Careless mistakes in issue 4483

[LambtonParticipant @lambton]

Two photographs (5 & 8) that should have appeared in the Pullometer article have been substituted by two photographs of C – spanner from the adjoining article.

This is simple carelessness that should not have happened in the first place and should certainly have been corrected by a proof reader.

Come on ME staff get a grip or risk serious "ribbing".

Eric.

[LambtonParticipant @lambton]

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

I've already raised the point and the missing photos have been posted on the forum here , there is also a note to say the additional material will be put on the site

 

Maybe a read of the forum would have saved you having to post

 

Edited By JasonB on 25/05/2014 14:30:23

[LambtonParticipant @lambton]

Jason,

You have missed my point. Such elementary mistakes should not get through to publication in a magazine with the reputation of ME. A glance at the list of editorial and production staff indicates that there are plenty of people who should have caught this problem before publication. Sorry it is just not good enough to print mistakes and then say it is OK as we have published corrections that the reader should have found out for himself.

Eric

[RobboParticipant @robbo]

Jason,

It is also wrong to assume that readers of the magazine are also users of the Forum.

Phil

[Ady1Participant @ady1]

Maybe a read of the forum would have saved you having to post <<<——-x

 

He used a smiley because he was being ironical

I'm sure Staff are well aware that they cocked up bigtime here

Edited By Ady1 on 25/05/2014 10:04:18

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

As an MEW-only Subscriber, I have no comment … except to mention that this orphan post might usefully be moved here.

MichaelG.

Edit. I have moved it to here so it does not get lost in this thread, though I had already linked to it in my first reply on this thread. JasonB

Edited By JasonB on 25/05/2014 14:32:10

Edited By JasonB on 25/05/2014 14:33:46

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

Please could we get a sense of proportion. No one died.

Mistakes will happen. Despite Eric's assertion, there are no additional 'proof readers' and only two people are in a position to check such things – designer and editor. Diane will have read that article some six or more times before the photo got transposed. with just two weeks to prepare each issue that makes mistakes hard to spot.

I can't understand why anyone would complain about acknowledging and correcting the mistake on line. Surely that's the sensible thing to do? It doesn't invalidate any correction that later appears in the magazine.

I have heard no cries of disgust that I didn't spot two errors in the last MEW, or that I posted a corrected table on the forum last week.

Why single out Diane for criticism?

Neil

[Colin AbreyParticipant @colinabrey20074]

Well said Neil. My sentiments exacly!

Colin Abrey

[Steve WithnellParticipant @stevewithnell34426]

Many years ago now, I was overheard criticising some particular management initiative or other, by the Head of Department. His comment was simply, "You know Steve, it's ten times harder to build something that to tear it down". It remains true 30 years on.

Steve

[Gray62Participant @gray62]

Quite right Neil,

Too many people on here are too quick to pass down judgement,

OK so a couple of pictures got misplaced,hardly the end of the world.

Go smoke your pipe with the armchair engineers and barrack room lawyers!!

[LambtonParticipant @lambton]

I was simply disappointed that such a mistake was made by a team of presumably professional people working for a large publishing house. I make no apology for raising the matter on this forum.

Of course it is not the end of the world but it demonstrates the lax attitude that abounds today towards getting things right. It used to be called attention to detail.

[John Stevenson 1Participant @johnstevenson1]

Jawohl, click.

It vill not 'appen again

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

I was simply disappointed that such criticism was aired in public, in the ignorance that the 'team of professional people' is actually one person supported by some of a designer's time. I make no apology for raising the matter on this forum.

Of course it is not the end of the world but it demonstrates the lax attitude that abounds today towards getting things right. It used to be called 'common courtesy'.

Neil

[Carl Wilson 4Participant @carlwilson4]

Hello Chaps,

I am not a model engineer, armchair or otherwise. I am however, a real, actual engineer who happens to enjoy "amateur engineering" – making things in my spare time using machine tools, welding, and a bit of electronics. I use this forum because I share common cause with some of what you discuss – the means of how you do what you do if not the ends.

The original comment on this thread and the follow up by the same author is unfortunate, but not that uncommon in here I think. You are lucky to have a magazine like The Model Engineer in this day and age, given that these days your hobby could be at best described as a niche activity. I have often written on this forum about the content of the magazine, but I have never had a problem with it's production values.

I am sure that the small handful of dedicated girls and boys who produce the magazine go out of their way to ensure accuracy and quality. Mistakes always happen, in any venture. As the man said, no one died.

Carl.

[Rik ShawParticipant @rikshaw]

"Jawohl, click.

It vill not 'appen again"

Knackwurst – it's all knackwurst!

Rik – click.

[ASFParticipant @asf]

Posted by Neil Wyatt on 25/05/2014 15:01:05:

I was simply disappointed that such criticism was aired in public, in the ignorance that the 'team of professional people' is actually one person supported by some of a designer's time. I make no apology for raising the matter on this forum.

Of course it is not the end of the world but it demonstrates the lax attitude that abounds today towards getting things right. It used to be called 'common courtesy'.

Neil

I dont think that is a very clever thing for a moderator or magazine editor to do . Mocking your readership like that. Shame on you.

[Gray62Participant @gray62]

Posted by Lambton on 25/05/2014 07:55:19:

Two photographs (5 & 8) that should have appeared in the Pullometer article have been substituted by two photographs of C – spanner from the adjoining article.

This is simple carelessness that should not have happened in the first place and should certainly have been corrected by a proof reader.

Come on ME staff get a grip or risk serious "ribbing".

Eric.

Well, in his last statement the OP invited a ribbing – and that is just what HE is getting, and well deserved in my opinion. Neil, I for one thought it was an amusing and eloquent twist on the words of the OP, I applaud you for having the courage to do what you did, a good response to an I'll conceived slur on the magazine and its staff.

[Mike PooleParticipant @mikepoole82104]

The person who never made a mistake never made anything.

Mike

[nigel jones 5Participant @nigeljones5]

which begs the question….did anyone review it?

[HopperParticipant @hopper]

"Proof readers" are a thing of the past. Publishers struggling to make money out of a dwindling print market got rid of them years ago. Along with the compositors who were the second backstop. Along with most of sub-editors who used to set up and check the pages. Any remaining staff, such as graphic artists, are usually shared between a number of magazines and the page layouts are done sausage-factory style.

Most small magazines/newspapers today are put out by an editor and a boy (or girl) and they have to do everything, from sourcing stories and pics to writing/shooting them to laying out pages and doing their own proofreading. I know, I've done it.

And it is quite possible with today's desktop computer publishing systems that the low-resolution photos appeared correct on the laser printed page "proofs" that the editor checked, but due to computer witchery were linked to the wrong hi-resolution photos in the metal plate-making procedure. Often, the printing plate is made at a print site far distant from where the editorial staff are based, and so there is no final check like when pages were pasted up "on the stone" and photographed in an etching camera to make the plates.

So, anyone who thinks they could step up and do a better job, please have a go. It all looks easy in the light of day, with time to sit in the armchair and consider things. But with your ring out at 10pm after a 7am start on "production day", I'll guarantee you wouldn't know what hit you.

Edited By Hopper on 26/05/2014 06:32:25

[LambtonParticipant @lambton]

1. I have bought the Model Engineer continuously since 1965 and have always enjoyed reading – yes often relaxing in an armchair. I still have most of them retained as they contain useful articles.

2. I think the quality of the magazine has greatly improved with the coming of the current editor.

3. Magazines such as ME are not just hobby interest magazines but are technical magazines often retained by many readers as a future source of reference. This is why I was so disappointed with the mistakes made in the current issue.

4. If an obvious mistake like using the wrong photographs can happen then so can less obvious ones that could cause problems for future readers relying on the accuracy of ME when building models etc.

5. My original post was not aimed at any individual just a general criticism of the whole production process.

6. I have obviously offended two forum members in particular who seem to have a very protective approach to the people who produce ME. I guess I am no longer on their Christmas card list.

7. I make mistakes like everyone else. I have made some on this forum in the past by once the mistakes were bought to my attention I immediately held my hand up. I did not try to deflect the matter onto the persons correcting me.

8. There is post giving the correct photos and a brief explanation of how the mistake happened but no apology.

9. If the moderator was as incensed with my post as he appears to be he could have use his powers as a moderator and deled it. Instead he has posted a very clever and sarcastic post putting forward his personal views.

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

Godd morning Eric,

I'm afraid my attempt to temper a rebuke with humour through parody has completely failed. I should have followed my normal policy of sleeping on it, before responding.

Perhaps I can break with tradition and publicly apologise for any hurt or upset caused.

I'm not going to delete posts just because they are critical, it think it's better to respond, especially where I think the criticism is based on a misunderstanding – in this case the assumption that there is a substantial 'team' editing the magazines.

This time I stepped over a line that I have to monitor with respect to others, so Eric, I still feel your criticism of ME was unfair, but I'm sorry for offence caused.

Neil

<edit solely for spelling>

Edited By Neil Wyatt on 26/05/2014 09:02:29

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

Hopper,

I can tell you that your description of the production process is accurate.

Neil

[Steve WithnellParticipant @stevewithnell34426]

Doesn't good manners dictate that if you spot an error in an article you PM the author or if it is an editorial problem you PM the editor? It's about respect isn't it?

[Author]

Posts