activity

Discuss the society, wargaming, and other topics of interest
User avatar
Rumblestrip
Posts: 60
Joined: 25 Jan 2013, 14:25
Location: ...where the oatcakes live...

Re: activity

Post by Rumblestrip »

granty101 wrote: 24 Jul 2018, 05:35 I'm happy for the Journal to go to two (bigger) issues per year
Rumblestrip wrote: 22 Jul 2018, 16:45Those attempts elicited, basically, two responses
  • I want the Journal - just make it shorter, less regular, less frequent (displaying and admirable failure to grasp the reality of the situation)
Think of any frequency, any length...we can't do it. Fifty pages, once a year...no. Ten pages, twice a year...no. 100 pages, every tenth year...no. Play the game as long as you like. Its not just the material and editorship it's the certainty of continuity of supply which permits the offer of a subscription.

Cheers
Andrew
¡Vencerán…pero no convencerán!
Richard B.
Posts: 885
Joined: 16 Mar 2012, 06:54

Re: activity

Post by Richard B. »

Andrew

Whilst i agree with your points to an extent.

You personally don`t seem to onboard with any enthusiasm about keeping The Journal or society alive (except online) this is the general vibe I got from you since day one, your first post here (well on the old forum).

I am quite happy to write a couple of 2 pages pieces for each and every issue plus reviews, but YOU give me no confidence you want them and that you would be happy for me to do so. So i have stock-piled my ongoing work here on this PC 9about 20 pages) and have stopped bothering to review.

In all your recent posts i have not heard you asking for submissions, has the team thought of a mail shot to all the membership??

Have you mailed the various - Rapid Fire!, Bolt Action, TooFatLardies, Skirmish campaigns/Check Your 6 plus numerous other C20th game companies, teams and asking for material contributions?? People have always been happy to help, they get a bit of advertising out of it too.

What about a general appeal on various forums - TMP; The Wargames Website, FB pages, etc, etc??

If you see and interesting article scenario online somewhere ask the author if you can re-publish it?? - offer a free subscription (whilst i had to personally pay for the hardcopy ones when I was editor, you could actually give a FREE pdf one at virtually no cost to the society!

Just a few ideas

Richard
"“Sir with the compliments of my officer, your shooting was excellent – you killed four of our men”!
Un-named Traillieur to an artillery officer at R`Fakah, Morocco, Feb. 29th, 1908
User avatar
Rumblestrip
Posts: 60
Joined: 25 Jan 2013, 14:25
Location: ...where the oatcakes live...

Re: activity

Post by Rumblestrip »

Richard B. wrote: 24 Jul 2018, 09:47 Andrew

You personally don`t seem to onboard with any enthusiasm about keeping The Journal or society alive (except online)...
Apologies if this is the case. I have no enthusiasm for repeatedly asking for submissions, for pointing out the absence of material and for trying to generate enthusiasm for considering alternative ways of keeping the Society going (not just online).

Clearly I have demonstrated my lack of enthusiasm for the printed Journal by the work I have put in developing the magazine, sub editing every article and writing 100,000 words for it in the last 7 or 8 years. I expect that contribution assisted less than remaining positive and enthusiastic and promising to write an article or two.

Cheers
Andrew
¡Vencerán…pero no convencerán!
Richard B.
Posts: 885
Joined: 16 Mar 2012, 06:54

Re: activity

Post by Richard B. »

If i seem harsh - i apologies but read the tone of your comments and your replies here.

I accept you`ve written loads - thank you

I know you`ve sub-edited the magazine - thank you

But you tone here is constantly negative, about the magazine and its future virtually from your very first post way back - and this isn`t the first time I`ve mentioned this either BTW - re-read the threads :roll:

If the team isn`t showing enthusiasm and is constantly preaching doom and gloom, how is this inspiring the membership to step-up??
"“Sir with the compliments of my officer, your shooting was excellent – you killed four of our men”!
Un-named Traillieur to an artillery officer at R`Fakah, Morocco, Feb. 29th, 1908
granty101
Posts: 640
Joined: 26 Mar 2015, 18:18
Location: Durham

Re: activity

Post by granty101 »

Rumblestrip wrote: 24 Jul 2018, 10:13
Apologies if this is the case. I have no enthusiasm for repeatedly asking for submissions
Andrew, I submitted to Pete Jones an article about a year ago. I clearly stated it wasn't a finished article, (and I still haven't finished it :oops: ), yet somehow it got through to you, and it came back partly edited!! Whether you knew or not, I don't know, but I did clearly state in my e-mail that it wasn't finished. So yes, I know you've done more than your bit for the Journal, but I have to agree with Richard, you do come over all doom and gloom mate.

Grant

P.S. I now run everything by Carl Luxford before submitting to Pete
Vot is your Name? Don't tell him Pike!!!
User avatar
Rumblestrip
Posts: 60
Joined: 25 Jan 2013, 14:25
Location: ...where the oatcakes live...

Re: activity

Post by Rumblestrip »

Richard B. wrote: 24 Jul 2018, 11:28...But you tone here is constantly negative, about the magazine and its future virtually from your very first post way back...
I absolutely disagree. I realistically set out the likely future of the Society given the lack of contributions. I maintained that line for several years and tried on two or three occasions to open a discussion about other activities we might undertake as a society. I actively demonstrated enthusiasm through action rather than simply proclaim it. Despite the perception you have of me I am almost entirely uninterested in an 'online only' Society. When others talk of portals, paywalls and the like I have no idea what is being suggested. I am interested only inasmuch as somebody is suggesting something which might be a spur to action. Personally I would like a society where people met up and, y'know, played games...probably set after 1900. No one has, however, responded positively to that. I await other constructive suggestions.

However I agree that since trying all that (not before) and getting nowhere I do have a jaundiced view of the Society's future. But Bannockburn Bhoy asked for views. I waited a while and few were forthcoming so I felt he deserved some sort of a response.

Also don't confuse my views as a member with my views as a ctte member - I'm very clear when I'm representing anyone other than me.

If people disagree with what I said, fine - propose sthg new and different or write an article. The fact remains that there is no prospect of a new subscription to the Journal until we have 80-100 pages ready to go. That hasn't been the case for two years or more.

Don't tell me I'm a misery, give me cause to hope.

Cheers
Andrew
¡Vencerán…pero no convencerán!
User avatar
Rumblestrip
Posts: 60
Joined: 25 Jan 2013, 14:25
Location: ...where the oatcakes live...

Re: activity

Post by Rumblestrip »

granty101 wrote: 24 Jul 2018, 14:28
Rumblestrip wrote: 24 Jul 2018, 10:13
Apologies if this is the case. I have no enthusiasm for repeatedly asking for submissions
Andrew, I submitted to Pete Jones an article about a year ago. I clearly stated it wasn't a finished article, (and I still haven't finished it :oops: ), yet somehow it got through to you, and it came back partly edited!! Whether you knew or not, I don't know, but I did clearly state in my e-mail that it wasn't finished. So yes, I know you've done more than your bit for the Journal, but I have to agree with Richard, you do come over all doom and gloom mate.

Grant

P.S. I now run everything by Carl Luxford before submitting to Pete
I don't understand what you're seeking here or were seeking then?

As I understood it, you submitted an unfinished article (which had some specific queries about grammar/construction embedded within it), presumably seeking a view on a form in which it might be published. Otherwise, why submit a part finished article? It's either a request for some form of assistance (entirely welcome) or...it's what? Anyway I thought I was being helpful putting it into the house standard and offering a view on some grammar so that you could then finish it. Obviously you're entirely free to wholly ignore what I said and submit whatever you want, as I'm just giving a view.

Alternatively you were sending it with (effectively) an accompanying unwritten note to neither read nor publish it.

For me, taking the time to comment and offer an opinion on a putative article, is a way in which I have continued to support contributions and the printed Journal. I would appreciate an explanation of an alternative view.

Cheers
Andrew
¡Vencerán…pero no convencerán!
granty101
Posts: 640
Joined: 26 Mar 2015, 18:18
Location: Durham

Re: activity

Post by granty101 »

Rumblestrip wrote: 24 Jul 2018, 16:46 I would appreciate an explanation of an alternative view.

Cheers
Andrew
Andrew,

The article wasn't sent in for it to be edited half way through. It was sent it to get a bit of feedback...that's all!! ( And I don't mean in the form of grammatical errors being corrected or bits of text removed...that would/should be done after a final submission, and before being sent to print). :evil:

It was clearly stated in my original e-mail to Pete that it wasn't finished. Whether you got that (e-mail) I don't know.

Anyway, I'm not going to open a 'war of words' with you, or anyone else online, about articles for submission or publication, but as Richard has stated, you are coming over as a 'doom and gloom' merchant on this forum...so cheer the feck up!!!

Grant
Vot is your Name? Don't tell him Pike!!!
CarlL
Posts: 1103
Joined: 25 Mar 2013, 20:53
Location: North Yorkshire

Re: activity

Post by CarlL »

Rumblestrip

Membership and participation and a shared interest in a period of history, gaming this period, or modelling this period - oh and sharing these on our forum, or in our Journal.

Keep it simple and stop looking to be so unique!

Carl being positive and trying not to be too rude..................
granty101
Posts: 640
Joined: 26 Mar 2015, 18:18
Location: Durham

Re: activity

Post by granty101 »

CarlL wrote: 24 Jul 2018, 19:03
Carl being positive and trying not to be too rude..................
Carl, you're one of the most positive persons I know, and you've never been rude...either in person, on this forum or via e-mail.

Grant
Vot is your Name? Don't tell him Pike!!!
Post Reply