps too.
Constructive criticism is good, but when you start negatively posting about someone elses work when yours is just as mediocre is a complete oxymoron.
Post whores. Have you seen them lately?! Over a thousand posts in a year. Hell, I havent even hit that yet, nor am I close. Some of these are the very individuals I speak about.
There are alot more reasons but even typing this makes my head hurt.
I enjoy Armorama, but even moreso when I first came to this site. There was alot more useful people and info to go around. Now, its just more of the 1337 crowd.

Its difficult to want to contribute when these elements are an issue, at least to me. Maybe
someday it improve.

Quoted Text

---

When you guys get kits, are they always preproduction or initial productions (no pun intended)? If so, does this have any effect on what you will see in such a kit compared to something one would see if it was the 3rd or 4th thousandth produced?

---

Hey Jim, before the Lionroar zundapps came out , Bill C and I evaluated the pre production kits for accuracy,missing details bad instructions, i thought that was great, as if missing details or such are found, the manufacturer can put their foot down and try and sort it out.

I don't personally need to see my build log inundated with "kewl" or "nice camo". I'd rather have a well placed criticism that reflects the positve or negative aspects of my build. Then again, I remember that there are those who don't know how to properly judge or review said subject matter, or say anything more than two or three words long. Again, this is my opinion.

'EXPERTS' This, IMO, is becoming a pretty lame excuse for not doing anything. No-one expects 'Expert' Reviews all the time. Let me give an example. I'm currently working on a Review of WWP's book on the FMTV Truck series. I'm sure there are other people out there whose knowledge of the subject is infinitely greater than my own. However, on the basis that i'm very familiar with this type of book (most of my Reviews HAVE been books of this type) i'm pretty happy doing it. My approach? Simple, i'm looking at it from the modeler's point of view. Will it be useful for anyone working on Trump's kit? Going by the published reviews on the model, I can apply its value towards anyone building it or the M198 Howitzer.