 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
This forum, and whatever it may turn into, can never do what the SCGB can (and should). This should be all the things we've been over before (campaigning over issues, safety awareness, training, reps, snow reports etc). As an independent site, using that independence to full advantage, I would have thought the two could co-exist. All of which reminds me - where is "Arnold Lunn"?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Bit difficult at the moment though, as it's still closed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
David, I've agreed with all the arguments made about returning the ski club site to an open forum, and therefore find it somewhat non-sensical to come to the conclusion there should be a smaller fee to use just the forum. Surely we all agreed that an open forum was best for everyone. If people decide they want to join the club great, if people decide not to so what - who loses??
The difference between £20 a year say (less than 40pence a week) and the full membership of £50 (less than a pound a week) surely isn't the issue. I can't believe that anyone who goes skiing can't afford 95 odd pence a week to join the club - it's just a question of whether they want to or not. If they don't want to, I personally don't have a problem with that - as long as they don't use the open forum to air their prejudices about the ski club, which let's face it is just slagging of all those who have decided to join.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
David, how can a 'lite' member have a full vote?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
I'm with Mark,
Lets keep our community here but I can see no point refusing to use the SCGB in addition.
Point being we will find it difficult to get publicity here but with posters in both camps it will bring new blood here.
Life is to short to squabble over the mistake SCGB made but let's see it pan out.
Although I do like the fact that this site is not controlled by a company.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Trouble is I'm already risking the sack browsing this one...don't have time to read all the messages in both!! So unless those who have time to do both post links to the interesting bits I'm going to have to stick with whichever has the most chatter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can there be an amalgamation where by U's and Mr Cragg's heard work (muchos applause!) continues as is, but is linked or integrated into the SCGB website?
That way all those "cyber space refugees" will once again be able to join in the discussions while maximising the potential for expansion and additional contribution. The SCGB could also continue with their members only forum - should anyone be interested.
Above all U and Alan saved the forum and must be thanked with the loyalty of the current user group and be allowed full control over the forum should any amalgamation/integration take place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gerry. I think it's best that your question is addressed on the SCGB site. Do you want to start a thread over there on the subject of variable membership rates?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
David Goldsmith, You may recall that I raised the issue in the Forum on MO day. I've also e-mailed Laura directly with the suggestion. She clearly was under pressure because she said that it had been suggested and asked me what I thought of the idea of a reduced fee for internet access membership only ( as I said, I e-mailed the suggestion to her).
It has clearly been flagged up to SCGB. Let's see what they do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is a lot of history on this. I have a file with evidence that the SCGB charged variable rates decades ago. Up until a few years ago, you paid more if you lived in the London area.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Why would you have paid more if you lived in London 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Gerry are you very short?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Oisin Osh Kelly wrote: |
| Why would you have paid more if you lived in London |
I think it was something to do with 'Provincial' members not having easy access to the clubhouse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| Gerry. I think it's best that your question is addressed on the SCGB site. Do you want to start a thread over there on the subject of variable membership rates? |
Not particularly, no.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Adam Holt wrote: |
| Gerry are you very short? |
Not particularly, no. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
so you don't suffer from wee man syndrome then? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
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?
|
hmmm ... thats a short contribution even by your standards ... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
If the SCGB just included a link from their site to this one that would seem to solve at least 2 problems........
a) it gives everyone access to a secure, monitored, open forum.
b) it presumably absolves the SCGB of any possible legal complications, if that was one of their worries ?
The SCGB site will often be a first calling point for newcomers - this one will take ages to reach such a wide spread of potential readership although it is growing fast and is clearly very popular with those who have tracked it down. The SkiBoard parallel forum established at about the same time as this one does not seem to have taken off in the same way and this might be an indication that 2 is 1 too many ? Or 3 if the SCGB re-open the stable doors......... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Given SCGB's initial reactions I did wonder whether they'd go for SnowHeads as a semi-detached discussion forum with the advantages you list. However this type of 'devolution' is not somehing I've seen before...
My suspicion is that they will return to an open forum with their current software, because it integrates with the rest of the site. This would make distributed moderating a bit tricky...
Around the web there are many ski=ing forums, my impression is that Ski Club was one of the busiest. It took quite a while to grow; many people naturally visit Ski Club for the snow reports and a percentage will look around and find the discussion forum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Ian - Catch 22 if they reopen with the old system. Stolen identities, abuse, swearing, criticism of t' committee here we go again ....... If that happens, I suspect many readers would much prefer to stay here.
If the SCGB do reopen a public forum rather than going semi-detached (nice term), they'd be nuts not to learn from what has been achieved so quickly and so effectively here and on SkiBoard.
While looking for a replacement forum I found 'newsgroup Rec skiing alpine' mentioned somewhere above and it was horrible. The only good thing on it was a tip to come here. I am no expert on skiing forums but 60000 posts was impressive so I tend to agree with you that the SCGB forum (warts and all) must have been up there with the market leaders in terms of content at least - if not in other respects. We'll see what transpires .......
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are some new posts on SCGB by Neil Britten (Council member, but not representing Council). He is talking about acknowledged coexistence - i.e. we cross link with each other - SCGB maintains a members only area but links to SnowHeads as an open area and we put in a reciprocal link. I think this is a pretty good idea
We've managed 2000 posts in 8 days - admittedly in high season and admittedly with me making 200 with rather low snowsport content. 
He also hinted that an upgrade in their own discussion software would not go amiss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cross-Linking in both directions sounds eminently sensible - I for one would be very happy if NB can persuade the SCGB to do just that. How do the 'management' of this forum feel about this ???
TVM for the info which presumably comes from the members' area.
Numbers of Posts - never mind the quality feel the width. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Yes - from the members only area - I'm reluctant to copy posts over from SCGB members only.
I've started a market research thread inside the members only section to find out for how many people played a part in their decision to join Ski Club...it's one of the things we appear to keep returning to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The question of whether this site would flourish, or not is probably not very difficult to address. I think I read in a thread someone asked if the media had been informed. If a press release were drawn up by anyone on this board and distributed to the media they would jump at it. The media love the establishment making a mistake. I wouldn't like to kick the club too much even though they booted us all out but a positive message could easily be broadcast which would increase the numbers using this site. Once the message is out there it tends to gain a life of its own. After all, we all found the SCGB site.
I personally do not want to post on 2 sites. I think that both will suffer. It would be best to either return to the SCGB fold or break away completely.
We have the opportunity to create something really good here and the cameraderie that already exists is a valuable asset which should not be ignored or undervalued. My vote will continue to remain here but to build on the foundation that is already here very quickly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
For God's sake let's not involve the Press; either no one will pay any intention or a storm beyond all reason will arise
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Well put Ian.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My personal opinion is that the ski club has done wonders for British snowsports over the past 100yrs and deserves a great deal of respect as an institution. We all know it's faults: we've been harping on about them on their own site for the last two yrs To their credit, they even seemed to have addressed some of them.
Ok, last week they made a pretty big boo-boo but I find it hard to maintain the rancour I felt 7 days ago having had such a wikkid week at snowHeads.
I was horrified at the 'loss' of so many people, at the destruction of the community - however, due to the combined efforts of so many and the incredible dedication of some, this has proved not to be an end but merely a relocation (with nice, shiney new leisure facilities thrown in ).
I am still concerned though, that there may be hundreds of people out there, occasional participants of the forum at scgb who might yet have trouble finding us. Yes, ideas like press releases and 'doorway' pages designed to 'rig Google' etc. have naturally come to mind, been discussed and discarded.
The point is: snowHeads has never been in competition with any aspect of scgb and frankly, I would rather it remained that way. It appears the council of the scgb, whatever their reasoning, would rather not run an open forum, s'ok with us Scgb still has so much else to offer and snowHeads seems to work just fine.
It would just be nice if the people who came to the SkiClub site looking for this community had some indication as to where to find us when faced with that 'shut door'.
I think a little dialogue between those in charge of SCGB and those looking after snowHeads would be a step in the right direction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
U Brain - Totally agree with your last 2 sentences. Hope it works out that way.
The rest is good reading too. Many thanks for all your efforts.
PS - I see we are Piste Bashing now. Next week yellow flashing lights ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Hello Peeps, I finally found my way here. I'd also like to say i was totally gutted at what the SCGB did and more so, the way they did it. But at the end of the day there's no point cutting off your nose etc.
The way i see it is: Thanks to whom ever gave us this site (U Brain i believe) and if he is willing to keep this site going then i reckon the best bet is for SCUK to simply have a link to this site from their main site as 'an open forum', then all the newbies will be able to find their way here and ask questions etc like before. Due to the extra traffic this site will receive, it may be wise to have some advertising (no pop up's please  ) Then the next time SCUK change their minds and want non members out, it won't matter so much?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
What's SCUK? Is it anything like the fashion company FCUK?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
When the SCGB closed it doors to me I was not a happy bunny, and if I remember correctly it was suggesting that the members wanted to restrict access to the forum, how many were asked? I can understand some dispair at the antics of the last few weeks on there I wasnt very impressed. I could have joined I guess but for now I couldn't see the benefit. I've got two littl'uns and only get away for a couple of weekends these days and £48 is the price of a flight to geneva and back if your lucky.
I also appreciate this matter of intellectual property that has been kept, I think it's a valid observation, and thought provoking.
Anyway, I like this place and will be staying. SCGB have had it as far as I am concerned.
Keep up the good work
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think this is a cracking place and have no intention of using the SCGB again. They made their intentions perfectly clear as far as I'm concerned. The way they acted was just rude and un-professional. Long live Snowheads. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As I said earlier, if enough people nominate snowHeads, then you can vote for this one
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
(I know I said I wouldn't visit the other place again but I've got a fascination with self-destruction 
)