 Poster: A snowHead
|
| Richard_Sideways wrote: |
| Gerry wrote: |
| Eternity/forever is a long time. Now, to illustrate this, magine a tungsten carbide sphere the size of our sun being brushed by a single butterfly wing once every 10,000yrs. Well, when said sphere has been worn away to nothing this two-way communication ban, and your exclusion, will have only just begun. |
An interesting concept... Now, we know that Tungsten Carbide has a specific density of 15.6 g/cm3, and the Sun has a (varying but roughly rounded) volume of 1.4 x 10^27m3. Where does this lead us? Well, the Gerrysphere will weigh 2.184x10^31kg. And thats where things get interesting. Gerrysphere will basically start to compact itself under its own weight, getting hotter and hotter at the core, soaring past the 2780'C melting point onwards until the bonds between the atoms themselves start to breakdown and fusion ignites the Gerrysphere into a Gerrystar, glowing an angry yellowish white in the skies above the Earth, bathing us in exotic radiation as the outershells are blown away and extinguishing all life on the planet. But because of the volume of carbon in the Tungsten Carbide (never build your artificial suns using a carbon alloy) the reaction won't be stable for long and the mass of the thing will cause the explosion/implosion to catastrophically tear the thing apart... or collapse uncontrollably inwards towards the singularity of infinite and inescapable denseness of a blackhole... or Gerryhole if you will, which will just sit there sucking in all available matter until the very heat death of the universe.**
And if you can think of a more beautiful metaphor for this thread, I'd like to hear it.
**Full disclosure, I've not properly WolframAlpha'd the nuclear bonding/ignition bit of this, so it may just sit there glowing an orangy/red colour - there is a bit of poetic license in there for a good ending. |
 Post of the Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
^absolutely post of the year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
^^ agreed. Class.
Any chance Gerry and Davina might disappear up their own blackholes?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Post of the year for all groupthinkers and arselickers. Looking forward to when goldsmith turns on snowHeads and all your reactions to that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Typical 
What a Gerryhole!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Gerry wrote: |
| Looking forward to when goldsmith turns on snowHeads and all your reactions to that. |
Indifference followed shortly after by pity probably
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Where are the old women? They normally turn up to big snowHeads moments like this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| martinm wrote: |
| Gerry wrote: |
| Looking forward to when goldsmith turns on snowHeads and all your reactions to that. |
Indifference followed shortly after by pity probably |
No, it doesn't work like that around here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| martinm wrote: |
| Gerry wrote: |
| Looking forward to when goldsmith turns on snowHeads and all your reactions to that. |
Indifference followed shortly after by deletion |
FIFY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[quote="Gerry"]
AFAIK, the Club refuses to enter into two-way communication with you and that is unlikely to change for all eternity.
"AFAIK"?
You clearly know nothing.
On 17 January 2013, at the Houses of Parliament, SCGB chairman Rob Crowder was perfectly happy to sit opposite me in a dining room and exchange two-way pleasantries. The detail of that conversation is obviously private, but included "Would you kindly pass the HP Sauce and tomato ketchup, Mr Chairman?". His 'two-way' response is vague in my memory but was probably "Yes, of course."
At the Ski Show in London in Nov 2015, a senior executive of the SCGB took the initiative to have a one-hour conversation with me at the Club's stand. This was an extremely pleasant conversation, which culminated in my leaving the stand with a membership renewal confirmation, a complimentary backpack and a membership pack.
The following day, the Club's chief executive phoned me and we had exactly what you say we don't have: "two-way communication".
| Gerry wrote: |
You are also excluded from the Club forever.
|
On whose say-so? Yours ... as unofficial spokesman of the Ski Club of Great Exclusions? The Attorney General's? That of the Secretary-General of the United Nations?
The situation clearly bears no relation to anything you claim.
I first joined the Ski Club of Great Britain in 1962 and enjoy cordial relations with numerous members, having served its Council as an elected member and having worked for six consecutive editors of its magazine.
It strikes me, having suffered your diatribes for the past 15 years, that you're a great one for 'keeping people out of the country' and 'keeping people out of the Club'.
And you complain of 'inverted snobbery' !
How many members have you personally recruited to the Ski Club of Great Britain? You've enjoyed £10,000s of expenses-paid travel, lift-passes, accommodation and food from the SCGB, as its roving representative and in-resort representative.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
@Davina Goldballs, can you please tell us exactly why you want to be a member of a club you appear to despise. And why you, as a non skier, persist in posting on ski related forums?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Quote: |
And why you, as a non skier, persist in posting on ski related forums?
|
He is a ski instructor don't you know?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| xedbot wrote: |
| Quote: |
And why you, as a non skier, persist in posting on ski related forums?
|
He is a ski instructor don't you know? |
A ski instructor who doesn't ski ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Yes - like a journalist who doesn't write.
(A person who writes for newspapers, magazines, or news websites or prepares news to be broadcast.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
He appears to have had items removed from the internet - try googling his name! (Not Davina; David)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Scrumpy wrote: |
| @Davina Goldballs, can you please tell us exactly why you want to be a member of a club you appear to despise. And why you, as a non skier, persist in posting on ski related forums? |
He's also been calling for the Club to be wound up, so not sure he can claim 'cordial' relations with the Exec. all of whom he wants made redundant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
No, it's Delia Goldsmith the popular TV chef and shirt florist, with another recipe for tasty ski construction.
| Scrumpy wrote: |
| @Davina Goldballs, can you please tell us exactly why you want to be a member of a club you appear to despise. |
| Scrumpy wrote: |
| A ski instructor who doesn't ski ? |
| Scrumpy wrote: |
| He appears to have had items removed from the internet |
Far from "despising" the Ski Club of Great Britain the objective is to honour those who founded and built it (not to mention those who pay its annual subs) by restoring its relevance, worth and honesty. I don't teach skiing any longer because there are younger fitter people more qualified to do the job. BASI allow instructors who hold old licences to refresh them, with a short course and 1st aid cert.
As for your censorship point, what is it?
| LaForet wrote: |
| Obviously SCGB is a commercial operation as it straight away prompts me for membership. |
| Gerry wrote: |
| Actually it's a member owned club, run on a not for profit basis. |
| achilles wrote: |
| I belong to a model aircraft association which is a private company limited by guarantee and not having share capital. It is very definitely run by its members via its Council (Board of Directors) - assisted by paid staff, including a CEO. It seems sensible to me that any significantly large association should be a limited company, even though it may run entirely for the benefit of its members. |
| FFIRMIN wrote: |
| ... a commercial organisation is one which is run with the specific aim of turning a profit ... The Ski Club is a not for profit organisation which defrays its costs and expenses (premises, staffing, insurance etc. etc.) against its membership and holiday profit income all of which enable it to work towards the achievement of its Articles and Memorandum of Association. So that together with the similar post from Achilles should put that the commerciality issue to bed. |
One can skin the cat in various ways. What matters is that the Ski Club of Great Britain does stuff that generates membership numbers which equate to a sensible percentage of the UK ski population. LaForet contributed two very worthwhile posts, and careful note should be taken of his/her points ...
| Gerry wrote: |
| [He's also been calling for the Club to be wound up, so not sure he can claim 'cordial' relations with the Exec. all of whom he wants made redundant. |
Let's be absolutely clear about all that. Clearly the future of the SCGB isn't going to be assured by endless freeloading and desk jockies doing pointless work. Human endeavour has to have a goal. Redundancy does not apply if human resources are steered to doing great stuff which generates membership delight and renewal/recommendation.
| Davina Goldballs wrote: |
Questions [to Gerry, 5 Aug 2017]:
1. How many membership cards did the Ski Club of Great Britain issue in membership year 2016-7? Please ask the membership dept.
2. How many SCGB members have an eligible vote? (i.e. is it one-member-one-vote?) |
These are very imporant questions.. Can Gerry, or some other official spokesperson of the SCGB please answer them!
| On Thursday 3 August, Gerry wrote: |
| The ski club has 250k registered users of the website. |
http://snowheads.com/ski-forum/viewtopic.php?t=94856&start=4640#3087006
Once again (this question has already been posed): Where does that "250k" number come from?
What's a "registered user"?
The Club says it has "112,000+ subscribers" (whatever that means), so how does this tie in with the "250k registered users" that you're claiming?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
...
Last edited by You need to Login to know who's really who. on Sat 12-08-17 21:14; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
The problems of a club not being a limited company. The link goes to a page discussing golf clubs - but the risks are generic.
| Quote: |
An Unincorporated Association structure is most suitable for small local clubs without significant buildings, equipment or financial assets and not involved in high risk sports where accidents are more likely and potentially costly if negligence could be proved.
A majority of private members golf clubs do not fit these criteria and on the occasion that something goes wrong the members are liable if the assets of the club do not meet the debt or if it is not covered by insurance. Therefore, if the club goes bankrupt, the members could be liable for the debts, irrespective of their individual financial circumstances. Because this liability is unlimited, those with more wealth could be hit harder than those with relatively little money.
For example:
* The trustees of a club could be sued personally
* The chairman and/or committee could be sued individually or collectively
* The committee of a club could be sued via an employment tribunal for damages
* A club could be sued if a construction contract goes wrong
* The estate of a trustee who has passed away could be pursued |
There is clear read across to skiing and the SCGB. It is common sense for the SCGB to be a limited company, and it does not directly follow that in being a limited company it is being operated for profit like Tesco.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
But not for profit doesn't mean they aren't paying staff respectable salaries or being generous with expenses or perks or indeed running up a cash surplus to save for a rainy day. I have no idea what circumstances the SCGB is in but I find it a little disingenuous to suggest that a not for profit club with many mouths to feed is automatically less commercial and more virtuous than say a for profit website with say 1 or 2 such mouths.
Or put it another way there are plenty of charity execs taking home more than sole trader shopkeepers.
Last edited by You'll need to Register first of course. on Sat 12-08-17 12:13; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Dave of the Marmottes, of course, but I got the impression that some here thought that being a company implied that a club became a normal commercial undertaking. Any club can be run badly - in which case the members can sort it out or leave. Not my worry, or from what you say, yours. I was just making a specific point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@achilles, Sorry I wasn't really arguing with your point just the suggestion that because the entire op is not for profit that it is not commercial. In most senses of the word commercial one would be hard pressed to find much to suggest that Freshtracks in particular is not as commercial as most niche TOs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
@Dave of the Marmottes, fair enough. The SCGB is not for me - and hasn't been for years. I did have some good times in it though. In those days the rep system (much changed these days) worked well for me and a regular skiing buddy. I know the arguments that were agains it (the rep system) but we had some really good times. I also had some really good SCGB holidays before and after they became know as Freshtracks, and one I did not enjoy. All part of life's rich pattern.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| @achilles, Sorry I wasn't really arguing with your point just the suggestion that because the entire op is not for profit that it is not commercial. In most senses of the word commercial one would be hard pressed to find much to suggest that Freshtracks in particular is not as commercial as most niche TOs. |
Freshtracks doesn't make a profit, as far as I'm concerned. It shows an operational profit in the books, but that doesn't take into account the 'free' premises, IT support, marketing, accounting, payroll etc etc. FT doesn't lose money or make it, what it does it provide club members with excellent value holidays to go on.
There seems to be a lot of envy directed towards the Ski Club from people outside of it, to the point where you would think these people must have been actively excluded, when the reality is that they have only excluded themselves. The Ski Club actually does a lot of good, getting underprivileged kids involved in skiing or boarding through a bursary, for example. Why some of you hate the Ski Club and all you think it stands for is beyond me.
You, Dave of the Muppets, have a history of slagging off the Ski Club, and its members, that goes back over a decade. You clearly have a personal axe to grind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
@Davina Goldballs, As a retired skier, please stay at home and do your knitting instead of pretending that you, or your opinions, might be of any relevance to the Ski Club, Snowheads or any other part of the ski industry.
You are a troll, and apparently a troll with things you now wish to keep hidden from history by having them removed from Internet searches.
A nasty piece of work all round as well as a foul mouthed one as shown in that video. Perhaps you should apply to have that rather odd display removed from the Internet too!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Scrumpy wrote: |
@Davina Goldballs, As a retired skier, please stay at home and do your knitting instead of pretending that you, or your opinions, might be of any relevance to the Ski Club, Snowheads or any other part of the ski industry.
You are a troll, and apparently a troll with things you now wish to keep hidden from history by having them removed from Internet searches.
A nasty piece of work all round as well as a foul mouthed one as shown in that video. Perhaps you should apply to have that rather odd display removed from the Internet too! |
This is all getting too meta for me
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Dave of the Marmottes, interesting use of the word 'meta'. In common use in that sense, I see on Google. I have used meta tags in web page coding for years - never stopped to think what the word meant. As so often is the case, snowheads is an education. Ta 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Just to answer that question in a slightly more serious way ...
... Yes, it was me (David Goldsmith), but the video clip's been removed from YouTube in the past 24 hours. A couple of points:
1. The clip (yours truly talking about Salomon Monocoque ski construction, around the time the very first Salomon ski was launched in 1990) is from an ITV series 'Ski Tips' which went out nationally on terrestrial commercial TV. It was a general interest ski programme, directed by Stuart Nimmo and presented by Andy Steggall and Liz Wickham. Phil Smith did the ski instruction and I did some interviews about equipment. At that time I was equipment editor of Ski Survey (magazine of the Ski Club of Great Britain) and writing for The Sunday Times etc.
2. The joked-up YouTube clip, which has seemingly been zapped, had a lot of amusing bleeps and captioned swear words such as fe*k, foc*, fook*ng ... and so on. This had absolutely nothing to do with me (it's generally not a good idea to swear on national TV, and it didn't happen) but that comedy clip generated plenty of harmless amusement in a depressing world, and it's depressing to see that someone's felt it necessary to zap it. The truth, as hinted in that clip, was that the Salomon Monocoque was - indeed - cock ... but it secured Georges Salomon's big entry into the ski market ... following his mastery of the bindings and boots sectors. It's was said that the late Georges was an avid reader of WW1 military strategy and based his business tactics on it.
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
But not for profit doesn't mean they aren't paying staff respectable salaries or being generous with expenses or perks or indeed running up a cash surplus to save for a rainy day. I have no idea what circumstances the SCGB is in but I find it a little disingenuous to suggest that a not for profit club with many mouths to feed is automatically less commercial and more virtuous than say a for profit website with say 1 or 2 such mouths.
Or put it another way there are plenty of charity execs taking home more than sole trader shopkeepers. |
Indeed. It's all about governance and scrutiny. 'Follow the money' is always a good starting point for organisations such as the Skeeb. 'Follow the membership figures' - as above - has also proven quite eye-popping.
| Gerry wrote: |
| Freshtracks doesn't make a profit, as far as I'm concerned. It shows an operational profit in the books, but that doesn't take into account the 'free' premises, IT support, marketing, accounting, payroll etc etc. FT doesn't lose money or make it, what it does it provide club members with excellent value holidays to go on. |
So, you're saying that Freshtracks effectively 'cooks the books'? If it doesn't pay for all that stuff, then I assume you're saying that the 90% of SCGB members who don't take Freshtracks holidays subsidise the 10% who do. The ones, presumably, who benefit from ...
| Gerry wrote: |
| excellent value holidays |
And they're even better value for the 'tail end charlies' (as a couple of ski professionals who lead Freshtracks holidays called them) who are the SCGB 'leaders' who don't actually have the responsibility of leading ... when the ski professional is in charge. The 'tail end charlies', as I understand it, get freebies!
| Scrumpy wrote: |
| @Davina Goldballs, As a retired skier ... |
You're barking up the wrong apple tree, again. If I was a "retired skier" would I have bought a return rail ticket (Eurostar + Paris-Verona couchette) to ski in the Italian Dolomites last December? If was a "retired skier" would it be odd that I'll be skiing in the next couple of months? If I was a "retired skier" would I be on skis in 2019 to celebrate 60 years since I first skied in Kitzbuhel in 1959. Maybe it's time you retired your brain, as it's obviously had a hard life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Davina Goldballs wrote: |
| Gerry wrote: |
| Freshtracks doesn't make a profit, as far as I'm concerned. It shows an operational profit in the books, but that doesn't take into account the 'free' premises, IT support, marketing, accounting, payroll etc etc. FT doesn't lose money or make it, what it does it provide club members with excellent value holidays to go on. |
So, you're saying that Freshtracks effectively 'cooks the books'? If it doesn't pay for all that stuff, then I assume you're saying that the 90% of SCGB members who don't take Freshtracks holidays subsidise the 10% who do. The ones, presumably, who benefit from ...
| Gerry wrote: |
| excellent value holidays |
And they're even better value for the 'tail end charlies' (as a couple of ski professionals who lead Freshtracks holidays called them) who are the SCGB 'leaders' who don't actually have the responsibility of leading ... when the ski professional is in charge. The 'tail end charlies', as I understand it, get freebies!
|
No cooking of the books at all. These accounts are handled the same way now as they were when you were a council member. So why didn't you object back then? It's my opinion, after having actually taken the trouble to examine the facts, that the holidays are provided at cost price. Yes, they are great value for me, as a Leader, but what makes it even better is your jealousy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
I removed the clip as it was being taken out of context. DGs point about the Salomon skis was valid in the original clip though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
Offering that sort of salary for full time in London? Is the minimum even living wage rate?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
For those seeking an alternative channel of SCGB entertainment, there's "Anyone fancy it? ("it" being the newly advertised job of Chief Executive of the Ski Club of Great Britain):
http://snowheads.com/ski-forum/viewtopic.php?t=132681#3091921
Job announcement on LinkedIn: https://gb.linkedin.com/jobs/view/425852579
Job announcement on SCGB website: "Ski Club is seeking a new Chief Executive Officer"
https://www.skiclub.co.uk/news/ski-club-news/2017/08/ski-club-is-seeking-a-new-chief-executive-officer
Best of luck to all candidates. I'm sure I speak for the nation in aspiring that our national ski club falls into the most competent and progressive hands.
The first thing the incumbent will want to ask is "how many members have we got?" PlanetSki reported yesterday "It was founded in 1903 and has 28,000 members."
The SCGB itself, in "About the Ski Club" says "The Ski Club is the largest and oldest snowsports membership organisation in the UK, with over 28,000 members."
https://www.skiclub.co.uk/about-the-ski-club
As previously pointed out, the Audit Bureau of Circulations (ABC) says that the Club posted an average 15,663 copies of its magazine to members last year (latest data: Jan-Dec 2016), so the crucial question (as raised above) is "How many membership cards has the SCGB issued during 2016-7?"). Gerry, do you have that figure yet?
I keep going on about this, because the SCGB has been so full of balloney about its membership numbers in recent decades. The new CEO will have a perfect opportunity to wipe the slate clean, establish a true number and begin the job with a statistic against which his/her achievements can be measured. This information is extracted from a posting I made to the Winterhighland forum back in July 2012:
| Quote: |
| The following numbers have been published by the SCGB since last autumn [2011]: 32,000 (29 Nov 2011), 30,000+ (21 Feb 2012) 31,000+ (22 Feb 2012), 33,000 (1 Mar 2012) and currently (2 July 2012) "around 34,000". |
In that year - 2012 - the Club ceased to express its membership figures in 'paying units' (which had been the standard measure for several decades) and has failed to publish that number in the five years since.
------------------------------------------
From the other thread [ http://snowheads.com/ski-forum/viewtopic.php?t=132681 ]:
http://snowheads.com/ski-forum/viewtopic.php?t=132681
Ski Club is seeking a new Chief Executive Officer
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
I can think of one candidate  |
| albob wrote: |
| Davina is the obvious person.....! |
Flattered, obviously, but I think the original Davina - master of ceremonies of that fine TV series 'The Jump' - would be far better qualified to knock the organisation into shape.
------------------------------------------
| Gerry wrote: |
Freshtracks doesn't make a profit, as far as I'm concerned. It shows an operational profit in the books, but that doesn't take into account the 'free' premises, IT support, marketing, accounting, payroll etc etc. FT doesn't lose money or make it, what it does it provide club members with excellent value holidays to go on. |
| Davina Goldballs wrote: |
So, you're saying that Freshtracks effectively 'cooks the books'? If it doesn't pay for all that stuff, then I assume you're saying that the 90% of SCGB members who don't take Freshtracks holidays subsidise the 10% who do. |
| Gerry wrote: |
No cooking of the books at all. These accounts are handled the same way now as they were when you were a council member. So why didn't you object back then? It's my opinion, after having actually taken the trouble to examine the facts, that the holidays are provided at cost price. |
You can't have it both ways. Either the holidays are provided at below cost price - because the costs you've stated (" 'free' premises, IT support, marketing, accounting, payroll) are not accounted for ... or they are responsibly accounted for, in the general interests of all SCGB members (who shouldn't be expected to subsidise the chosen few who go on these holidays). The information you've given points directly at Freshtracks not being responsibly accounted for.
| Gerry wrote: |
| These accounts are handled the same way now as they were when you were a council member. So why didn't you object back then? |
I went far further than 'objecting'. I simply stated - at the very first SCGB Council meeting I attended - that each aspect of the Club's operations should be subjected to cost-benefit analysis, so it could start down the road of becoming a modern organisation geared exclusively to the interests of British skiers generally. There should be huge cost-saving and a great deal of creative development, to put things straight.
The problem, year in year out, is individuals such as yourself, desperately trying to preserve the status quo of jollies (unjustifiable free ski trips) for the elite.
Hopefully the new CEO will lay down the line, and pull the SCGB out of its crevasse of craptitude.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Come on. The new CEO is not going to stop the gravy train. The new CEO will probably be selected from the gravy train, quite precisely because they have guaranteed, presumably at interview stage, to keep the gravy train well and truly on the tracks and stopping to pick up Carruthers, Montague and Cecelia on the way to the mountains every year.
An institution like this doesn't become as dyed in the wool as it has without learning how to resist even the most determined agents for change. I've dealt with similar many times before, and you will find, squirrelled away in a constitution, committee or even some long hidden bill of rights that certain things must remain the same. By which I mean everything. All the time. Forever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
I never thought that I would see the day when DG called Gerry a part of the elite !
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Have tried several times in the past week to log in to the new site and change password etc, but it never works, and / or get an error mssg, eg:
Error - Something went wrong
Sorry, we are experiencing technical difficulties with the page you requested. Please try again later.
Frustrating, so given up now... Pity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
@stephen buck, I work for the Ski Club of Great Britain - we've checked our database and for some reason your account was locked. We've now unlocked it, so if you can call us on 020 8410 2015 or email members@skiclub.co.uk we'll be able to re-set your password for you. Thanks.
Last edited by You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net. on Thu 24-08-17 15:47; edited 2 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| stephen buck wrote: |
Have tried several times in the past week to log in to the new site and change password etc, but it never works, and / or get an error mssg, eg:
Error - Something went wrong
Sorry, we are experiencing technical difficulties with the page you requested. Please try again later.
Frustrating, so given up now... Pity. |
Exactly the same problem here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
