ps: PJSkiO - I was worried you had flounced off the forum without starting a thread to explain your reasons for leaving us. Nice to see you back but please try not to drive the temperature straight back through the roof.
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Fri 22-03-13 19:53; edited 2 times in total
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
PJSki wrote:
You're a nasty, scheming, vindictive piece of work, you really are.
No I'm not. If my mother was still alive, she'd be absolutely furious with that description.
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Comedy Goldsmith, PJSkiO, have/give yourselves a BIG hug.
Last edited by Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see? on Fri 22-03-13 20:27; edited 1 time in total
I stated that you are Gerry Aitken. The irony is that two other members of this community had come to that conclusion, one very firmly, and I thought they were wrong. Then you left seemingly irrefutable clues. Obviously you're at liberty to offer an alternative name, but you can't just hurl abuse around the place, like somebody on the Jeremy Kyle show ... with their head in a paper bag.
Jeremy Kyle insists on affirmative ID. Internet forums don't, because the etiquette is that the abuse is avoided.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Comedy Goldsmith wrote:
PJSki wrote:
You're a nasty, scheming, vindictive piece of work, you really are.
No I'm not. If my mother was still alive, she'd be absolutely furious with that description.
Whatever...
And before you start using data held by this site to identify individuals, you might want to read this: http://www.out-law.com/page-8060
Comedy Goldsmith, to me, you seem on a relentless mission to discredit the SCGB. To those that are quite happy with the club you must seem like you are a
Quote:
nasty, scheming, vindictive piece of work
Megamum asked a while back what your agenda was - and you seemed unable to reply...you are not happy with the leading service costs, not happy that the SKGB forum has yet to roll out PM'ing, unhappy with your perceived gender bias of the organisation etc etc to me, it seems you are nit picking.
Quote:
Obviously you're at liberty to offer an alternative name, but you can't just hurl abuse around the place, like somebody on the Jeremy Kyle show ... with their head in a paper bag.
actually, within SH T&C, he can; the fact that that niggles you is irrelevant.
My impression, from those that have skied with you from SH, is that you are a well liked guy - but I will be honest here, to me it seems like this is an unhealthy obsession. Let it go.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
PJSkiO, Comedy Goldsmith, you're as bad as each other
Comedy Goldsmith, you're pretty happy to dish it out but obviously don't like being on the receiving end. PJSkiO even though there is some force in your observation that CG brings out the worst in people, you don't have to throw petrol around everywhere.
After all it is free
After all it is free
PJSki, I guess the continuation of this thread is great advertising for the club. You and cDG should really head up the New Media marketing dept.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
boredsurfin, now that would be worth watching.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Unfunny Goldsmith wrote:
--
??
Be published and be damned, is that not the correct way?
A brand-new, online Ski+board magazine will be available from Thursday 28 March.
A combination of superb conditions, inspirational stories and some wonderful member content meant that we thought we'd create another edition. It'll be available to download from skiclub.co.uk as well as the Apple Newsstand.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
Filthyphil30k wrote:
Unfunny Goldsmith wrote:
--
Be published and be damned, is that not the correct way?
Absolutely. It was published. Then it was "delete and be damned". If you check back to the end of those deletions you'll see there's a firm plan to re-publish and be re-damned.
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
Actually, I've come to the conclusion that internet forums work like this:
Be born and be damned
Publish and be damned
Edit and be damned
Delete and be damned
Re-publish and be damned
Say nothing and be damned
Be an innocent little flower: give lots of friendly help, advice and encouragement and be damned
Die and be damned ... etc. etc.
A brand-new, online Ski+board magazine will be available from Thursday 28 March.
A combination of superb conditions, inspirational stories and some wonderful member content meant that we thought we'd create another edition. It'll be available to download from skiclub.co.uk as well as the Apple Newsstand.
cDG you are the clubs new media a adverting consultant aren't you and I notice that Ski and Bored's deputy editor's is connected loosely to snowHeads as well
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Comedy Goldsmith wrote:
Filthyphil30k wrote:
Unfunny Goldsmith wrote:
--
Be published and be damned, is that not the correct way?
Absolutely. It was published. Then it was "delete and be damned". If you check back to the end of those deletions you'll see there's a firm plan to re-publish and be re-damned.
I see that, but my simple question is why delete?
Do you have time frame or is it nebulous?
Many thanks.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Filthyphil30k wrote:
Do you have time frame or is it nebulous?
Haven't the faintest idea what you're talking about. I'll try and get Dr Who to answer that question. As previously explained ... the stuff was deleted when I got home from work (approaching midnight) one night, there'd been a troll-fest and I thought "fuck this for a game of soldiers". It was an error of judgement, so admin and I had a chat about it the next day. I daresay when he's less busy in a few weeks it may be possible to to retrieve the material, if it's archived. In the meantime, why not watch some paint dry?
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Comedy Goldsmith, . . . Gerry and PJSki are both spilled from the same seed. It doesn't matter if the occupy the same space physically, their minds occupy the same midden . . . a sort of syncopated shithead.
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Comedy Goldsmith wrote:
Filthyphil30k wrote:
Do you have time frame or is it nebulous?
Haven't the faintest idea what you're talking about. I'll try and get Dr Who to answer that question. As previously explained ... the stuff was deleted when I got home from work (approaching midnight) one night, there'd been a troll-fest and I thought "fuck this for a game of soldiers". It was an error of judgement, so admin and I had a chat about it the next day. I daresay when he's less busy in a few weeks it may be possible to to retrieve the material, if it's archived. In the meantime, why not watch some paint dry?
Thank you for your fair response, it must have been hard to admit you were trolling, I for one will be more sympathetic to your agenda. I don't personally need the posts reinstated. All the best.
THE MYSTERIOUS LONG-TERM AFFAIR OF SCGB MEMBERSHIP DATA
Thanks to two historical analyses in my files, compiled by former SCGB council members in the late 1980s, I can give you a good picture of how the membership of the SCGB grew after its formation in 1903, through to 2013 ... and the recent decades of non-achievement. Rather than quote all the data (which is not complete anyway - particularly between 1911 and 1939) I'll highlight some of the key stages of British ski history in relation to what was generally going on.
The data is mysterious for modern times because so many odd statements, hopes and hypes have been expressed. The more the club has indulged in marketing, PR and advertising (and the more it seems to have diverged from the UK ski population's aspirations) the more strange these statements have been. The last annual report of the Club (2012) did not quote the membership figure at all - expressed in the conventional form of paying units - thus breaking a tradition going back many decades. Why mess around like this?
There is confusion between 'paying units' (the most important figure, since it confirms the number of households/subscribers) and 'overall membership'. Another figure, potentially quotable, would be the number of voting members ... which is theoretically important. Ballot papers are not automatically issued to all eligible SCGB members, though the SCGB's membership has been dulled into such a state of passivity that fewer than 2% of members actually vote annually in AGM matters, council elections etc. Electoral Reform Ballot Services (the auditors) have expressed concern over this.
1903-1944 Before the First World War, Second World War
Two years after its 1903 formation, the SCGB had 135 members, and 286 by 1911. But by the outbreak of the Second World War in 1939, the membership had soared to 8170. Chairlifts and draglifts, which did so much to improve uplift and popularise the sport, first appeared in the 1930s.
1945-1953 A post-war boom
Despite the devastation of the war, the SCGB quickly picked up interest and momentum. Membership rose from 4973 (in 1945) to 9426 (in 1949). Then came a really impressive push, to 14,041 members in 1952. Not surprisingly, the Club saw this as a springboard to acquire its most prestigious clubhouse at 118 Eaton Square, London SW1. The building, acquired in 1953, included a dining room, bar and library.
1954-1965 The early rise of air travel to the Alps
This was the period when air travel really picked up, but before packaged ski holidays were mass-marketed with charter flights. In 1954 the SCGB's membership was 11,019. By 1965 it had grown to 17,020.
In 1960, the Club's president declared its membership of 12,644 (25% of the UK ski population) as "a significant under-achievement".
1966-1980 Dramatic growth of the UK ski population
Here, we need to be sure whether we're dealing with 'paying units/subscribers' or 'overall membership'. For the year 1966 I have a figure of 18,020 (apparently the former, but needs checking) - apparently the highest membership figure the SCGB has ever achieved. In 1980, the Club had 10,110 paying units. By this time, a serious problem had set in, and the membership level - relative to the overall UK ski population - had slumped. The Club was viewed as elitist and irrelevant to the typical package holiday skier. Most skiers saw no need to join a club - for what was usually a one-off annual holiday experience (unlike a regular recreational activity). The Club had failed to strike the essential common chord - a publishing and communications strategy which would hold people's fascination/anticipation of skiing for 12 months a year.
1981 to 2013 What happened?
It may seem strange to lump this long period - almost a third of the SCGB's history - into one span, but essentially very little has happened in the 32 years to date. In 1981 the Club had 11,360 paying units. In 2012 there were 16,782 paying units. The Club currently declares to members that it has a membership of "around 34,000" (overall) but various other figures have been quoted recently. Historically, until the maximum age for children in family membership was increased from 18 to 24, the ratio between paying units and overall membership was about 1 : 1.5. Now it's claimed at around 1 : 2. Go figure.
The really important factor has been the 20-fold growth in the UK population between the mid-1960s and the recent pre-recession years when the number of UK skiers exceeded 1 million. In that period, despite fluctuations, that huge growth of the market had almost no impact on the SCGB's membership.
Right now, snowHeads has achieved 35,630 user registrations ... and these users probably get most of the information and advice they need via the forum threads here ... with their many links to other information sources. Plus, all the other info. available for free around the internet.
Clearly, in 2013, the majority of UK skiers see no need for a club at all - whether free or £60 per annum. But that will probably never change!
Last edited by You need to Login to know who's really who. on Sat 23-03-13 18:31; edited 3 times in total
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
FFS, yes CG we got your point 34 pages ago, just repeating it over and over does not make it more relevant. It's not about the forums (Snowheads or SCGB) but about the skiing - and as I said earlier most skiers (those I've skied with anyway) couldn't give a flying XXXX about either, let alone their histories.
On the rocks, calm down dear, it's just a commercially-relevant analysis.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Comedy Goldsmith, there are fewer repeats on Dave.
After all it is free
After all it is free
DT68, bullshit. The info. above has never - to my knowledge - been published. The devil is in the detail. Yours sincerely, Dave
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
Comedy Goldsmith, I think that is a rather nice analysis.
The key points here for me however is how the context has changed...
The Internet destroys the information provision monopoly the SCGB once had.
The mag is tired and irrelevant and this is reflected in its newsstand sales.
The club is not a sporting representative body.
The discounts can be useful and the insurance and freshtracks hols worth it.
But there has been a democratisation of skiing and information and I'm not sure any activity "club" really is relevant these days in the way you desire to a huge number of people.
Last edited by You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net. on Sat 23-03-13 19:42; edited 1 time in total
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Comedy Goldsmith, you seem particularly tetchy today. I hope you are alright.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
DT68 wrote:
Comedy Goldsmith, there are fewer repeats on Dave.
But he is Dave
stoat of the dead,
Quote:
The mag is tired and irrelevant and this is reflected in its newsstand sales.
It will be interesting to see if having it on the Apple newstand makes a difference, from March 28th according to the advertising on here
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
DT68 wrote:
Comedy Goldsmith, you seem particularly tetchy today.
Hopefully not tetchy. I have to admit that my attitude right now is 'Zero Bullshit Tolerance' and hope that we can continue in that vein for the moment.
After the mud-wrestling episode above (this kind of activity is absolutely not tolerated at the Hurlingham), I thought it was best to get back to solid ground.
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
What colourful metaphors, David!
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Comedy Goldsmith, oh FFS
how tedious is it possible to be?
SCGB is a bit like gay marriage- if you don't like SCGB- don't join it.
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Why is the Ski Club's forum so quiet? CG has stated (bullshitted) that the majority of Club members now post on here. Well, actually, the membership seem to post on Facebook from what I'm seeing. So far today, all the members I'm friends with on FB have between them generated just under 200 posts. So it seems fair to say that a large percentage of Ski Club members are now sharing information via Facebook. There's even a Ski Club Leaders' group on FB which I'm told is 'very busy'.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
ed123, I think Admino McBadmin explained - at an early stage of this thread - that no one is forced to read it ... or join the SCGB, or have a gay marriage, or eat Marmite.
Just read something else!
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Comedy Goldsmith wrote:
ed123, I think Admino McBadmin explained - at an early stage of this thread - that no one is forced to read it ... or join the SCGB, or have a gay marriage, or eat Marmite.
Just read something else!
Is this advice to ed123 or yourself? Or both?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
DT68 wrote:
Comedy Goldsmith wrote:
ed123, I think Admino McBadmin explained - at an early stage of this thread - that no one is forced to read it ... or join the SCGB, or have a gay marriage, or eat Marmite.
Just read something else!
Is this advice to ed123 or yourself? Or both?
He really has been giving himself some excellent advice today:
Quote:
Hopefully not tetchy. I have to admit that my attitude right now is 'Zero cowdoo Tolerance' and hope that I can continue in that vein for the moment.
DT68, bullshit. The info. above has never - to my knowledge - been published. The devil is in the detail. Yours sincerely, Dave
Bless you/Gesundheit.
The thesis remains the same, namely "Golden age of Ski Club followed by stagnation". A microscopic examination of a a couple of different trees doesn't mean that you're not still lost in the same wood. It's a repeat of a repeat of a repeat etc.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
PJSki wrote:
There's even a Ski Club Leaders' group on FB which I'm told is 'very busy'.
The SCGB's issues will not be resolved by a 'closed group' of those with the greatest vested interest in maintaining the status quo. Clearly the message isn't getting through at all!
Comedy Goldsmith, you could always do the leaders' course. Then you might be allowed to join the playgroup too.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
One of those issues ... once again ...
SCGB REPS / LEADERS
1992 ... Cost of resort operations: £85,406 ... Resorts repped: 31 ... Number of people who skied with a rep: c.15,000 ... New members recruited by reps: 1108
2011 ... Cost of resort operations: £263,451 ... Resorts repped: 34 ... Number of people who skied with a rep: 5281 ... New members recruited by reps: 229
[Sources: 1992 and 2011 SCGB annual reports]
A worthy subject for discussion by the Ski Closed Group Britain !
After all it is free
After all it is free
Calm down dear, it's just a FB group, like the one I'm a member of for the last holiday I went on. A good chance for the Leaders to bitch about the running of the club no doubt.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
Comedy Goldsmith, oh I know, oh I know. Those horrid leaders who blocked your rightful anointment as the true editor of the club rag.
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
and I notice that Ski and Bored's deputy editor's is connected loosely to snowHeads as well 
