[COR-FB] Railside Moonshine

[Mesabi]

Location: Mesabi Landing

Type: Small factory

Workers in ML often enjoy hootch, or moonshine, and make it just about anywhere. 

Rail side moonshine by North White, on Flickr

[Roadmonkeytj]

Ha clever parts usage for a simple 20 gallon pot still. 

[Captain Dee]

Edit: Forget it.

Nice still.

Edited January 3, 2019 by Captain Dee

[Darnok]

Hmm, not the greatest build in the game, not the worst either. A bit on the low end of effort, aye, but not bad. Certainly not worth a rant of the length above...

 

I think the build itself is fine for what it wants to show. It is actually a good representation of small-scale distilling (see below), and the parts usage is neat. Building with very few parts on a small scale is a challenge of its own, and I fell the "job's a good one" here.

What lets this one down more than anything is the presentation, not the build itself. One photo and a single sentence... eh, quite underwhelming. With the angle chosen the leaf on the left blocks the distilling apparatus in parts, and the front minifig partly obscures the one in the back. At least this aspect was handled lazily indeed.

 

@Mesabi: This could be easily changed by one or two pictures from other angles, and some more story (maybe the two guys having a discussion about something?).

 

However...

 

For perspective, this is the picture reference material given on the German Wikipedia page for "Moonshine":

 

The English Wikipedia page gives this as a "historial example":

 

Compare these to the build above, and you see it is a perfectly fine representation of the process. In minifig scale none of this requires more than what has been done above.

 

TL/DR: A good build for what is supposed to be reprsented, with poor presentation.

 

So now...

4 hours ago, Captain Dee said:

Well... there's not much to comment on here.

Given the length of your post, this is ironic at best.

 

4 hours ago, Captain Dee said:

The "factory" is pretty much just an open-air still. There's nothing wrong with the concept, but again, more building effort would really help to present this as a legitimate factory. I recommend some type of a structure, even if it's just poles and a roof. Add a few barrels or something, and make it look a little more substantial.

You say you are not into the EGS portion of the game, so maybe you do not know the corresponding rules. They define a "factory" as:

Quote

A factory is a production facility. It is where raw materials are brought to in order to produce a manufactured product.

A distillery is given as one of the defining examples. Nowhere does it state the things you ask for. This one is a "legitimate factory" according to the letter of the rules, as well as the spirit of them game: moonshine was (and is) produced exactly like shown in the build.

 

@Captain Dee: I will spare myself the time picking apart the rest of your rant. Pooping on one point of property in face of 222 more is bad form though. There is nothing wrong with this build justifying your angry tone. If you do not even care for the EGS or its implication I really do not understand where the strong feelings come from you obviously have about this - otherwise you would not have felt the need for such a long post as the one above.

Edited January 2, 2019 by Drunknok

[Bregir]

While the still itself is fairly clever, I have to say I agree entirely with Captain Dee here. Too little building effort/building mass, and to that a near absence of story. 

And I do not think this qualifies as a factory. You have been here long, have built a lot, have proved that you can do better, and have plenty of EGS income. Additionally, you have heard similar feedback before. There is no excuse left for subpar builds, and I have to suggest such to the court now.

[Darnok]

Just now, Bregir said:

And I do not think this qualifies as a factory. You have been here long, have built a lot, have proved that you can do better, and have plenty of EGS income. Additionally, you have heard similar feedback before. There is no excuse left for subpar builds, and I have to suggest such to the court now.

Please see my post above. Your opinion is incompatible with the rules.

[Bregir]

9 minutes ago, Drunknok said:

Please see my post above. Your opinion is incompatible with the rules.

From the rules on properties:

Note: Plot Sizes are guidelines; neither maximums nor minimums. However, leadership reserves the right to reject any poor quality or undersized MOCs.

EDIT: In court we use a concept called "sufficient effort" as a general rule of thumb to cover the above.

I will add that I think @Captain Dee's position promotes the sort of community and spirit of the game we should foster. One of quality and improvement, as well as mutual respect. And I want to commend him for taking the time to suggest improvements and explain his position. I am sure it can be helpful to @Mesabi, who has often asked for feedback.

[Darnok]

Just now, Bregir said:

From the rules on properties:

Note: Plot Sizes are guidelines; neither maximums nor minimums. However, leadership reserves the right to reject any poor quality or undersized MOCs.

I will add that I think @Captain Dee's position promotes the sort of community and spirit of the game we should foster. One of quality and improvement, as well as mutual respect. And I want to commend him for taking the time to suggest improvements and explain his position. I am sure it can be helpful to @Mesabi, who has often asked for feedback.

None of this adresses my post. You show once again that you easily dismiss viewpoints other than your own without backing it up with any reasoning.

 

To shorten this: if this is indeed brought up to Court I hope somebody reasonable stands up to you.

[Bregir]

Just now, Drunknok said:

None of this adresses my post

Mesabi has shown a fine still, which reasonably accurately depicts what was historically considered a moonshine still.

However, to license something as a property, the build in total has to show sufficient effort for the desired license size. So showing something accurately does not qualify it as a property. That takes "sufficient building effort".

Just now, Drunknok said:

You show once again that you easily dismiss viewpoints other than your own without backing it up with any reasoning.

I have called you out for your insinuations and accusations about my leadership before and asked you to explain yourself, either directly to me or to another leader, if you do not like to approach me directly. You have not, and I consider that dishonourable behaviour. Hence, I cannot associate with you beyond absolute bare necessities until such an explanation is offered. And please take it elsewhere, as it it not relevant for this build.

[Darnok]

2 minutes ago, Bregir said:

However, to license something as a property, the build in total has to show sufficient effort for the desired license size. So showing something accurately does not qualify it as a property. That takes "sufficient building effort".

None of this is stated in the rules. The term "quality" is mentioned, and so far nobody hasbrought up a convincing point as to why this MOC is of "poor quality" - as would be required for "leadership reserves the right to reject any poor quality [...] MOCs".

If you wish to see your opinion represented in the rules, you could start a discussion to change them accordingly.

 

7 minutes ago, Bregir said:

explain yourself, either directly to me or to another leader, if you do not like to approach me directly. You have not

This is factually incorrect, and I can not let this stand in the open.

If you wish to further discuss this: you are familiar with the PM system.

[Ayrlego]

ALL: This matter has been referred to the court. I'd ask everyone to refrain from further comment on anything but the build itself. The court will make a ruling and communicate it via appropriate means.

[Fraunces]

4 hours ago, Bregir said:

I have to say I agree entirely with Captain Dee here.

me too

 

[Bart]

The still it self is well designed and build.

If it was licensed as an Artisan I wouldn't have bothered about it, but I tend to agree with captain Dee otherwise. 

[Captain Dee]

Edit: Forget it. See above.

Edited January 3, 2019 by Captain Dee