My online subscription comes up for renewal tomorrow. I’m not going to renew so this will be my last post.
I’ve been a member here for quite a while. I’ve gotten some good advice, hopefully given some decent advice and enjoyed the forum until the disastrous change.
I find the overall quality of “Fine Woodworking” to have diminished considerably, to the point that I would not include it in the top three woodworking magazines available today. If you can, look at some old issues from the 1980’s and compare them to one of the 2010 issues. Heck, just go back to 2005 and you can see the drop from “Fine Woodworking” to “Advice for Amateurs”.
There are magazines out there geared to the novice. I’ve read them, still read some of them and have learned from them. But “Fine Woodworking” used to print articles that challenged me and made me aspire to improve my skills. Today each issue might contain one or two articles that pique me, but when articles like “Tame Tear-out” and “Tame Glue Squeeze-out” are featured they are writing below my skill level.
I’m not bragging. I probably have more to learn than most experienced woodworkers. The thing is, I can’t count on “Fine Woodworking” to teach me like it used to. I have my father’s collection from the 1980’s I have the disk with all issues through last year. His magazines I’ll always cherish. And the disk is a great reference. Although I’m not happy about saying good-bye, it’s time to move on.
I wish all here good luck, safe shop time, tight joints and flawless finishes.
Replies
You don't have to pay to stay
I'm a member of Knots but not the online magazine. Full accesss to the forums costs me nothing, I just can't access the links to the magazine. Like you I have lots of back issues and reference books to turn to and as you said most of the old stuff is better anyway.
So stick around for free, I hate to see people go.
Bret
Before you leave Knots ,,,
You should know we pay nothing to access the Knots forum , your online subscription had other benefits as well but you can access it free , if you want to make a comment you will need to log on . Just a hunch but you may need to register a new name to log on .
regards , dusty
The online membership is cheaper.
Do what I do, I check out the up coming issue, if there are only one or two articles I download them and not buy the magazine. I do know what you mean though, I do miss Woodwork magazine.
buh-bye!
Take care
unfortunately a lot of others have gone before you. Contributions from any member leaving will be missed. The quality of the site depends on contributions of its members. Adios Amigo!
I was a charter subscriber to the magazine. It hasn't changed very much outside of the appearance, although, some people's perception of it may have changed. Same with this forum. Its a little like going fishing. Sometimes you get skunked, sometimes you catch a small one and now and then you catch something serious. Just like fishing, you have to go or you won't catch anything.
I don't think you have to be a member to use the forum.
Northouguy,
When I look back at the old issues, I can't quite tell, if the magazine has changed or if I have changed.
I think it may be a bit of both. I think everyone that is serious about woodworking, rather quickly outgrows all the preparing stock , dovetailing, sharpening etc. and are left wanting more. From my standpoint many issues have something in worth reading. Most recently it was the article on quarter columns and photography. The current issue had nothing for me in it. (EDIT the current issue has the photography article, I was confused. there was a recent issue that had nothing of interest to me) I do like the simpler layout of the old magazines and the photography used to be better too.
Unfortunately the forum isn't what it used to be, and again that may be more of me than the forum itself. I will say, the log in issues are troubling; it took me 5 or 6 tries to log on to reply to this thread.
Rob Millard
http://www.americanfederalperiod.com
http://www.rlmillard.typepad.com
When I look back at the old issues, I can't quite tell, if the magazine has changed or if I have changed. I think it may be a bit of both......
Great reply! I think you 'hit the nail on the head'...
Then again, when I see your work on your web pages, I wonder why you need/want to read anything about woodworking from any Magazine. Your work falls into a class of magazine that is not, or ever will be published! Could we call it?... 'Superb Woodworking'.
I could fit into a 'Fine Woodworker' on some of my work... but not all... I could 'try' to make a american federal period piece but I know it would be less than second class work so I do not ever try! I may have some of the skills but I know that I do not have the patience to do it right. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patience
I probably could make a 'reasonable' basic structure but I give up on the inlays and finishing. Way out of my 'class'....
Your work is 'First Class'... And then some.
You should give inlays a try
WiilGeorge,
Give inlays a try, starting with a corner fan and and some stringing. Fans are very easy to make and stringing is just a piece of wood in a narrow dado. I'm not a patience person.
Even an article on the simplest of tasks, can teach something.
Thanks for the comments on the furniture.
Rob Millard
Rob: Give inlays a try....
I often use stringing of various sizes and small to medium size (whatever that is) inlays. I tend to get very upset with myself when I make any small mistake (Just as I have always been since I was a small child). I make many mistakes, but when I make one while using my hands... I am my very harsh Judge.
Making all the inlays for a large piece like a federal sideboard would surely drive me insane. Because I am not an artist, layout and cutting of all the inlays would surely show variations in each. For some reason, my brain/eyes have always shown to me, small differences in most paired objects I see. Yes, sometimes being like that is a blessing. Many other times it is something that makes me upset. Mostly with my own work,,, I hardly ever judge others work as I do my own .
By the way.. On my original post... I forgot to include words like: I think that I like your Daniel Munroe Kidney Dial Clock the best. Not sure why.. I think because.. It just 'looks trim and proper'! Sort of like any new bride on her wedding day....
The Magazine Changed Long Ago
The magazine changed long ago. The first year - 1978 - saved my life. I was on the road to ruin when after reading a few issues, I realized that there was room in the world for passion and woodwork, and that someone like me might just be able to make a living doing so. I remember articles on Tlingit Cedar boxes that challenged what I thought of as woodwork. Also totem poles - the actual carving, not just a look-see. Wet cooperage, and pattern-making. Historic reproduction. Hand split siding and shakes. The entire world of woodworking. God, it was wonderful!
The magazine shaped me and many others for 15 or 20 years before it took the turn to crass commercialism. Shaped our careers and helped us make our living and indulge our passion. What could be better?
Now the website is a complete insult to anyone that tries to participate. FINE ??? You really have to be kidding. I don't know what more they could do to chase off who is left. Undoubtedly someone has their hand on the switch at this moment and is ready to turn it all off. A mercy killing.
There is no money to be made here, and as the modern mantra goes 'We must all make money, all the time; We must all understand this. We must all accept this.' So here we sit, despite the attempts of postivity like Will George and others, waitng for the lights to go out.
So here we sit, despite the attempts of postivity like Will George and others, waitng for the lights to go out.
I loved working for some reason unknowen to me.. I always did my best.. I was 'downsized' from my job just before the 9/11 attack. I was REALLY down.. I thought I lost everything. Come 9-11, I remembered that I only lost a job I loved. My job was everything to me.. My wife died a few years before that and she was my best friend. I only had my job then as I thought.
After the death of my wife, then came 9/11. After that I Iost much of my 401K savings. I was very wrong to be sad. I remembered that my children liked me or even loved me.. I tried to be a good father...
I would say no matter how bad it gets.. Hang in there if you have anybody that loves you. If not.. I am not sure what to say.
.
I just organized my collection of the first 200 issues yesterday. I stopped reading the magazine or buying it after issue 200 - I figured that was a nice round number to stop with.
There's a good body of work in those 200 issues. I particularly enjoy the first 100 issues and the (physical, book-like) index I have for them.
Good luck, will miss your sense of humor. EH
As we improve our skills in wood working, in my case it is because of people with more skills and knowledge sharing on forums like these that help me improve.. In other areas of my life where I have been labeled an"expert" can become boring as theres not much of a challenge anymore. Where my joy comes now is in the satisfaction that I can pass on what I have learned to someone else. I agree with those that question who has changed, the magazine has but what about us. Thanks for sharing your expertise with us, I'm sure you will be missed.
Craftsman
Northhouguy -
I'm guessing it's a combination of a craftsman who has mastered his skill and the magazine has touched every subject a few times.
You don't have to leave the site - just making the statement above may influence the editors to try harder.
I don't know if you have - but consider writing an article yourself for the magazine. Give back to those who want to gain what you already have.
Regards,
SA
Points
Point one-- remember why Taunton is in business. They are not in business to provide this forum, educate you on woodworking or improve the planet through Widespread Woodworking Induced Happiness. The editors are juggling several competing forces on their output. Taunton is here to make money, customer satisfaction is merely one avenue, one means to that goal. There are others. Taunton usually selects a fairly high level of customer satisfaction. The very existence of this forum is evidence of that.
Point two-- one viable, completely legitimate route to more money is to make more money per customer from fewer customers. To make this choice, if one has an established, subscription or dues paying base, one must cut down the number of customers. One can do this manually, ("You don't subscribe to our magazine anymore. Have a nice life!") or one can introduce forces to the equation that will cull the customer list in ways that one desires. One needs to be very careful if one selects this method.
Point three-- moving on the (non)issue of content, it takes twenty five or thirty years of constant practice to master a trade. Other people, I understand, put the number lower. I don't consider any of them masters.
Point four-- Fine Woodworking regularly covers at least five trades.
Point five-- when one moves from one trade to another, one usually needs to change how one holds one's mouth.
Point six-- I can learn from anyone, including my children and my apprentice. I can even learn from people who raise their electronic voices, foam at the mouth, grow red in the face, and scream on some insignificant spec swirling in the maelstrom of the internet.
Point Last-- if someone really can't learn more from Fine Woodworking, I understand. In fact, I understand more than you think I do.
And I think you should move on to greener grass, on the other side of that fence, with all the alacrity you can muster.
Pointy One
Jammer,
You do know how to jam a bad signal! I am still grinning at your many excellent rhetorical thrusts (and also the parries) through the cyberaether. However, I will take issue with this bit of your broadcast:
"Point One ....... remember why Taunton is in business. They are not in business to provide this forum, educate you on woodworking or improve the planet through Widespread Woodworking Induced Happiness".
Well, we may never know the (probably multiple) motives of the many folk involved in publishing Fine Woodworking, nor how those motives wax, wane and perm to create a particular issue of the magazine. However, Taunton was founded (or so claimed the founder) to do the very things you list as reasons they are not in business.
The original idea was to find and promulgate high quality (fine) woodworking techniques, examples, designs, tools and so forth. In the America of 1976, the obvious and most effective vehicle for doing this was a commercial magazine publishing venture, as there was no low-cost Internet full of free-to-cyberspace enthusiast-sites in those days.
Now, whether this education & improvement motive was the whole story then, and/or still the case today, are very important questions. Not just because of concern by consumers about the quality of FWW and its content (which may or may not be diluted by too much commercialism) but because of the wider question:
Does commercialisation of any enterprise initially undertaken for motives other than to make money tend to increase, decrease or not-affect the quality of those initial intentions?
Your Point One seems to indicate that you think commercial considerations will always dilute customer service or satisfaction in favour of accountant-led calculations.......? If so, perhaps you would care to describe the socio-economic or psychological mechanisms that make this inevitable? If not, what does your proposition Point One actually mean?
****
As test question: is amateur-produced furniture always potentially better than commercially-produced stuff (all things such as skill, materials, design et al being equal) because the amateur needn't bother with a bottom-line?
Lataxe, being a sophist (inspired by Jammer-soph).
Looking For My Plane, Setting Up My Tormek
Well, Lataxe, you did it again.
I'm going to have to retreat to the shop, break out the plane irons, and do some thinking. Not many people can make me stop and think. (I may have cause and effect reversed, there, but I digress.)
My first reaction is that yes, commercialization will always result in an inferior output (remember that we specified everything else is equal) simply because the lights must remain on. Amateurs can count on their wives to keep the lights on, and as long as marital bliss and perfection is maintained, (meaning the garbage goes out on time, without request) you can start over because of a single blemish as many times as it pleases you.
However, the one obvious case where that theory would break down would be when the stated goal and commercialization are different names for the same thing, but that would mean the stated goal of the enterprise is to make money, wouldn't it?
Now, there are sub-threads. This commercialization is not necessarily a bad thing. That "self serving" drive to keep the lights on and the payroll met mean that clearly sub-standard enterprises go away. At least, they go away if they're not banks or automobile manufacturers. (There's a whole 'nother topic there, but allowing failed enterprises to fail belongs in the Woodworker's Cafe in America in 2010.)
Another interesting thought is to turn this around: if commercialization were removed from a commercial entity, would that increase, decrease or have no change on the quality of their output?
If Taunton were given a grant from a Bill Gates look-alike, say, for ten million, in a suitable blue chip equity, that would pay Taunton's bills, including all salaries in perpetuity, what would you expect to happen to Fine Woodworking?
Would the articles get better? Would all the articles on through dovetails, glue-ups and sandpaper go away? Would we suddenly be looking at Fine Loius XIV Furniture Building? Finer Shaker Furniture? Finest Kind Dust Collection Monthly?
Which brings up another point-- what, exactly, is "better", where Fine Woodworking is concerned?
I confess that I'm a Master Carpenter, but not a Master Woodworker. I still learn things every time I open an old or current issue, and I find points that I'm not clear about every day. (And Taunton has an uncanny knack for sending me an article on modern 14" bandsaws the day after I decide "you know, I think I need a bandsaw.")
I suspect that, just as when I was an Apprentice and a Journeyman, that it was always there.
It's always all around you, but you don't notice it unless it's relevant for you, at that moment. So wallowing in old Fine Woodworking issues is fun, reading the current issue is fun, and I expect the future to be fun, too.
I'll close with a story, and then I'm off to the shop, to sharpen things and think over what you said, Lataxe.
A beautiful lady, who knew me very well, called me and woke me up.
She was a very close friend, and very close to a lover. We were close enough that we could look at each other and see the disaster that would happen if we ever removed any article of clothing.
She opened our little chat by saying "Breakfast. Julia's. Wallingford, not Eastlake. Forty minutes, okay?"
I said "Okay, see you there."
She said "Wallingford."
I said "Wallingford."
She said "Not Eastlake."
I said "Not Eastlake."
She said "Don't go to Eastlake."
I said "No Eastlake."
She said "Wallingford."
I said "Wallingford. Wait, what?"
She said "See you there." and hung up.
It doesn't register unless it's relevant. So I don't really mind another article on half blind dovetails.
Someday, I might decide to try half blind dovetails, and then they'll all be relevant.
Off to the shop.
Head stands (turning the world upside down).
Jammer,
You are indeed a jammer! Those musicians do it with fiddle-scrapes, flute-toots and drum-rattles but you are quite good at jamming with the concept-horn. Asking the same "what does commercialisation of an enterprise do to it" question the other way around does help to zero in on the essentials. The first thing that that occurs is that:
* Commercialisation increases the work rate, productivity and experience of "doing the enterprise" so the participants probably obtain a wider range of skills at a pace far higher than with an amateur.
The there is also the point that:
* Commercialisation and associated competition will often drive up standards, since there is more than one judge driving the result (i.e. the customers and competitiors, not just the individual doing the work as with amateurs).
In fact my original question (about whether commercialisation improves, degrades or doesn't-affect the quality of the output) contained a large assumption (that "all things being equal" bit). In reality, amateurs are never in equal circumstances to professionals because of those basic differences of "social" context. The amateur is essentially his own judge and pace-setter whilst the commercial fellow is not; and this has large effects perhaps?
******
Perhaps "commercialisation" is also too broad a concept to encompasss the different kinds of profit-driven organisations and people's behaviour in them. One major fault-line divides small enterprises from large corporations.
In the former, the main motive is often a desire to do the kind of work and make the kind of goods that the proprietor enjoys, to a high standard. The money-making is secondary - a social imposition of the culture in which the would-be producer finds himself. In the latter (the large corporation) the goods and their qualities are secondary to the money-making and building of the corporate hierarchy.
The small proprietor will get satisfaction and pride from making high quality stuff. He will get these pleasures via the satisfaction of his (often demanding) customers and the admiration of his (often talented) competitors. He does the accounts but moans about it, as this is not his focus.
The corporation, on the other hand, will do anything to sell the "goods" and is only concerned with processes to exchange the products for wealth, which is distributed in a highly-uneven fashion, often to people (shareholders) who have zero interest in the goods or the "art" of making them. Here, accountancy is everything.
***
Which of these represents FWW in this day and age? Perhaps this is the subtext underlying many of the complaints about lesser content, poor website management and so forth? The craftsmen-customers of FWW detect a move in the editorial policy from "small proprietor" to "corporate accountancy" mode with all the consequences for the quality of the content ........?
Perhaps this is inevitable when a business grows, loses its original proprietor (he with the vision) and lets the grey men from the counting house dictate editorial policy? Even when the staff retain that original vision along with their traditional high-quality process (the magazine format, photography, etc.) the content will become infected with "most-poplar", "lowest common denominator" and "in line with advertisors concerns".
But I'd like to hear a counter-argument.
And I personally still find plenty enough in FWW to justify spending what is a small amount of money for a lot of very well-presented WW information, even if there is less of high (personal) interest today than there was 5 or 10 years ago.
Lataxe
Better How?
You may hate this answer, but it comes back to the touchy-feely (squirm) question "what is 'better"?"
I think your idea about multiple judges has merit. In that sense, Fine Woodworking is on top-- they have lots of judges, and most of them can't keep their mouths shut.
I also think that this "explosion" of chatter about "better" is a myth.
Magazines have always been talked about; now we simply do it on the internet, and the internet has made it far more public. The difference is that publicity, not whether the talk was there. It was, it's just easier to see (hear) it now.
It still comes back to that annoying question of standards.
If Taunton were to become "better" between close-of-business tonight and coffee break tomorrow, what would change?
How, exactly, do they become "better"?
That's the question everyone likes to ignore. Far easier to do other things.
More articles about advanced things? (The article about stained glass or the one about making your own hardware from scratch wasn't hardcore enough for you?)
Fewer articles about basics? (How many of you have actually TRIED all the basics Taunton writes about? How many built all six jigs for their bench? Tried cutting every joint published? Calculated how many clamps a glueup takes?)
More articles about what? (Because the articles about making ships float, gorgeous screens from circles and pictures of Highboys and furniture that would be at home in Ten Forward clearly isn't enough...)
Better how?
Glossy pages? Beautiful pictures? Oh, wait, we have those.
Better writing? Better editing? No, that's already top of the line.
Better subject matter?
Better how?
What, specifically, would change, if Taunton became "better" overnight?
Or would they become better if you had some coffee and your headache went away?
The world waits for the answer to these questions.
Better How?
Deleted, double post.
Better Is a State of Mind
Jammer - Better is not an objective quantification, it is a state of mind. My better and your better will be different, but we both can agree that a Krenov cabinet is better than the first thing I built. Or the second.
Rather, better is an ongoing process where the goalpost is forever to be moved. Occassionally the goal may be reached, only to moved again, by ourselves, to something that is better. Sisyphus, but linear.
Climb a hill and see the taller hill, climb the mountain and see the taller ones on the horizon.
That is what was in the original FW magazine - the notion that there is a better, no matter where you stand now. And that the better that is beyond you now is attainable, but there will be other better out beyond that. The early FW made one aware of this better, whether you wanted to go there or not, it was there, and some folks valued it. Curiously, this leads one to want more, unlike the current publication.
This is difficult to talk about, and most people will never have these thoughts. Maybe sports people, maybe other craftspeople. Maybe money grabbers or politicians think about it - but not in the same sense.
The current magazine has no clue as to what an abstract better really is and wishes to avoid the subject entirely (witness the tool comparisons and the struggle to appear objective and not subjective). Instead they sell a commercial version of better by implication. In the subscription, the tools, the books and videos. It is just right here, within grasp, finite.
There may be a better word for better, but it is all I have right now.
Dave Sochar
Whoa
Where have you been? We needed you in these discussions several months ago.
We agree on every point except one, because the current magazine does, indeed, make me want to do better woodworking. And it makes me want to do different kinds of wood working.
That could be a function of my skill level relative to others, or it could be because my expectations are lower. It could be because every time I "discover" some "new" woodworking action (that has only been around since the time of the Romans) I get all excited and have to go back and read every word about It. Whatever "it" is at the moment. Shaker cradles was one. That took almost a month, and the cradle still isn't finished. Another was vise selection vs. the kind of work one does. And don't even get me started on turning. I ended up buying a lathe.
But every time Taunton switches gears, and goes from dovetail joints to finishing to inlays to turning, I seem to re-boot, and then I have to start all over.
For me, better is the goal. The quest is what this is about.
Therefore, it does't matter what the source, the publisher or the subject is.
And so Taunton, and therefore Fine Woodworking, will do fine.
Well...
I'll be one of the ones to say that I'll be sorry to see you go. I'm missing more and more people as they drop off Knots. It once was a lively, informative, compelling forum that I checked into at least once a day.
But now I'm spending much less time here. I have no complaints about the magazine. I've learned so much from it over the years, and from the website as well; the videos are great learning tools. But..
At the risk of sounding like a whiner, the usability of Knots is just so irritating that I can only stand to come here periodically. What is even more aggravating is that, despite complaints - and the obvious signs that something is amiss by virtue of the fact that more and more people are ceasing coming here - nothing is being done to fix the problems ("Latest site update March 12"?). My suspicion is that Knots is not high on FWW's priority list, so it gets short shrift in the resources department.
So it seems like a dying entity, to me at least. And that is too bad. I wonder how much longer I will put up with this unnecessarily labor-intense interface before I, too, will decide it is no longer worth it..
Zolton
Zolton,
I thought it was a possum but turned out to be a woodchuck......
How's the brake fluid supply holding out? LOL
Regards,
To A Point
I go along with that. At least, most of it.
Every so often, when a new song comes out that's truly bad, or some clown makes some "music" that isn't music, I think "I could do that, and I could do it better. Why does he get the million? What has he got that I don't have?"
But then I listen to someone like Eric Clapton, or Barbara Streisand, (or fill in your favorite name) and I realize that yeah, there IS something there, they have some magic that, like blond hair, simply isn't present in me.
So I grant you that there is such a thing as talent, and I have seen flashes of it in workers around me.
But I'm not sure that that talent will take you to the top in woodworking without dedication, training and the pursuit of the craft.
Every time I'm shown someone who "magically" has the ability to make music, or turn a beautiful piece on a lathe, I have to wonder how much better they could be with training, dedication, discipline and practice.
And my important point is that in the end, thirty years on, I'm not certain at all that the dedicated, disciplined, trained Journeyman who followed his craft from zero through to the end won't be in the same place as the Magical Mystical Sensation who was born that way, and then did whatever Magical Mystical Sensations do for thirty years.
Barbara Streisand didn't really improve in a strict musical sense throughout her career; she really was that good right out of the gate. Her business decisions certainly improved, but her musical ability stayed about the same.
From a strict musician's point of view, Clapton showed marked improvement over his career, even though he still disdains rehearsals. What would have happened if, with his talent, he had chosen to rehearse rigorously for all these years?
And in the Value Of Training department, we have Madonna. She was nowhere NEAR as good, musically or performance-wise, as she is now until she made a small amount of money, and then spent a HUGE amount on training: vocal, gymnastics and dance. That training, along with her relentless pursuit, (and no small amount of willingness to sell whatever the public would buy) took her to the top. Not much talent, unless you're counting raw attraction potential. Even then, you have to like blondes, and if you prefer sensual to sexy, the whole thing falls apart. I vastly prefer hookers to welfare mothers, so on that level, I respect her, but she doesn't stand a chance next to Sandra Bullock or Angie Harmon in my book. I imagine your milage varies.
Anyway, I'm a believer in dedication, training and discipline rather than talent. If one has that talent, I suggest dedication, training and discipline for the forty year win.
gofigure57,
Thanks.
I define a master woodworker, as someone, who when asked or for their own enjoyment, can build anything, be it inlaid, carved, bent, turned etc. I can't do that. Also, I think one should be able to produce (successful) designs of their own, in order to be a true master. I can't do that either.
I do console myself, by looking at Goddard/Townsend furniture. Their work in the Chippendale period, is rightly regarded as masterpieces, yet their Federal period furniture is nowhere near the same caliber. They were talented carvers, but apparently not as comfortable with veneer and inlay work. Some of this might be attributed to the decline of Newport durning the period.
Rob Millard
http://www.americanfederalperiod.com
http://www.rlmillard.typepad.com
Like others here, I hate to see someone leave. Especially those with experience. Having only become interested in woodworking the last 2 years, I don't even call myself an amature. I am just what I said, a beginner. When I open (and I look forward to my FWW magazine) each month I see articles that interest me. Now, had I been doing woodworking for the past 30 years I can understand why someone would say it is "bland" in its articles. But, look at it this way, what if ALL woodworking magazines were published for the "Master" woodworker? Where would that leave beginners? I did not take shop is school and did not have a father to show me "how" to do things in the shop. All I can do is read an article or watch a video and then go to the shop and "try" some of the things I read or watched. I do look forward to building something someone would call "fine" woodworking but I also know that will take time. I am 65 so I sometimes wonder whether or not I will have the time to do so. When I run into a problem or need advice I post here and I generally get good feed-back. Sometimes, I will refer back to a FWW article. There is just so much to learn and one needs a place to start. And asking a "pro" sometimes gets you an answer you don't understand because it is far above your skills.
I don't know what FWW was 30 years ago. But, all things change. Including ourselves. What most here find bland in FWW (and I am sure the same can be said of other publications) some of us find intreging. I look at some of the work and articles submitted and can only dream of doing something like them. And, some of the "tips" have paid off too. So, I would say don't judge the publication because you have "out-grown" it but do something to help those of us just starting by continuing to send advice to the publication or posting something here. Please, pass on your knowledge, skills and advice.
Just my opinion.
Thanks,
Jerry
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled