Not a “modeller”!

[Russell EberhardtParticipant @russelleberhardt48058]

Posted by Roderick Jenkins on 26/08/2014 09:25:43:

Relax guys, we're just a bunch of old gits putting the world to rights over a metaphorical pint .

Speak for yourself, well me as well I suppose

Unfortunately we can't get pints here and when I buy a half litre it's cold, tastless, and fizzy

Russell.

[jason udallParticipant @jasonudall57142]

Not commenting on Engi eer…
But the op MODELLER.

If he doesn’t like the term the good luck..I doubt anyone he knows addresses him as such.
And if they did I am sure a polite correction would suffice.

Myself?…
Not bothered over title ..
But may be this thought…boats owned for pleasure/non commercial purposes are defined as yachts. ..regardless of power or size. ..

[alan frostParticipant @alanfrost17805]

HansR , yes I could have added the odd bit of blacksmithing to my list of interests. Not sure forging one of those would be encouraged by the law in the UK and I'm not sure I would want to meet that blacksmith when he had his axe. He seems a bit twitchy to me.

Regards

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

A lot to wade through here. I will read it properly tomorrow.

For the record DAG has the wrong end of the stick. My comment was to reassure all that I wouldn't rename the title lightly, and anyway that would be a decision for the publisher, not the editor. Mind you, Model Engineer's several name changes don't appear to have affected its longevity.

As for the increasing breadth of content? The publishers have specifically asked me to include more content of relevance to the wider readership of the magazine which goes far beyond model engineers to car restorers, light engineering companies and 'makers' etc. I am hoping to do this in a way that doesn't alienate existing readers.

Again, as far as I'm aware, no-one complained about Ken Sprayson's first article way back in issue 146 on bending tubes for motorcycle frames.

Neil (who isn't here… right!)

[MadMikeParticipant @madmike]

Neil W, lat's face it no matter what anybody else thinks about names, titles, engineering and model making abilities that Ken Sprayson should be considered a Superhero. His knowledge, abilities and sheer ability to build super handling racing motorcycle frames makes him a true legend in his and our lifetimes. If anybody on here considers thenself to be an engineer then theyshould look at Kens work If they have 20% of his ability then they would be truly super engineers.

[Russell EberhardtParticipant @russelleberhardt48058]

Posted by jason udall on 26/08/2014 16:55:06:

But may be this thought…boats owned for pleasure/non commercial purposes are defined as yachts. ..regardless of power or size. ..

Mmm…

The more usual definition seems to be a boat (motor or sail) equiped for cruising. Does that mean that I can't call my model boat a Yacht?

Russell.

[Russell EberhardtParticipant @russelleberhardt48058]

Posted by Neil Wyatt on 26/08/2014 21:51:18:

As for the increasing breadth of content? The publishers have specifically asked me to include more content of relevance to the wider readership of the magazine which goes far beyond model engineers to car restorers, light engineering companies and 'makers' etc. I am hoping to do this in a way that doesn't alienate existing readers.

Quite right too.

Keep up the good work Neil.

Russell.

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

The stuff about professional engineers and chartered status may seem irelevant, but I'm a bit of a sucker for the magazine's heritage.

It's interesting to look at not just the old titles, but also a few of the old straplines, which are, in a sense, 'mission statements' for the titles:

• The Model Engineer and Amateur Electrician. A journal of mechanics and electricity for amateurs and students.
• The Model Engineer. A journal of small power engineering.
• Model Engineer. The Magazine for the mechanically minded.

A journal of mechanics and electricity for amateurs and students.

These days the word 'amateur' has become rather undervalued, take the word 'amateurish'.

In the past 'amateur' was not a dirty word. There was even a degree of 'snobbery' attached to it as an amateur did things for the love of it, while a 'professional' was paid. In sports gentlemen were the 'amateurs'.

So if we want to look at the term 'model engineer' from a 1999 perspective, the distinction between the 'amateur engineers' the magazine was aimed at and 'professional engineers' becomes a very simple and clear one.

In comparison, MEW has almost always been 'the practical hobby magazine' which suggests an enormously wide remit!

Neil

P.S. The general public have a very vague understanding, if any, of what 'chartered status' is, but Chartered Engineers have a much better deal than some professions…

[Ian S CParticipant @iansc]

Don't know, but I think I must be a model engineer, a good many years ago I answered an add in ME, and received a little round badge, it's blue and gold, with a micrometre on it, and the letters I, ME, the mic forming a G, International Guild of Model Engineers. I don't mind wearing it when I'm displaying my Hot Air Engines, they are not models, just small hot air engines. Even the Stuart Turner is not a model, but a small steam engine. But if Percival Marshall thought it was OK, so be it, people told him the magazine wouldn't last more than a year or two.

Ian S C

[Martin KyteParticipant @martinkyte99762]

Niel

In my book the opposite of Amateur is Mercenary. The one does it for the love the other for the money. Similarly the opposite of Professional should be Incompetent.

Martin

[Russell EberhardtParticipant @russelleberhardt48058]

Posted by Martin Kyte on 27/08/2014 12:28:53:

The one does it for the love the other for the money.

Not necessariliy. I was an amateur engineer when at school. I then studied and trained to become a professional engineer because I was hooked on engineering. I could have made much more money in accounting or law with easier qualifications so I didn't do it for the money.

Russell.

[Martin KyteParticipant @martinkyte99762]

Exactly, if you did it for the money you would be a mercenary professional.

If your motivation was love of engineering you would be an amateur professional who got paid as well.

When you were at school you were an amateur tyro-engineer.

Martin

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

Those look like Humpty-Dumpty definitions to me…

Neil

[Martin KyteParticipant @martinkyte99762]

I'm just trying to illustrate that professional relates to competence and amateur relates to motivation in a light-hearted way.

Martin

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

I was being light hearted too- Humpty Dumpty: "When I use a word it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."

Neil

[HopperParticipant @hopper]

"Engineering: Combining art & science to create artifacts from dreams"

(Henry Petroski)

Sounds like what we do, dunnit?

[Bill PudneyParticipant @billpudney37759]

This is all taking semantics and pedantry to a new high level. I'm not a bit surprised at the playing with words and the pedantry, but it is highly entertaining.

cheers

Bill

Edited By Bill Pudney on 01/09/2014 06:18:54

[Oompa LumpaParticipant @oompalumpa34302]

When I read or hear the comparisons between Professional/Amateur it always brings to mind a "Which?" report I read many years ago comparing Computer Operating Systems. You have to first grasp that the report was for the 'general public' to make a decision about which operating system and therefore which type of computer it was they would look to purchase.

The list went on, Sun Solaris the type of application it was used and who would use it, the Mac OS, type of application and so on, MS Dos… And when we finally reached Linux the description said something like: "Only really suitable for the Amateur Hobbyist or Serious Professional user."

Says it all really and has been a sort of yardstick for me ever since. I really wish I had kept that article.

graham.

Edited By Oompa Lumpa on 01/09/2014 08:29:09

[Russell EberhardtParticipant @russelleberhardt48058]

Don't let's get started on operating systems – they are even more contentious

Russell.

[Ian PParticipant @ianp]

Posted by Russell Eberhardt on 01/09/2014 10:15:09:

Don't let's get started on operating systems – they are even more contentious

Russell.

I don't think Graham was bringing operating systems into the discussion. He just used it as an example of the Am/Pro definition.

Its all rubbish really, we can argue/discuss till the cows come home but we wont be able to reach a consensus that applies to all fields of activity.

Ian

[John Stevenson 1Participant @johnstevenson1]

Yabut you have to agree that whinging and whining is far better than cutting any metal isn't it ?

Must be or there would be less of it and more show and tell posts.

The local hospitals have some fluid for parting fingers etc when stuck together with superglue, wonder if they have something for getting moleskin trousers unwelded from armchairs ?

[Chris TriceParticipant @christrice43267]

I used to restore Triumph Sportscars professionally for nearly ten years. I should've charged myself when working on my own car because otherwise, I would never have let an incompetent loose on it. Under no circumstances let any friends or family do things for you for free because you'll also get an incompetent doing the work.

What a dumb definition.

I'm sure we all have many examples where people charging for services in no way makes them competent to do the job they're doing.

Edited By Chris Trice on 01/09/2014 11:25:36

[JAParticipant @ja]

When things go wrong:

• Amateur (or favour at work) = not legal complaints system = possible dissatisfaction but no loss of money.
• Professional = receipt = recourse to law = possible satisfaction which could cost a lot of money.

You take your choice, simple.

JA

[Chris TriceParticipant @christrice43267]

The definition of competent is not defined by the ability to sue and in nearly all cases, you can sue an individual whether they charged or not if it led to damage.

Edited By Chris Trice on 01/09/2014 12:20:21

[Ian PParticipant @ianp]

Posted by Chris Trice on 01/09/2014 11:24:06:

I used to restore Triumph Sportscars professionally for nearly ten years. I should've charged myself when working on my own car because otherwise, I would never have let an incompetent loose on it. Under no circumstances let any friends or family do things for you for free because you'll also get an incompetent doing the work.

What a dumb definition.

I'm sure we all have many examples where people charging for services in no way makes them competent to do the job they're doing.

Edited By Chris Trice on 01/09/2014 11:25:36

I'm not sure which part of your posting was a quote or whether the dumb definition is your own? either way I am left confused!

Ian P

[Author]

Posts