Author Topic: Awesome site on model rr commentary  (Read 4836 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

bdeuster

  • Guest
Re: Awesome site on model rr commentary
« Reply #15 on: August 03, 2007, 08:55:10 AM »
0
WOW!!!

The Truth has been revealed. I am impressed....   ;D

Congrats Ed. The Blog looks nice – and you have learned the skill of acquiring content through attribution. I am looking forward to some of the topics you intend to do in the future!!

B

CVSNE

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 384
  • Respect: +7
Re: Awesome site on model rr commentary
« Reply #16 on: August 04, 2007, 09:00:16 PM »
0
Marty, I'd be really interested to hear your take on my (limited) comments.

Ed, First of all I like the approach - I think blogs are a great option for a full-fledged web site - less work, and something a little different every time people visit.

The saga of FLB and his various incarnations are well known in the model railroad business - I always figured if someone was going to engage in somewhat bizarre and questionable business practices they should pick something they stand a chance of making money at - and model railroading isn't it.

Understand the issue with the MTL PS-1 -- I remember the only review I wrote that was EVER questioned at MR was the review I did of the MTL "ARA" boxcar - the one they used  diagonal panel roof and PS-1 underframe one. I mentioned this is the review and was called on the carpet by the publisher - turns out Keith and Dale were good friends of his and he didn't think we should critcize a "minor" detail on an N Scale car -- after all, you could read the lettering with a magnifying glass . . . I should add the complaint on the review did not come from MTL - it was self generated in house by a publisher who should have known better.

Just watch any criticism of Micro-Trains  :-X- you may well be banned from N scale . . .  :o

Marty
Modeling (or attempting to model) the Central Vermont circa October 1954  . . .

bsoplinger

  • Guest
Re: Awesome site on model rr commentary
« Reply #17 on: August 05, 2007, 09:24:28 AM »
0
Gawd, now I've seen everything - Ed blogging about model railroading. No wonder his progress on that railroad is glacial.  ;D ;D ;D

So that's the real reason he stopped the "tree a day" thing huh?  ::)

mopaustin

  • Guest
Re: Awesome site on model rr commentary
« Reply #18 on: August 05, 2007, 12:01:00 PM »
0
Good idea for a blog Ed.

Just wondering, why on Blogspot and not your own site?

Ed Kapuscinski

  • Global Moderator
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 24746
  • Head Kino
  • Respect: +9272
    • Conrail 1285
Re: Awesome site on model rr commentary
« Reply #19 on: August 05, 2007, 10:09:04 PM »
0
Why blogspot?

Well, 2 reasons.

1. At the time I started it, my webhost (1and1) had eaten my site.
2. I like trying different technology products, and this is my chance to play with blogger.

tillsbury

  • Guest
Re: Awesome site on model rr commentary
« Reply #20 on: August 06, 2007, 06:45:37 AM »
0
So, Ed, you've given up on Fake Steve and moved to a new subject?   ;D

tom mann

  • Administrator
  • Crew
  • *****
  • Posts: 10917
  • Representing The Railwire on The Railwire
  • Respect: +1014
    • http://www.chicagoswitching.com
Re: Awesome site on model rr commentary
« Reply #21 on: August 06, 2007, 07:46:56 AM »
0
So, Ed, you've given up on Fake Steve and moved to a new subject?   ;D

lol. ;D

Hiroe

  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 592
  • Respect: +256
Re: Awesome site on model rr commentary
« Reply #22 on: August 06, 2007, 09:53:10 AM »
0
I took the liberty of setting up a feed account for ttamt on LJ, (http://syndicated.livejournal.com/ttamt/) so i can read your posts on my FL.
wubba lubba dub dub

Ed Kapuscinski

  • Global Moderator
  • Crew
  • *
  • Posts: 24746
  • Head Kino
  • Respect: +9272
    • Conrail 1285
Re: Awesome site on model rr commentary
« Reply #23 on: August 06, 2007, 11:52:46 AM »
0
I guess that means I should post more frequently then!

tillsbury

  • Guest
Re: Awesome site on model rr commentary
« Reply #24 on: August 07, 2007, 01:25:53 AM »
0
...thinking about it, since it's the same layout, isn't it more likely it's a Fake Ed?   :o