Subject:
|
Re: Lego(r) Master Maniac designation?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 28 Dec 1998 11:40:57 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1128 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> Steve Jacquot wrote:
>
> > Ok, try this: a two-tier guild membership. Membership at the first
> > level (journeyman?) is relatively inclusive, but non-trivial: anybody
> > can get in if they're willing to work for it (something like the
> > N page website might even be appropriate here).
The more I think about this, the more appropriate it seems. At this
entry level, the objective is primarily to encourage activity, not
to reward achievement, so why not let it be merit badgy? Most of the
web sites people create specifically to qualify for this will be crap,
but that's ok. Some people who otherwise would never have built a
site will want to improve on the initial crappy effort and make
something worthwhile - everybody wins.
> > They can also vote special honors for exceptional service.
>
> I think you're on to something here. Honors for service, honors for body
> of work. Separate things.
Right. Very much like the NMRA as it happens, with its three
certificates in the Service to the Hobby area.
How's this: a *three* tier guild. First is the general membership
which may be further subdivided into Special Interest Groups (SIGs)
which each have their own merit badge requirements (for example,
someone might qualify for the Technic SIG simply by designing
and building an original Technic model - low threshhold). SIG
membership would not be required, but you could belong to as
many as you qualify for. Each SIG would elect masters in its
own area (analogous to the NMRA certificates), and the general
membership would select the Service to the Hobby masters. The
third level would be Grand Masters (analogous to the NMRA MMR)
who have achieved mastery in N of the M SIGs (where N might even
== M).
Hard to say what a good division of SIGs would be. It might be
better to avoid strictly theme based SIGs (given the ephemeral
nature of most themes these days) in favor of a more functional
division (e.g. architectural, vehicular, mechanical, artistic)
although some SIGs (e.g. Trains) are probably inevitable, even
where they could be subsumed elsewhere (e.g Trains<vehicular).
> I dug up the NMRA reference:
> http://users.vnet.net/paulrver/welcome.html
>
> which describes the Achievement Program, as well as the Master Model
> Railroader designation. Interesting reading. Clearly the developers of
> this strived to make it the right level of achievement. They broke it
> down into 11 categories grouped into 4 broad areas. You need 7 of the 11
> categories, but at least one must be from each area.
> One of the areas is hobby service. But Hobby service includes being an
> author...
>
> Also, Model Railroading is a huge hobby compared to ours, and many
> people are NMRA members. Model Railroader, the magazine, has a paid
> circulation of over 200,000 copies a month, and the RMR newsgroup gets
> several times the volume of posting that RTL does. Yet in the entire
> time the NMRA has had Master Model Railroader, only 280 people have
> achieved it, and only 3 of *them* got all 11 certificates.
It's also, notably, a more mature hobby, with well developed (presumably
objective) standards for judging merit, something we don't have.
--
Steve Jacquot
sj5w@virginia.edu
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Lego(r) Master Maniac designation?
|
| (...) I think you're on to something here. Honors for service, honors for body of work. Separate things. I dug up the NMRA reference: (URL) describes the Achievement Program, as well as the Master Model Railroader designation. Interesting reading. (...) (26 years ago, 28-Dec-98, to lugnet.general)
|
39 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
