 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Ernst Goldsmith, He isn't Mark. Will you accept LadySurfings and my word on that? And then you really should remove reference to Mark... Do you think that Mark is the only one who knows the Arnold Lunn story. 
What was that word Admin used? "Stalkerish" ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Ernst Goldsmith wrote: |
| PJSki, you are Mark Ogilvie and my demand is doubled to £10 (or £10 to you if you're not Mark Ogilvie). Let's meet! |
does this person actually exist ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know which person you mean, but two out of the three people you mention do exist (including myself, to avoid confusion)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| rayscoops wrote: |
| Ernst Goldsmith wrote: |
| PJSki, you are * and my demand is doubled to £10 (or £10 to you if you're not *). Let's meet! |
does this person actually exist ? |
Probably best to remove that name.
Goldsmith won't because he has no honour.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| stoatsbrother wrote: |
PJSki, comes into the conversation to make some points about how the OPs point of view might not be the whole story, and to wonder if her post might be defamatory, then later I think says on refelction her post seems quite reasonably worded. |
Like others have said, names shouldn't be named. The account, nevertheless, is still an honest one. Although I don't agree with some of the expectations expressed, I can understand the emotions involved. Also, some very interesting and insightful posts from others, which goes to show there are always two sides.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
I bet ten of your English pounds (which will be worth about 3 Euros by the time this thread runs out....) that Pandora wishes that she'd never mentioned her experience now, and instead just complained straight to Ski Beat then to Watchdog when Ski Beat refused to acknoweldge that she'd actually ever been one of their victims.... oops I mean customers.... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
stoatsbrother, I respect your strength of feeling on this. I'm happy for the mods to take a view on it, so you're welcome to refer the matter to them now. In cricketing terms we've definitely reached 'close of play', since the light has now faded and the players are having a shower.
Mentioning someone's real name, and linking that name speculatively to a pseudonym, is not covered by the registration terms of the site (nor does the spirit of those terms cover it). I stated, with some conviction, someone's real name and attached it to 'PJ Ski'. I also made it clear that this was not a definitive statement of fact or opinion, because it was obvious that I was taking a punt on the two names being the same person.
I get the impression that you are applying the rules of a 'gentleman's club', rather than those of an internet forum. This is not a club, and it cannot be a gentleman's club. It is a rough-and-tumble democratic discussion forum, where freedom of expression has to be king. The gentleman named is welcome to email me and confirm that he is not PJSki: dgoldsmith[at]btinternet.com . And if he wishes to have his name removed I'll do it immediately.
If we're discussing honour, the serial 'dragging up' of an aspect of Chris Exall's history - for weeks on end - seems unacceptable. This is very ancient history. He's done a lot of hugely beneficial work for British skiing, which isn't reflected by PJSki's unnecessary link.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ernst Goldsmith, I do expect you to take notice of Boredsurfing who has dropped a massive hint.
You can take up the subject of PJSki's honour with him, not me.
But to drag Mark into this on the basis of your misguided and totally incorrect conviction is pathetic, and is also unfair to Mark - who other than being involved in working out what your mate was upto as Arnold Lunn a few years ago - has nothing to do with snowHeads as far as I am aware - and hasn't even been seen on the SCGB forum for a couple of years. Why the hell should he have to e mail you to get his name out of your pathetic googleable insinuations?
No wonder people don't want to post using their real names when you are around the place. Look how you treat the good name of someone who hasn't even posted. Nasty and Stalkerish. My residual respect for you has completely gone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Ernst Goldsmith, oh FFS, do go away you tedious twit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
I've noticed that when a thread drags past it's sell-by date on this site, as this one has. Invariably someone decides to turn on the OP and it all becomes personal. Understandably, Pandora's feelings were running rather high at the time of posting and she felt the need to vent her fustrations. I feel that she focused on the serious points that deserved to be made and I agree with the naming of the two individuals who let themsleves and their company down so badly.
As for the bitching and back-biting tossers? Get a bl**dy life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Mollerski, very well said sir.... and an intersting observation
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Quote: |
I've noticed that when a thread drags past it's sell-by date on this site, as this one has. Invariably someone decides to turn on the OP and it all becomes personal. Understandably, Pandora's feelings were running rather high at the time of posting and she felt the need to vent her fustrations. I feel that she focused on the serious points that deserved to be made and I agree with the naming of the two individuals who let themsleves and their company down so badly.
|
I'm sorry, Mollerski, but I don't see how it is fair to say this, when you haven't heard the other side of the story - i.e. from the reps themselves. I also don't think it is fair to do this when Pandora hasn't yet written to SB to formally complain (at least this is my understanding of events). In other words, neither SB nor the reps have been able to put their point of view across and/or to sort this matter out in private, rather than on a internet forum.
When YOU make a mistake at work or at home, would you expect to be named and shamed in this way. No? Then why should the reps?
This is made even worse by the OP posting under a nom de plume - hardly fair, to me. Pandora relies on the luxury of anonymity - something she clearly doesn't believe should be afforded to those who have crossed her path.
IMO, the more you find out about this story, the less convincing it looks.
| Quote: |
As for the bitching and back-biting tossers? Get a bl**dy life. rolling eyes
|
Totally agreed. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Mollerski wrote: |
| I've noticed that when a thread drags past it's sell-by date on this site, as this one has. Invariably someone decides to turn on the OP and it all becomes personal. Understandably, Pandora's feelings were running rather high at the time of posting and she felt the need to vent her fustrations. I feel that she focused on the serious points that deserved to be made and I agree with the naming of the two individuals who let themsleves and their company down so badly. |
And of course that observation means the OP has to be 100% in the right in this instance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
PJSki, What is the story behind your sig? Why is something that is dated 11 years ago so important to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Boredsurfing wrote: |
| PJSki, What is the story behind your sig? Why is something that is dated 11 years ago so important to you? |
PM me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
' pandora is a "lady" not a girl. Do you refer to male posters on here as boys or men?!'
Certainly don't refer to them as lords 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| PJSki wrote: |
| Boredsurfing wrote: |
| PJSki, What is the story behind your sig? Why is something that is dated 11 years ago so important to you? |
PM me. |
Entirely off topic - posts like this always mystify me, so here's a gentle enquiry. He's already asked the question, you know his user name, so have everything you need to answer his question by PM. If on the other hand you don't want to answer it, him sending you a PM is not going to change that. So what would he need to add in the PM that you don't already know?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| GrahamN wrote: |
| PJSki wrote: |
| Boredsurfing wrote: |
| PJSki, What is the story behind your sig? Why is something that is dated 11 years ago so important to you? |
PM me. |
Entirely off topic - posts like this always mystify me, so here's a gentle enquiry. He's already asked the question, you know his user name, so have everything you need to answer his question by PM. If on the other hand you don't want to answer it, him sending you a PM is not going to change that. So what would he need to add in the PM that you don't already know? |
PM me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Ernst Goldsmith wrote: |
stoatsbrother, I respect your strength of feeling on this. I'm happy for the mods to take a view on it, so you're welcome to refer the matter to them now. In cricketing terms we've definitely reached 'close of play', since the light has now faded and the players are having a shower.
Mentioning someone's real name, and linking that name speculatively to a pseudonym, is not covered by the registration terms of the site (nor does the spirit of those terms cover it). I stated, with some conviction, someone's real name and attached it to 'PJ Ski'. I also made it clear that this was not a definitive statement of fact or opinion, because it was obvious that I was taking a punt on the two names being the same person.
I get the impression that you are applying the rules of a 'gentleman's club', rather than those of an internet forum. This is not a club, and it cannot be a gentleman's club. It is a rough-and-tumble democratic discussion forum, where freedom of expression has to be king. The gentleman named is welcome to email me and confirm that he is not PJSki: dgoldsmith[at]btinternet.com . And if he wishes to have his name removed I'll do it immediately.
If we're discussing honour, the serial 'dragging up' of an aspect of Chris Exall's history - for weeks on end - seems unacceptable. This is very ancient history. He's done a lot of hugely beneficial work for British skiing, which isn't reflected by PJSki's unnecessary link. |
PM me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[quote="sanglier
I'm sorry, Mollerski, but I don't see how it is fair to say this, when you haven't heard the other side of the story [/quote]
Because, unless the OP is lying, the Reps behavior was inexcusable. Reps shouting at guests is utterly unacceptable and there is nothing that can justify such behavior.
I have little interest in the nitty gritty details that have been trawled through at length within this thread. The above is the banner headline that surely no one can condone?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Mollerski, Re reps shouting at punters - agreed - and many of us have said that if you actually read the thread... but I am guessing you were there and know exactly what happened when the cluster of angry and upset tourists were seeking answers.
The issues which later posters (including PJ) raise are 1) Should Pandora have exhausted "proper channels" before naming the managers concerned here? 2) Were some of the things they appeared to hold the reps responsible really in the reps control?
And anyone involved in a customer service business knows that half the complaints you get are totally unjustified, but luckily these are made up for by the people who don't complain but should have
To repeat: we do not know exactly what went on here, and never will.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
stoatsbrother, bit of a Pandoras box, this thread, dont you think?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mollerski:
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
sanglier:
I'm sorry, Mollerski, but I don't see how it is fair to say this, when you haven't heard the other side of the story |
Because, unless the OP is lying, the Reps behavior was inexcusable. Reps shouting at guests is utterly unacceptable and there is nothing that can justify such behavior.
I have little interest in the nitty gritty details that have been trawled through at length within this thread. The above is the banner headline that surely no one can condone? |
Personally, I can see, after reading some of the stuff you can't be bothered with, how in exceptional how an overworked rep could reach breaking-point. This would not be a sack-able offence, given the higher than normal level of stress involved.
Last edited by 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  on Mon 25-01-10 21:29; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| stoatsbrother wrote: |
Mollerski, Re reps shouting at punters - agreed - and many of us have said that if you actually read the thread... but I am guessing you were there and know exactly what happened when the cluster of angry and upset tourists were seeking answers.
|
Stoatsbro, you've contradicted yourself in two sentences. You've agreed with my comments re. reps and then gone on to say that I'm in no position to make a judgement as I wasn't present during the event.
My point being, that NOTHING could justify the reps shouting at the guests. So what could have I have possibly witnessed if I'd been there to alter this fact?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
DAB, sorry but I kinda cracked that one in around 1968 when this thread started. Keep up.
| Quote: |
Reps behavior was inexcusable
|
Sounds like the kind of day where many might have cracked. Add a dose of whingeing/tutting/moaning/sarky remarks etc and we all might just decide it's better to let fly. I wasn't there but I can easily imagine a scenario where a rep might lose it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Bode Swiller, ooohhh, meeoow,
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Mollerski wrote: |
| stoatsbrother wrote: |
Mollerski, Re reps shouting at punters - agreed - and many of us have said that if you actually read the thread... but I am guessing you were there and know exactly what happened when the cluster of angry and upset tourists were seeking answers.
|
Stoatsbro, you've contradicted yourself in two sentences. You've agreed with my comments re. reps and then gone on to say that I'm in no position to make a judgement as I wasn't present during the event.
My point being, that NOTHING could justify the reps shouting at the guests. So what could have I have possibly witnessed if I'd been there to alter this fact? |
Yeah, yeah, we get the message. But it's only your opinion and others disagree with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Hi Mollerski
I've said on previous posts that I don't think it was right for the reps to shout at the guest - but I think the "degree of wrongness" depends hugely on the circumstances and the provocation they were under. This is where the detail DOES matter. If I've understood correctly, there were 10 (understandably p*ss*d off) adults taking on 1 or 2 reps - it doesn't take much imagination to see how this MIGHT have led to raised voices all round - and not just from the reps.
The reps' names have been posted in a public forum, with seemingly no right of reply, and it wasn't their fault that things went wrong in the UK. That is what caused the clients to (quite understandably) arrive in a less than ideal frame of mind, and due to what appears to be some clumsy client handling by the reps, they now have their names on the forum for all to see.
In no way am I suggesting the OP is lying - but I am saying there are two sides to every story. When you read the detail (and if you've got a few minutes to spend, it's fairly revealing) this whole thing looks far less black and white than perhaps even I would have suspected based on the OP.
In my own posts, I have tried to present things from the SB RM's point of view, as I used to be one a while back. I don't know the reps in question and I have nothing whatsoever to do with SB. I just read the OP and thought I might be able to offer a slightly different pov.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
I not interested in the black or the white or the grey bits in between. Reps CANNOT shout at guests period. If the reps are not able to deal with or resolve any situation which might arise with guests without resorting to shouting they shouldn't be in the job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Mollerski wrote: |
| I not interested in the black or the white or the grey bits in between. Reps CANNOT shout at guests period. If the reps are not able to deal with or resolve any situation which might arise with guests without resorting to shouting they shouldn't be in the job. |
Oh dear, you seem to be stuck on transmit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Quote: |
I not interested in the black or the white or the grey bits in between. Reps CANNOT shout at guests period. If the reps are not able to deal with or resolve any situation which might arise with guests without resorting to shouting they shouldn't be in the job.
|
But guests can shout at reps, can they, and that is ALWAYS all right, is it?
That's a seriously closed mind you have there ....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
I only piped-up in an attempt to stem your drivvle. 