 Poster: A snowHead
|
Oh dear Gerry, you really are the best advert for reasons as to why people don't wish to join SCGB and despite being told on many many occasions, you just don't get it, do you? It is just your attitude that makes me think I really don't want to be part of your 'gang'. Yet again you resort to pedantics and picking apart sentences instead of answering the big question.
To begin with, the Council did not take this decision with care. They closed the open forum down, then they took legal advice, then SCGB said the matter would be re-examined again shortly at which time they hoped there would be a favourable outcome and then it was announced it would not be re-opening. How was this a decision taken with care? What thought was given to the postings of people freely given, who now had no access to that information but SCGB was willing to advertise how valuable this information was - rather hypocritical don't you think??
No, the Ski Club did not offer to put people back in touch. After several requests, Laura very kindly agreed to try to pass on emails, time permitting. Yet obviously Kevin Mcclean was one such person that people wanted to get in touch with yet he had no idea snowHeads existed.
I don't think you quite realise the concept of an open forum as opposed to members only. Yes, anyone can pay to join SCGB and thereby access the forum, but it doesn't allow outsiders, maybe first-time skiers to become involved in the community that develops and, as others have said, want to make the positive decision to join the Ski Club.
Personally, I am pleased now that snowHeads exists - I think that it is just very very sad for the SCGB that they have closed down this very valuable service, for the skiing community as a whole, not just the narrow membership of the Club.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Gerry I'm almost sure you don't do it deliberately but your posts do tend to be a little provacative which I guess rubs certain people up the wrong way, I know its happened to me, as for the accusation that you rep in order to get free skiing, I'm sure having spoken to many reps over the years that it's at least partially true, it has certainly been a factor (to a greater or lesser extent) for every other rep I've spoken to for the last 10 years or so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
D G Orf, I've been a member for a lot longer then I've been a rep. If I was after free skiing I would have done the reps' course years ago. I haven't spoken to the same reps you have, mate. I doubt if Ubrain has spoken to any.
Cathy Coins, you should have stood for Council. I wonder if any of the pro open forum people have?
Last edited by Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see? on Sat 4-09-04 9:25; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
As someone who had not visited the old Ski Club forum, I'm rather glad the SCGB has this somewhat cavalier, patronising attitude towards SnowHeads. This should benefit SnowHeads in the future. While the SCGB continues to sneer at the potential here we can carry on quietly growing, perhaps expand into areas a little 'closer to home'.
Just take a look at the French equivalent of SnowHeads, 'SkiPass'. Set up in 1997 on precisely the same basis as SnowHeads it now has 12,000 members and 20,000 subscribers to its bi-monthly newsletter. Its site has had 1.5 million hits, 1.1 million unique visitors, 14 million page visits between September and April 2004.
It has expanded into holiday and other products, established partnerships with environmental protection agencies, bought premises in Grenoble where it holds winter sports related exhibitions, sells skiing/boarding equipment. It publishes equipment tests, has a monthly column (editorial/photos) in SkiTime.
It has developed into a genuine on-line magazine covering everything from freeride to freestyle, ski and snowboard, with a network of contributors, providing photos and text. This part of their service attracts a lot of visitors as they have some 80 or so highly illustrated and original articles each season, plus many more basic news pieces.
They funded this in part by partnerships with some of the big French events – North Face Freeride in Les Arcs, Mondial du Ski/Snowboard in 2 Alpes, and many others. A kind or mutual promotion effort.
Skipass themselves point out that the forum was and remains at the core of their growth over the years. In Feb 2003 l’Equipe, the massively popular French sports daily newspaper and weekly magazine dedicated an entire page to the site, T-shirt and slogan, resulting in a huge boost for Skipass.
Seems to me that the Ski Club has become somewhat complacent. Keep it up!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
PG, For everything there is a season, but I don't think the SCGB's time is up yet. I am not aware of any movement within the SCGB to sneer at snowheads. I think it a very good thing indeed that this independent forum has sprung up. Could be that in time this forum will roll into someting really big. If so, skiers can only benefit. Meantime, I enjoy wandering into both sites 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
- The initial decision to close the forum was ill-considered.
|
The Council consider all matters with care. They looked at the legal risk that each of them have to personally take on and decided they didn't want to take that risk. They also looked at the negative impact the open forum was having on the other much more valued activities the club provides for its member. |
According to their own announcement they took legal advice after closing the forum when they were surprised by the vigour of people’s reaction. So, the point is, as I said, initially the decision was ill-considered.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| The way in which it was closed was incompetent. |
They wanted it closed, it got closed. |
(Gerry misses point  )
But, in the process, seeming to demonstrate a complete lack of awareness for how the facility was being used or concern for the people using it, losing a great deal of good will toward the club in the process. Yes, it was done… incompetently.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| The explanation as to why it was closed, changed substantially over the subsequent few weeks and many still doubt the justification. |
The Club Council had good justification. That's been done to death in the other place. |
Not the point, Gerry. However good The Club Council’s own justification, many people still doubt the justification: that’ll be a communication problem, I suppose.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| The vast majority of those who have expressed an opinion have responded strongly negatively. |
These people are still small in number compared to the whole paying membership. |
So their views become irrelevant? But then it’s also true that the people who use the clubhouse are ‘small in number compared to the whole paying membership’ or, the same could be said even for those who use the reps’ service. I believe the point has been raised on numerous occasions that the legal risk posed to the club by aspects of the reps system is well in excess of any risks posed by running an internet forum. Would you therefore advocate the removal of these services without consultation of the membership or advance notice? If this were done, would you still stand in staunch defence of the council and ‘do battle’ with any who dared complain?
I think not.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| The action affected over 2000 people who the club refused to put back in touch with each other. To this day people are still turning up at snowHeads, surprised to find the community they lost back in Feb. |
Not true. The Ski Club offered to put people back in touch. |
Yes, so they did: after a while. It’s just, well, the post isn’t so good these days is it? Hence, 6 months on, people are still turning up here, not having been able to find anyone in the intervening period. I know of instances where people followed SCGB’s instructions in order to contact a particular ex-user yet, by the time that user finally found us, they had received no contact. Given the power of the internet as a communications medium, it does seem to have been remarkably difficult to reconnect. Why? More incompetence? Obstruction? Who knows, but there's no question that SCGB has not made it as easy as it could [should] have been.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Belittling someone's opinion is not the same as debating their point. Only by the latter can there possibly be a positive outcome to the argument. |
Agreed. |
We Agree!!! We Agree!!! Then let this be our topic of discussion should we ever meet on a chairlift 
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| It doesn't matter how pedantic you are when addressing David Goldsmith's posts, everyone (+-10%) still thinks the club did something really stupid. |
'Everyone' in this case being the the small minority U have decided are more important that the paying majority. |
Sorry, are you inferring that, everyone who has not expressed an opinion, by default agrees with you, despite >90% of those who did express an opinion disagreeing vehemently? Surely not, that would just be silly – so, what are you on about?
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| It is naive to think that damage to public opinion can be measured by how many memberships have been cancelled etc. |
I invite U to join the Club, stand for Council and change things to how you want them. |
Well, not exactly dealing with the point again Gerry but thank you for your kind invitation. Ever the top-rep, on the recruitment drive eh? If I get it from you, do I still get my two years for the price of one? Perhaps you’d like to do me 2 seats on the council under the same offer? Though as far as I understand the current distribution of power within the club, that still wouldn’t give me much clout. Perhaps you know otherwise?
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| The more you ‘prove’ with your sets of half baked stats that no-one really cares, the more you distance the hundreds of people who have already changed their opinion of the club for the worse.Now, if U truly care about your club, help in getting these issues addressed rather than simply pandering to the egos of those who made the mistakes by pedantically picking this post apart or perhaps giving us some more of your ‘stats’. |
A thousand apologies for for having a different opinion. |
Differing opinion is not only welcome but absolutely essential to a healthy forum. However, incessant pedantry only serves to sabotage healthy debate – it does become rather tiresome after a while. But again, you seem to have ignored the point for some reason. You presented these figures in response to my post (which itself was in direct response to the topic title) as if to prove that no one really cares about the way SCGB closed its forum. But who are you trying to convince? The fact that so many people disagree wit you, in itself, proves that many people do care. Get the point! People are not saying these things just for the entertainment value of disagreeing with you. As far as I understand, the vast majority of conversation on the MO forum at SCGB has been along these lines too.
Look, Kevin, as I recall, doesn’t like the Three Valleys, I do. This is differing opinion.
However, scores of people all say “we think the way SCGB closed its forum is rubbish”. Gerry says “See my figures: they prove no one cares about the forum being shut”. This is more like differing planets.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Alternatively, and here's something radical, why not stick to the subject of the thread and tell us why U are a member of the club? Oh yes, U get to ski all season at the members' expense. Good for U Gerry! |
It say 'Why Havn't' not 'Why Did'. |
Oh look, there's the point, where's Gerry? (nowhere nearby of course)
| Quote: |
| To make the accusation that I rep just to get some free skiing is beneath contempt. It's a smear on me personally. Many people have read your accusation by now and will have been given a wrong impression of my motive as a result of your unfounded remark. |
Oh, Chill out Gerry! Such an agressive over-reaction doesn't really show you, or the club you represent in a very good light.
| Quote: |
| The question is: are U big enough to apologize? |
So... are U too short to tell us the ‘real’ reason why U rep? Or would that be too close to 'the point'?
Oh ‘sorry’ Gerry, perhaps I just got the ‘detail’ wrong
What I suppose I should have said was, “U get to ski most of the season at the members' expense.”
You are planning to ski “Most of the season” are you not?
It will be predominantly “at the members’ expense”, will it not?
I’m sure most of the people here quite envy your situation in this respect. I’m sure most of them would consider such motives perfectly reasonable justification for ski-club membership. If U, however, are motivated by some ‘higher porpoise’ please do let on. Jeez, it’s got to be more interesting than the same old pedantry aimed at sabotaging David Goldsmith’s latest point. This, after all, is an ‘open’ forum: speak up!
| Quote: |
| Are U liable for the things posted on here? Where are you contact details? The Ski Club and the Council members ARE accountable and contactable and sue-able! |
Oh don't be ridiculous! I am perfectly contactable as U well know, or have u forgotten the e-mail exchange we had a few hours ago? I certainly respond a damn sight faster to requests for information than your 'contactable' pals on the SCGB council ever did... and that's without the benefit of a staff that they enjoy.
Although my personal details are on public record, the fact that I don’t have the luxury of a ‘clubhouse address’ as a buffer between my family and the 'freaks of the internet', means that don't overtly bandy my address around. This is conventional internet wisdom.
However, if you truly feel that "my 'accusing' you of skiing at the club members' expense" gives you a case to be answered, PM me a request and I shall return you details of my legal representative (he’ll enjoy the laugh I expect). First though, I suggest you get independent advice: it wouldn't do to run up big legal bills on a whim.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Zotov, sneering may have been a little strong, but there does seem to be an undercurrent of condescension in some comments posted here, and I recall an earlier quote about the quality of information and posts on snowHeads, with particular reference to contributions from some of the more prolific members!
U, all this is a bit counter-productive don't you think? Let's just get on with making snowHeads a better place and let the SCGB worry about their own methods - or not, as the case may be. Their approach will play into your hands in the longer term. There's no reason why, if you use the skills of current and future contributors in the right manner, snowHeads shouldn't become a major winter sports player in a relatively short period of time. Skipass has shown the way, using modern methods of communication, technologies, and enthusiastic, forward-looking talent. 12,000 members in less than 7 years. If the SCGB aren't worried by the competition, all well and good!
Last edited by After all it is free  on Fri 3-09-04 20:16; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
PG, I half agree with you. An external debate about a private club is something the internet has obviously facilitated. Whether or not people think that's a good thing, the overriding point is that our Club has rightly declared, as a mission statement, to be the 'Club for all skiers'.
Therefore it's logical for all skiers to be involved in constructive criticism and creative ideas for the Club's future. The Club will ultimately benefit enormously, provided people are altruistic and honest in their comments, and not gratuitously negative.
U Brain is a positive influence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U, why I joined is a personal matter for me. I do, however, choose to share my rational with some people, but not you or the general snowhead population.
It's not fair for me to have to publicly go into my personal reasons for doing something just because you want to make unfounded and inaccurate statements about me.
PG is right the Ski Club has gifted you a golden opportunity to start your own club run in your way. If you and David are right then it is sure to be a success. The best that can happen is the skiing population of the Uk and beyond having two great clubs to choose from. I wish you every success, in fact, I'll even donate more money in due course.
In the meanwhile I hope you'll accept that the Ski Club will develop in a way the majority of its members wish.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Cathy, I believe you've got to the main point, I don't believe the majority of members are involved in determining how the club goes forward. In that respect it's no different from any other club or association there is always cadre of members who KNOW BEST and who always have the members interests at heart. The interesting point that Gerry made was that the council took the decision to close the forum beacuse of the potential impact on them as individuals. That appears to me to run counter to his agrument that the club will develop in the way the majority of members wish.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| PG wrote: |
| Nick Zotov, sneering may have been a little strong, but there does seem to be an undercurrent of condecension in some comments posted here, and I recall an earlier quote about the quality of information and posts on snowHeads, with particular reference to contributions from some of the more prolific members! |
Well, I do seem to recall things were a little excitable all round, in the early days, PG. And a very few club members may have their own unique style of expressing themselves. I guess that's their right. It doesn't mean that the Club as a whole is condecending towards snowheads. And, personally, I have dropped in a link to snowheads when I thought the required information was expressly covered by a link here. Heck, skiers, I meet all get along well together. We may have different politics, live or not live in the mountains , be old or young. But we get along fine. In itself, thats a major joy of skiing. Hope it never gets different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
As has already been pointed out the vast majority of any clubs membership have no interest in how it is run, having been an active member in several clubs over the years my personal experience seems to indicate that on average the number of members who have an active interest in how the club is run tends to be less than 5% of the membership these are the people who help out with club events and stand for positions of power, a further 5% or thereabouts maintain a passing interest in its running and may help with say local events or fundraising but the rest couldn't care less, they are mearly there for the benefits that membership gives them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Just accept that snowheads and SCGB are poles apart (no pun intended). Snowheads is about community spirit, freedom of speech and sharing of information. (if liability is such an issue - how come there are so many successfull forums on the net) whereas SCGB (In my honest opinion) are conservative, afraid of change,over protective of their "assets", and narrow minded. I think the pro SCGB posters (reps or whoever) are by large showing themselves up as a good reason not to get involved with their desire to win an argument by nitpicking points rather than address the whole picture.
The posts in the SCGB forum must be fascinating viewing.
Obviously the split was acrimonious to the point where ill feeling is still held by certain snowheads members (and rightly so - I was furious at the time). But I would say just admit the differences and the let the SCGB ship list away on it's own course. They know best and leave it at that.
Do we really think we can change them with attitudes like Gerrys? Besides isn't life too short anyway???
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Quote: |
Besides isn't life too short anyway???
|
Damn right
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Why have I not joined?
1. I see no value in me joining. (either for me or for the SCGB)
2. Why should I pay a membership fee to something from which I do not benefit?
Now, I expect that some will point out the many generic "benefits" of joining - discount vouchers, repping, etc, but none of these things are of value to me. I can get my ski gear at better discount than is offered, and I like to go to different resorts, not just ones which have reps at them.
I do not have a family, I have a tailored travel insurance policy, I like specialised ski holidays with top instructors, but then I can get those on EpicSki, and with some of the best in the US, not just BASI guys!
As for the free magazine, and the knowledge, I believe there is far more informative and impartial information available here.
Booking holidays? I tend to travel independently because most tour operators tax people for being single. I also like to explore and not do package tours, I mean if I wanted that, I'd go to Ibiza, etc, and stick with Brits everywhere I go. My, I could be as isolationist as some Americans!
So, why would I want to join?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Fox, I think the answer may lie buried in your tag line:
"If God had meant us to join the Ski Club of Great Britain he would have...."
Please complete in no more than 10 words. And I'll buy you a drink at the Ski Show if it's vaguely amusing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| David@traxvax wrote: |
| The interesting point that Gerry made was that the council took the decision to close the forum beacuse of the potential impact on them as individuals. That appears to me to run counter to his agrument that the club will develop in the way the majority of members wish. |
I also said that the Ski Club was worried about the impact some of the material being posted on the open forum was having, or could have in the future, on the Club's other more popular activities.
It will be interesting to see this year's nominations for Council. The absence or inclusion of any candidate from the group of people who want an open forum reestablished will speak volumes.
If this group is as large as has been suggested I would think at least one person would be willing to give it a go. If, however, no one steps forward I will be left to ponder the true size and commitment of this very vocal group.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...there's also the welcome opportunity for existing members of Council to change the policy. I'd like to feel that it could be a "Twelve Angry Men" scenario (though women are happily involved).
In other words, one persuasive and knowledgeable member of Council methodically changes the opinion of his colleagues.
Unfortunately Henry Fonda is dead.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Goldsmith, so the opportunity to address the Council in person, as one of them, as an equal if you like, has no appeal? Sounds like apathy to me.
Is anyone stepping forward? If anyone were in the know it would be you, David.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 wrote: |
| "If God had meant us to join the Ski Club of Great Britain he would have...." |
... to get elected onto the Council
... only put snow on repped resorts
... renamed churches to "ski clubhouses"
... not given us freedom to choose
(removed the last one as it was rude and insulting, and unproven)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You only get a non-alcoholic lager for that lot, but an upgrade is negotiable. (Mind you I liked the first one).
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Gerry wrote: |
| It will be interesting to see this year's nominations for Council. The absence or inclusion of any candidate from the group of people who want an open forum reestablished will speak volumes. |
I don't think it will Gerry. I think only the real believers in the Ski Club and what it should stand for care enough to still wish to have an open forum again, for the benefit of the Ski Club. I think the rest us think: sod you then, we're quite happy with snowHeads, why should we care about what's going on at SCGB 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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, how many SCGB members use their website?
There seems to be an underlying assumption in your writing that all members use the website regularly, but only 1 or 2 ever went near the forum.
How many of the council members regularly use the web site?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Wear The Fox Hat wrote: |
| I like specialised ski holidays with top instructors, but then I can get those on EpicSki, and with some of the best in the US, not just BASI guys! |
Hmm .. interesting implied comment on BASI, WTFH. FWIW, the SCGB holidays I am looking at have IFMGA guides.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Nick Zotov, unfortunately, because I am not a member, I can't find out how specialised these holidays are, so I just have to guess. Is there somewhere on the SCGB site which tells this information? (I may be just too stupid to find it  )
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Click on the 'SKI FRESHTRACKS' link.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Stupid me!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Ok, U, you’ve made your point about frustration at the closure of the forum. But as for copyright your version is a case of copywrong! I’m just trying to correct your misinterpretation of the subject.
| Quote: |
| On a technicality, Beck Daross, 'giving up' your rights to a work by placing it in the public domain is not the same as assigning those rights to another party. |
Obviously
| Quote: |
| Unless stated otherwise copyright automatically remains with the originator |
You did state otherwise. Thats why your work is now PD.
Hey David G, it was U Brain who said that he had given those messages to the public domain, not me, disagree as strongly as you like of course, but at least disagree with the right person!
| U Brain wrote: |
| many of those 60,000 'extremely valuable' messages are mine, given freely to the public domain |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Beck Daross, Placed in the public domain by the author, in good faith, within an open, unrestricted forum, then restricted from the general public, not to mention the author himself, unless he becomes a member of a private club. Hmmm. Doesn't quite seem right somehow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Beck Daross wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Unless stated otherwise copyright automatically remains with the originator |
You did state otherwise. Thats why your work is now PD. |
Um. Did he? Can't see anything about that, even in the current SCGB Terms of Use. I guess copyright does remain with U. Might have rather more force if the material had been inserted under his name (may have done, I don't know).
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
The Terms & Conditions of use of this site, and the Privacy Policy, are not so easy to find. There are links in the User Guide but perhaps these should be repeated under User Facilities, or in some other reasonably prominent, accessible place ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nick, you're right about the SCGB Terms of Use. But I'm refering to the post where U said 'given freely to the public domain' regarding his own messages. I was simply trying to clarify what constitutes the public domain which isn't posting or publishing or otherwise disseminating some work to the general public. It means work which is not subject to copyright, thats all. There is no question about what constitutes the public domain from a technical POV but the term suggests that it means public knowledge or on public display, which, though not correct, explains the confusion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why haven't you... I did several years ago after having a free ski day with a Ski Club of GB rep in Avoriaz. We all (myself and 3 friends) had an awesome day, and I was certainly NOT a good skier at the time. Up until then I had a very negative view of the Sk Club as a bunch of aloof Hooray Henrys - the rep we skied with couln't have be been more different to this stereotype. As a consequence I decided to join the club once I returned home (so stupidly missing out on the 2 for 1 deal!).
I found the website a great source for information, particularly for resort info and snow reports; and the staff were always very helpful and friendly whenever I phoned for information I started skiing a lot more with other reps each time I went on holiday, and as my skiing imporved making use of the guiding days in conjunction with qualified guides organised by the Ski Club Rep. Meeting other members on and off the slopes was also great.
After doing this for a few years I plucked up the courage and did the reps course last season. I repped for 3 weeks last year and loved it and intend to do so again this coming season. Every rep will have their own reasons for doing it - I'm passionate about skiing and love meeting new people and old friends in resorts. There is a lot of commitement in time (I have a real job to hold down too unfortunately) and the course is not cheap (though good value).
As for the open forum, personally I think it was a bad idea to close it and the way it was communicated was not good; though I think this is now recognised by those at the Ski Cub. I would like to see a open forum, however Snowheads now exists so is there any point? I'd also like to see a link on the SCGB site to Snowheads - there's room for both. We all love skiing, so let's be friends. I've had the pleasure to ski with Snowheads as well as Ski Club members.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Red Dave, Over the years I have met a fair number of SCGB Reps, it would be fair to say that they ranged, from being a great rep eager to to arange post skiing parties and great on the slopes, to others who have been over impressed with themselves or boardering on the hazardous when it came to guiding others, like many clubs active members are either their for selfish reasons i.e to get lots of skiing in a seson at little cost to themselves, or for non selfish reasons i.e to promote the club and to help others to have a good time, just occasionally the two combine but it is rare, it's not helped by the way the reps course is promoted, I've been asked by 3 separate reps why I don't do the reps course, the answer is that I would not make a good rep and I know it, but I wonder how many of the reps should have answerd in the same way ? That said I would say that only 1 in 4 of the reps I have met in the last 5 years really were not good reps, the others ranged from good to incredible
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Perhaps it is had to criticise those who must choose bewteen putting themselves (and their families) at financial risk, or taking a purely altruisitc view. Problem was that there were also risks involved for the club and its council in remaining an old-fashioned club, rather than a not-for-profit company owned by its members. If snowheads grows into a large size, I suppose it will have to expand its activities, and think about liability in the same way. Sometimes small is beautiful - but not neccessarily viable. 
