I have been reading the thread but not laughing at anyone, not even the huffers and puffers. It was a relief to see Mr Gibbs is "thick skinned" and therefore, I hope, content that my original posts have at least caused a vigorous discussion of his magazine. No such thing as bad publicity, eh.
My intent was to be controversial, although I had hoped it would lead to criticisms and defence of the magazine style, content and clarification of its raison d'etre rather than some of the laddish exchanges that have ocurred (and I was guilty of a couple too - birdbox remarks, for example - so apologies for those at least).
I don't feel a need to apologise to you, Mr Gibbs. I have been harsh but I don't mind in the least if you are harsh back. In my experience little is actually achieved in discussions by being nicey-nice and offering nothing worse than faint praise. Perhaps you might consider again your belief that criticism of the magazine is some how personal to you? If that were the case, how is anyone ever going to question the content without you taking offense?
I don't question your dedication, hard work or abilities. I question the style and content of the magazine and assume that (were you persuaded) your abilities would easily allow you to change that conduct and style to something else. Neither do I expect you to change it just because I say so. I merely make suggestions as to why I think you should (my opinion) with reasons why I think the current content is inadequate and suggestions about what you could do instead. You are perfectly free to ignore everything I suggest without that somehow making you a bad person, in my eyes or anyone else's.
In short, why not be be professional about criticism? I worked for many years in an environment where long-researched and sweated-over technical or other written productions were vigorously and heavily criticised in every way you can imagine. It would have been very petty of me to take such criticism personally. After the heavy duty arguments they were rewritten and they were always better for it. In that workplace, which was not unlike yours in intent (education in a palatable even entertaining form) the idea was to test and refine a document until it was fit for purpose, not for people to pat me on the back and admire how hard I'd worked.
This is how I look at a magazine you are trying to sell me. It has to be of use to me or get criticised by me. if the criticism falls on deaf ears, so be it. I don't mind you selling to a different market and you shouldn't mind me telling you why I'm not in that market, especially if you would like me to change my mind and buy it. (I presume you do want to sell to as wide a readership as you can).
This post is already boring and long enough so I'll try again to state my fundamental criticisms now:
1) You seem to have made an assumption that your market is hobbyists, including beginners but that such people only require very basic information, very easy challenges-to-make and inexpensive tools. I think that is a false assumption (bordering on insulting when you opine that a beginner should expect to make do with some cheap tool or other to construct sticks for balls of string or book jackets of the not-illustrated variety). This assumption will limit your market, more to the point.
2) The magazine style seems more concerned to sell personalities than it is to provide good quality how-to or other technical information. Articles discussing personalities certainly have their place (eg your innovators article) but shouldn't overwhelm technical articles to the point where the how-to is obscure, incomplete and inter-twined with spurious personal opinions, histories and "feelings about stuff".
I'd like you to attempt a refutation or at least state in clear terms what your editorial policy is, what the magazines goals are and the fundamental types of content you think are appropriate to them - the what and the why.
Of course, what I would like is neither here not there, so you can simply ignore me if you wish and plough your own furrow. There seem to be plenty of folk on this forum who are content with the magazine as-is. I don't mind in the least; but then my money stays in my pocket and I suspect that there will be a lot more like me - many others who might otherwise be your customer.
Lataxe, no couch potato (magazine-reading variety).
