I agree and at the same time disagree. I believe that a model should be based on ones ability. A modeller who has 10+ years experience should be held at a higher standard then a modeller who is just starting out and without the resources of an airbrush, weathering material and the like. I for one will always post on how a model could have been better or what can be done the next time. I will never tell a modeller that their work is crap becuase I can see their skill level just by looking at the model. I agree that more people should post what they think could make the model better, this will in turn enable that person to become a better modeller. It definately has for me. As for historical accuracy, I am one who can really care less about it. I have shelves and shelves of reference books ranging from early Panzers to King Tigers to the M1A1 Abrams. I do at times put the time in to make sure my kit is accurate in some ways, but I am not going to count bolts. I much rather build a kit that is scale with a convincing paint scheme and weathering then one that isn't with every nut and bolt where it should be. World War II Armor gives you alot of leeway when it comes to markings, etc. because not every vehicle was photgraphed, or photographs are in black and white. Therefore there must be some creatvity on the modellers side.
Again, I agree that not every model should be given the "WOW" that is great, but in turn, you should take into account the modellers level of ability.
Cheers
Mo