Model railroad 'ethics'

[arbomambo]

I'd like to pose, what I would consider an 'ethics' questions to members here:
If this thread belongs in another area, then please move it:

My question:
In large modular model railroad set ups, at various regional shows, there will exist modules, now owned by an individual, but built by another.
The current owner will, if pressed, allow that the module was/is built by another, but has no compunction accepting the awards/prizes/acollades for said module, and will continue to accept the awards/prizes, as the module wins contests at other events.
Is this 'ethical'? Does anyone else have an issue with this?
...and..
should a module, that has already won awards, remain in contention for further awards, at the same event the following years?

The example,  that has inspired me to pen this post, has another wrinkle: not only is the module NOT built by the current owner, but, when the animation on said module 'breaks' (as it often does) the repairs are not made by the current owner, but by the original builder!

So, again, my question is, does everyone here think that this is 'unethical', or is everyone ok with this practice?
to my mind it seems as if one is 'buying' an award.

[Philip H]

I'd say its sketchy at best after the first win.  I'd also say the ethics of the contest organization are sketchy after the first win - sure there were other entries in other years deserving of accolades?

[MVW]

I can't imagine being the second-hand owner of a module which is singled out for an award, and NOT pointing out the work was done by someone else.

There's nothing wrong with being proud of a module you purchased (or somehow came to possess). After all, you showed good taste, and perhaps preserved a module that may have hit the dumpster otherwise. But if you didn't create it, don't pretend you did.

I'm with you on this one, arbo. "Unethical" may be too strong of a term. But "sad" certainly fits.

Jim

[Point353]

If you buy a classic car, commission a frame-off restoration and then win at the Pebble Beach Concours, who receives the trophy?
Does it go to the car owner or to the restorer?

[Ed Kapuscinski]

I can't imagine being the second-hand owner of a module which is singled out for an award, and NOT pointing out the work was done by someone else.

There's nothing wrong with being proud of a module you purchased (or somehow came to possess). After all, you showed good taste, and perhaps preserved a module that may have hit the dumpster otherwise. But if you didn't create it, don't pretend you did.

I'm with you on this one, arbo. "Unethical" may be too strong of a term. But "sad" certainly fits.

Jim

Yeah, I agree. I wouldn't call it "unethical", but I would call it "wrong".

[DKS]

This issue has reared its ugly head quite a few times over the years. How many so-called modelers have won awards for models they simply bought? I've personally interacted with a couple, and they adamantly insist there's nothing wrong. I beg to differ... strongly. I would maintain "unethical" is not over-the-top, because I'd argue it's the assumption by most people that an entry was built by the person entering it. And I'd recommend that all future modeling contest organizers include an "I built this model, Y/N" line on their entry forms.

 

[Dave V]

I agree...  I think "unethical" is an appropriate word to use here.

As a member of a modular club whose modules have won awards, I think we have a good solution.  What we do is after the member who built it no longer owns it, we put a plaque on it with the awards and the builder's name.

I have acquired a module from another member but one that had been stripped of everything except the frame, legs, skyboard (unfinished), and roadbed.  I plan to completely rebuild everything from the subsurface up.  Not that I expect my module will win awards (I've decided it needs to be something mundane like wilderness running through scrub brush and juniper to balance the high-country and mining scenes), but I would not accept one without acknowledging the previous owner's contribution.

[arbomambo]

If you buy a classic car, commission a frame-off restoration and then win at the Pebble Beach Concours, who receives the trophy?
Does it go to the car owner or to the restorer?

Does the above question equivelate to the example in my oroginal post?
Do you have any issue with the situation in your example?
Do you have an opinion on the example I shared?
I’m trying to gauge opinions either way...

[CRL]

It’s certainly a valid question. The custom car world is a good current example where many award winning builds are not done by the owner of the car, but by a custom car shop who built the car commissioned by the owner. History is replete with artists creating art or music under commission from a benefactor, but in those cases the original artist or composer remained attached to the work, typically by signing the work in some manner.

I knew a very talented modeler who built some gorgeous modules, but he was so paranoid that someone might take credit for something he built that he took a hammer and smashed his creations when he was done with displaying them. However, if someone chooses to sell their work product, that’s their choice.

The idea of requiring the module owner to disclose the original builder is one solution, but you also need to consider if that logically extends to giving credit to the creator any component parts that were used? How about a module originally built by one person, but updated and super-detailed by the current owner? Do you write rules and create multiple categories or assign scoring points based on who did what? That can be done, but it will still be an honor system.

Very few people who admire Mozart’s music can name the prince who was his benefactor, nor do they care.

[IronPenguin]

I guess that's similar to marathoners who cut a course short and brag about their times. Never could understand how someone can fool themselves into thinking  that was right.  Runners simply call it cheating.

[DKS]

That can be done, but it will still be an honor system.

And therein lies the stickiest part of this whole conundrum.

FWIW, a modeler who bashes a loco and superdetails it need not credit the manufacturer of the original model nor the maker of the detail parts, IMO. But a modeler who buys a scratchbuilt model and paints it does indeed owe the original builder much if not most of the credit. There are naturally more than a few grey areas that need to be dealt with property through the "honor system." Failing that, we have a major problem. I know that, on the few occasions I submitted models to contests, I declared my contribution by rough percentages. The general public was obviously oblivious to the details, but at least the judges were not in the dark about anything.

[narrowminded]

This is a reply with my thoughts that I made on another board where this question was posed:

"Like so many things, it's in the details for me. Full credit and acknowledgement of the original builder would make this perfectly OK to me. Could even afford extra "bragging" accolades that the original builder (and observers) might find distasteful to pronounce for himself but can be made by a second party. A second party like the new owner. The perception to me, in this scenario, would be the new owner really enjoying the exhibited skills of the builder. As far as his collecting awards? Again, with proper credit, those awards are accepted by the current owner but all know who actually "won" the award when it's fully disclosed. He's just the stand in.

I also think the new owner might deserve a small amount of credit for caring, exhibiting, and maintaining an outstanding piece of work, sharing it with others rather than letting it be dismantled and lost to the world. Assuming he actually IS doing that and again, with full credit to the builder."

[basementcalling]

I say it's unethical. Buying a module and entering it into a contest is no different than "buying" a model of an engine or piece of rolling stock - or commissioning someone to build it for you - and then entering said item in a contest. Could someone buy Max's SP&S steamer from him and then enter it in contests to win prizes without complaints? What if someone gets a professional modeler - Lance Mindheim or Bernie Kempenski, for example, to build a module for them, and then enters that module in contests? Who's skill is resulting in the win of the contest?

I'd also fault the rules of the contest for not specifying that modules eligible for judging should be the original work of the current owner. Maybe a tweak there solves your dilema.

[basementcalling]

And therein lies the stickiest part of this whole conundrum.

FWIW, a modeler who bashes a loco and superdetails it need not credit the manufacturer of the original model nor the maker of the detail parts, IMO. But a modeler who buys a scratchbuilt model and paints it does indeed owe the original builder much if not most of the credit. There are naturally more than a few grey areas that need to be dealt with property through the "honor system." Failing that, we have a major problem. I know that, on the few occasions I submitted models to contests, I declared my contribution by rough percentages. The general public was obviously oblivious to the details, but at least the judges were not in the dark about anything.

However, David, in NMRA contests don't contestants do exactly that with detail parts, and list those that they purchased from suppliers vs those they handcrafted themselves? Under NMRA contest rules, you score more points for the scratchbuilt items, though there is no mention of a similar rule in this module scenario.

[basementcalling]

This is a reply with my thoughts that I made on another board where this question was posed:

I also think the new owner might deserve a small amount of credit for caring, exhibiting, and maintaining an outstanding piece of work, sharing it with others rather than letting it be dismantled and lost to the world. Assuming he actually IS doing that and again, with full credit to the builder."

@narrowminded I believe the OP said that when the effects break down, it's the original builder of the module who does repairs, not the current owner. Glad to know that a quality item is still on display for the public to appreciate; I think many clubs do that with modules where a member passes on or moves. Displaying is one thing, but entering in contests to me crosses a threshhold.

In fishing, I guess the equivalent would be the boat owner claiming credit for the catching of a record fish even though the guy fishing from the back seat caught it on a borrowed rod and real using a lure someone else suggested he try. Who deserves the credit, the person who plays and lands the fish, the boat owner for taking him to that spot, or the friend who suggested the lure to use?