Well I guess it is pretty easy to be a "2 km sniper" where you take shots at others work... but I really don't see some of these snipers actually submitting their own work.
So lets have a look at the evidence. So, I've decided to look at the last three editions. Firstly, book reviews. The allegation is that SCMRA publications review their own books. Secondly, faults in the model
(as distinct to errors in prototype information) are not reported.
Book reviews - Two books reviewed, neither published by SCMRA.
Model reviews - Four models reviewed. One clearly describes a number of issues with constructing a kit, another review highlighted some minor issues with a model, a third review gave a fairly positive review and the fourth, I would say, is a pretty light weight review.
Book reviews - Three books reviewed, none published by SCMRA.
Model reviews - Six models reviewed. Each review pointed out various issues with each model. One review started with "... this is not a kit for the faint hearted..." and then went on to say "... a decal sheet with a selection of numbers (most not correct..."
Book reviews - one. Not published by SCMRA.
Model reviews - four models reviewed. All four reviews note some minor issues but are otherwise very positive.
So.... with respect to books.... six books reviewed and none by the publisher. Sure it may have happened... but nothing recently.
There were 14 model reviews. All reviews have clearly pointed out various issues with three pointing out some moderately serious deficiencies. I only found one review that I would consider pretty soft. I have based that assessment not
on the model review per se
but because it was four columns of text but only one paragraph
that discussed the model!
So in summary, I would say reviews are clearly demonstrably fair. Sure there may have been an issue in the past, but interestingly, the negative comments are all based on "something" that had happened at some unspecified time in the past, without a specific reference. Bizarrely state that they don't read the reviews anyway??? On that basis how would you know they were biased?
Anyway, I shall look forward to the 2000 metre snipers penning their own articles for the AMRM. In the mean time, I'll keep reading and enjoying.
AMRM, keep up the good work!