I think we have read enough opinions here, and the most recent have not advanced the original premise a great deal. Let's move on.
-Crandell
steinjr wrote: Reminds me of this great T-shirt I once briefly considered buying and wearing at work after the company where I worked then changed my job description into "senior consultant" : it had the word "unemployed" crossed out, and the text "consultant" penciled in instead. Under it said : "same work, more pay".
Reminds me of this great T-shirt I once briefly considered buying and wearing at work after the company where I worked then changed my job description into "senior consultant" : it had the word "unemployed" crossed out, and the text "consultant" penciled in instead. Under it said : "same work, more pay".
I've met a few people that would fit into one of those shirts.
So by your definition, based on that experience, anyone who is a consultant is unqualified?
Apparently, you've never heard the joke and, judging from your reply, have trouble recognizing a joke as well.
There's a joke I like that takes potshots at software types (I was one once) which involves a woman who's been married 3 times but is still a virgin. To keep it short, I'll skip straight to the punch line where the woman wails to her friend, "My 3rd husband is a software engineer and all he ever does is tell me how good it's going to be".
And yes, the big 5 consulting firms did hire kids straight out of college and made them "consultants" without first having at least a modicum of actual real world experience. Still do as far as I know. I'm retired, but I doubt things have changed all that much. Cheap labor, billed out at $250/hour at the time. We had 2 of the 5, Price-Waterhouse Coopers and Deloitte & Touche. Talk to any software professional who's been in the business for any length of time. They'll tell you about consultants. It ain't just MY opinion.
And then there was a colleague of mine who reveled in his S.C.U.M.B.A.G. title (Santa Clara University MBA Graduate). OTOH, he had over 12 years real world experience before getting the MBA so he actually knew something useful.
And just to bring this back on topic, if you're going to have a layout professionally built, make sure your contractor actually has built layouts. Otherwise, I can guarantee you it won't be "good enough".
Andre
Scarpia wrote: andrechapelon wrote: "expert" consultants* to assist us. Turns out, these self-proclaimed "experts" caused more problems than they solved (snip ...) I don't trust unverified claims of expertise (snip ...) *Consultant - a person who claims to know 101 ways to make love but has never actually been out on a date. So by your definition, based on that experience, anyone who is a consultant is unqualified?
andrechapelon wrote: "expert" consultants* to assist us. Turns out, these self-proclaimed "experts" caused more problems than they solved (snip ...) I don't trust unverified claims of expertise (snip ...) *Consultant - a person who claims to know 101 ways to make love but has never actually been out on a date.
"expert" consultants* to assist us. Turns out, these self-proclaimed "experts" caused more problems than they solved (snip ...)
I don't trust unverified claims of expertise (snip ...)
*Consultant - a person who claims to know 101 ways to make love but has never actually been out on a date.
Sadly I chickened out from buying and wearing both that T-shirt and buying and wearing the T-shirt that said "select * from management where clue > 0 - zero rows returned" - I must have been getting older and more "responsible" even then
Anyways - the main point of Andre's post seems to have been not "all consultants are unqualified", but rather "some self proclaimed 'expert' consultants are unqualified - so I want to see for myself what data these self proclaimed experts base their analysis &recommendation on, and see them explain how they went from data to result."
Which is an very sensible attitude, in my opinion. "Just trust me, I am an expert" is usually a weak argument. An qualified expert in a field ought be able to explain to a reasonably intelligent layman (and especially to a reasonably intelligent layman with domain knowledge) how he or she arrives at their result.
Incidentally - is this thread really much related to model railroading any more ? Or are we all busy illustrating the old quip that explains why somewhat vaguely defined emotional touchy-feely subjects tend to get 5-10 pages of followup posts while posts about technical aspects of our hobby rarely gets more than 4-5 followup posts: "opinions are like (umm - plural of excretory body opening at lower rear end of human beings) - everybody has one, and everybody thinks everybody else's stink worse than their own" ?
Hmm - I forget - in these kinds of threads - was I supposed to bite my tongue and sit on my hands, or was I supposed to bite my hands and sit on my tongue, or was I supposed to bite what people sit on and put my tongue out, or ....
Grin, Stein
Well I might as well jump in too LOL.
There was this guy who could build brass steam Locos from scratch but could not build the base for a layout out of 2 x4's etc. After I they were built he had a tear in his eye they were so beautiful [his words]. he could not build the guts for a layout but he could build brass locos.
I can not build a loco to save my life. But if it is made of wood I can probably build it.
For me 'good enough' amounts to the level of my skills for now. I buy a loco and if it stays on the tracks I am happy. I have never weathered a loco or car etc.
However, I can and do build buildings and bridges etc etc that make people go nuts trying to figure out how i do it.
Recently i built a trestle. I did not put in ALL the details for a change because i simply coudln't be bothered. And yet it still has all the nut and bolt washers etc on it. I also put a spike in EVERY tie etc etc. I just choose not to put in other things though because I thought what I had done this time was 'good enough'.
For others it would be too much and yet others would have done more [like put in the gurd rail].
As for the 'rivet counters'. If it were NOT for them we would not have the fine looking locos and cars etc that we now have. I appreciate these people a lot. No way my shay would look as good as it does if it were not for those guys.
Personally I think we owe rivet counters a big round of applause. But there is no chance at all of me doing that kind of stuff on my own.
So good enough' for me depends on what it is I am doing. I hand lay my own track and make my own turnouts. I hand make board by board all my buildings and bridges.
But I also but cars and locos and run them as is out of the bow and never have changed them. Whatever they look like out of the box is generally what they look like years later as well.
For me, both areas are good enough.
As for others, I think that good enough is what ever makes you happy. When the hobby stops being fun it stops beinga hobby I think. For me "FUN" is cutting and dying and laying out 5,000 scale sized railroad ties. I have had people watch me cut them out etc and almost run out of the room LOL.
I also make things like ladders etc and people go crossed eyed watching me. To me that is fun. Changing the appearance of a loco or car is not fun to me.
We are all different, and each of us have our own idea of fun. I think often though it comes down to our expectations and our experience. In the end, are you having fun? Then it does not matter what others think.
That just my opinion though. Hope it helps :D
andrechapelon wrote:Dave Vollmer opines: Huh huh...While the Andre-CNJ thing was entirely predictable,....Well, at least I'm dependable. You'll have to excuse me, Dave. I was a part of a large software implementation about a dozen years ago and our company hired a whole slew of "expert" consultants* to assist us. Turns out, these self-proclaimed "experts" caused more problems than they solved and our team spent the better part of the year after implementation undoing much of what the "experts" told us to do. I don't trust unverified claims of expertise and I'm a bit sensitive about same. Anything I've personally posted about hobby pricing can be either verified or falsified by a little research since specific examples are provided. That should be "good enough" (to try and keep it somewhat on topic).*Consultant - a person who claims to know 101 ways to make love but has never actually been out on a date.Andre
Dave Vollmer opines:
Huh huh...
While the Andre-CNJ thing was entirely predictable,....
Well, at least I'm dependable.
You'll have to excuse me, Dave. I was a part of a large software implementation about a dozen years ago and our company hired a whole slew of "expert" consultants* to assist us. Turns out, these self-proclaimed "experts" caused more problems than they solved and our team spent the better part of the year after implementation undoing much of what the "experts" told us to do. I don't trust unverified claims of expertise and I'm a bit sensitive about same. Anything I've personally posted about hobby pricing can be either verified or falsified by a little research since specific examples are provided. That should be "good enough" (to try and keep it somewhat on topic).
No offence, but I haven't seen your name in the editors section of the Webster's Dictionary. I trust you'll excuse me for not trusting your unverified claim of expertise in this matter.
I still say the point of good enough is when the fun disapears.
Due to the personal growth that seems to be inherent to any modeling based hobby, that is a point which fluctuates based on experience and skill development.
But hey, I'm no expert......
I'm trying to model 1956, not live in it.
markpierce wrote: If Semper ubi sub ubi means "Always wear underwear" .... What is the Latin translation for "and when you don't, try not sitting on new upholstery"?Thanks,Mark............
If Semper ubi sub ubi means "Always wear underwear" ....
What is the Latin translation for "and when you don't, try not sitting on new upholstery"?
Thanks,
Mark
............
Latin's a little rusty, but I believe "ut vos operor non , tendo non sedeo in novus upholstery" is close enough. "Upholstery" not having a direct translation
The Dixie D Short Line "Lux Lucet In Tenebris Nihil Igitur Mors Est Ad Nos 2001"
kcole4001 wrote:BTW, compared to some ASL (Advanced Squad Leader) forum's standards this squabble is really quite tame.
Wow, does this bring back fond memories of playing SL/ASL !
PS -- My girlfriend asked me this question because of an incident involving our cabin's chair on the maiden voyage of the cruise ship Pearl. Believe me, you don't want further details.
Hi all, new to this forum, but been reading MR since late 1978.
In the past, I knew well enough that I hadn't the space, time, or money for anything that could be considered 'good enough' for my standards, so armchairing had to be good enough for many years.
Lately, though, I've finally put some real concrete effort into model railroading, and it is expensive, but so are all hobbies. Finding your own limitations, financial and otherwise, gives you a sort of boundary line, a place where you know it'll have to be good enough for you to at least make a start worthwhile.
Expecting that boundary to be in the realm of the big layout features seen in magazines is, for most, unrealistic, though these do serve some really fine inspiration.
There have been many features and how-to's on smaller layouts in MR. The Clinchfield series was just wrapping up when I began reading MR bacl in the fall of '78, and there's even more small layout info and interest now, fortunately.
The hobby goes through phases, and it's still really developing it's overall public identity, but what we all do in our own basements, garages, and spare rooms really defines what the hobby is.
Most of us will never have that 'dream layout' or have our work featured in an international modelling magazine, but spending our time in this hobby is something we've all chosen to do, so we just need to make the most of what we have to hand, and not begrudge those that have more time or money, and help those that have less in terms of knowledge and skills.
We all have our own preferences and standards, but in the end it's about having fun, and if it's not fun, why do it?
Interesting debate, anyway!
:)
twhite wrote:Ray--On CARMINA BURANA--we found out the best way to whet the addiction was to PERFORM it, which is exactly what my high school choir did, two years ago--with blessings from the Administration, BTW. Worked like a charm, and the guys just LOVED doing it. And we did a pretty darned good job of it, too. They didn't care about the lyrics, they were just having too much fun with the music. And after that, it was easy to get them into Brahms, Beethoven and Copland. Tom
Ray--
On CARMINA BURANA--we found out the best way to whet the addiction was to PERFORM it, which is exactly what my high school choir did, two years ago--with blessings from the Administration, BTW. Worked like a charm, and the guys just LOVED doing it. And we did a pretty darned good job of it, too. They didn't care about the lyrics, they were just having too much fun with the music. And after that, it was easy to get them into Brahms, Beethoven and Copland.
Tom
Oh Yeah!!!!!! Hope you had orchestra accompaning them. You have to have the gong in "O Fortuna"!!!! (I know you realise that 95% of the people on here have no clue of what this is all about........) I played "O Fortuna" for my 8th. grade classes years ago (It was in the Series Books). After school 4 of the "tough" kids showed up in my room. "Mr. Howard, would make us a copy of that Fortune Song you played today?" Had to tell them no as it is copyrighted, but they could buy the entire piece at the local record shop downtown. Found out from the owner of the shop that a few kids did exactly that. Great way to show students that great music isn't quite so boring as they thought....
Sorry for stealing the thread............... You can go back to argueing now.
Ray Seneca Lake, Ontario, and Western R.R. (S.L.O.&W.) in HO
We'll get there sooner or later!
Tom View my layout photos! http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm310/TWhite-014/Rio%20Grande%20Yuba%20River%20Sub One can NEVER have too many Articulateds!
jasperofzeal wrote: twhite wrote: Gary: "Semper ubi sub ubi" means "Always wear underwear." Learned that from my favorite Jesuit priest at the Catholic boy's school at which I teach. Other than that, my Latin's pretty poor, myself (well, except for possibly some of the more ribald sections of "CARMINA BURANA" )Tom Am I the only one that finds this distrubing? See you on the news at 6.
twhite wrote: Gary: "Semper ubi sub ubi" means "Always wear underwear." Learned that from my favorite Jesuit priest at the Catholic boy's school at which I teach. Other than that, my Latin's pretty poor, myself (well, except for possibly some of the more ribald sections of "CARMINA BURANA" )Tom
Gary:
"Semper ubi sub ubi" means "Always wear underwear."
Learned that from my favorite Jesuit priest at the Catholic boy's school at which I teach. Other than that, my Latin's pretty poor, myself (well, except for possibly some of the more ribald sections of "CARMINA BURANA" )
Am I the only one that finds this distrubing? See you on the news at 6.
Well, not unless you ALSO find it disturbing when a public school gym coach reminds his team to be properly and protectively attired (i.e, 'jockstraps' )for sports events.
I'm a lot more concerned about that "Carmina Burana" thing..... I once had an Orff addiction myself. Even kept a copy of his Shulwerk in my desk at school for those times I had to have it. It came from an addiction to Kodaly. I even sang his Te Deum in collage..... You have seen Close Encounters of the Third Kind haven't you? Guess I shouldn't really say more here on line, but hopefully ol' Tom can get some help for this...
No doubt!!
PASMITH wrote:Holy Cow Batman, over 5,000 views of this thread and still climbing!
So is that good enough??
I have seen this on virtually every forum. Post a question that actually asks for a technical answer or some constructive input and get a half dozen constructive answers (if you are lucky). Start a thread about some esoteric point or some undefineable aspect and you can get a dozen pages and keep it going for weeks.
Opinions are evidently more common than knowledge. 8-)
Dave H.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
TONY
"If we never take the time, how can we ever have the time." - Merovingian (Matrix Reloaded)
numbnut57 wrote:That's what good lawyers do. If you would have read the post rather than look for a way to dig at someone you would have seen the compliment there. However, when you change my screen name to provide a dig or snide remark, you've gone too far.
That's what good lawyers do. If you would have read the post rather than look for a way to dig at someone you would have seen the compliment there. However, when you change my screen name to provide a dig or snide remark, you've gone too far.
Would you like it if I started all my posts "fignewton writes".
Get a new life and pick up a sense of humor with it.
selector wrote:I believe I have stated in earlier such threads (maybe just one of them) that I get the impression the use of the term "modelling" is misused by many of us. I call myself a railroad modeller, but I don't do it. Sure, I have mostly NYC and PRR engines and rolling stock, but if that's all it took we'd all be able to say we model a given railroad.
I believe I have stated in earlier such threads (maybe just one of them) that I get the impression the use of the term "modelling" is misused by many of us. I call myself a railroad modeller, but I don't do it. Sure, I have mostly NYC and PRR engines and rolling stock, but if that's all it took we'd all be able to say we model a given railroad.
Grampys Trains wrote: We definitely had different opinions of what was good enough. It seems to me that applies to model railroads, too. As to the money argument, people ask me what kind of gas mileage I get with my vehicle. I tell them I don't really know. I don't check it. It serves my needs, and I have to put gas in it, so gas mileage is irrevelant to me. That' my personal opinion, and doesn't necessarily apply to anyone else. I don't really know how much money I've invested in my layout, maybe $5,000 over a span of approx. 5 years. That's an average of about $80 a month. From the start, I knew I'd have to invest time and money to achieve my goal of a nice layout. I don't regret a minute or dollar invested.
We definitely had different opinions of what was good enough. It seems to me that applies to model railroads, too.
As to the money argument, people ask me what kind of gas mileage I get with my vehicle. I tell them I don't really know. I don't check it. It serves my needs, and I have to put gas in it, so gas mileage is irrevelant to me. That' my personal opinion, and doesn't necessarily apply to anyone else.
I don't really know how much money I've invested in my layout, maybe $5,000 over a span of approx. 5 years. That's an average of about $80 a month. From the start, I knew I'd have to invest time and money to achieve my goal of a nice layout. I don't regret a minute or dollar invested.
Well said! People (including myself) should probably spend more time working on our layouts (striving towards the kind of quality you have achieved on your layout) and less time arguing about what is "good enough" in general terms
Now, it is back to my warehouse for me - I need to make a new concrete loading dock for trucks on the back side of it and get the door frames painted. I'll try to make it look as good as I can given my current skill level and available time. That will just have to be good enough for now.
Amazing commentary, this thread. Some of us on this thread are the most outrageous advocates of do it my way or you are . . . What we mean is "what is good enough from my personal view".
Case in point, I just visited the Greeley Transportation Museum last night, for the third time. This layout consumes a 70' x 140' building and in a word, is "amazing'. Thousands of trees, probably a dozen trestles, canyons with backgrounds to die for. Thirty car trains winding their way through the trees, Doug Geiger engineered signaling system with CTC. Oh, and all that outrageous mountain scenery towering 15' high is built on stacked blue foam.
But if one measured this incredible work by the yardstick of many on this website who proport "good enough works for me," Greeley Transportation Museum is, well, all code 100. Atlas code 100 at that, with watermellon sized tie plates and outrageous rail heights some 30 thousandst of an inch too high. And to add misery to the stack the turnouts are outrageously unreliable commercial, right out of the box. As for the use of blue foam; well I know a fellow who is adamant bout that little point.
No, Greeley Transportation Museum is not 'good enough'.
FYI, the museum opens to the public on Memorial Day, 2009. (Unless you are a member of the Northern Colorado Model Railroad club.)
Back to the train room, I got work to do. . .
My
Joe Daddy