feef, would love to see results of usability testing though.
Usability tests are only as good as the tests set out..
e.g.
Find the chat forum...
Did you find the chat forum easily? Might be a poor result, but would that be what the 'average' member be looking for? Or would they be looking for content..
Find information about snow conditions in Chamonix...
Did you find the information easily? I would expect that to have a reasonable result
Additionally : what snow conditions resources did you use or visit?
I'd expect the chat forum to be hit there. They didn't come to use the chat forum, but they did as it had relevant content.
I think it's a sensible approach by the SCGB.. they know the chat forums aren't well used, so why promote them heavily on the front page? Users will only be disappointed. Promote the content they come to see and allow the forum use to grow organically from that. If forum use grows, then they can promote it as content in itself. If not, theres no loss.
Who's going to use an empty forum, but equally, how do you get the forum full if noone is using it?
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
feef, well, proper usability testing tracks the user's eye movements, mouse clicks etc. while they perform tasks sat at special terminals that track all that. The results indicate what changes to make, you make the changes and test again. It costs a lot of dosh to do properly but the ROI is fast. That site has not been usability tested for sure.
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?
Bode Swiller, almost certainly by commitee and on the cheap. Most school kids have more design skills than those used by the club.
yes, I know that. My reference is to what tasks the test request the user to do. If the requests are not relevant to what the users would actually come to the site to look for, then it's all good and well demonstrating that the chat forum isn't very visible, but unless you know that's what the average user is coming to look for, then it's a moot point.
What needs to be done before the usability test, is find out what is wanted of the site, once you know that, then you can use navigation and usability testing to ensure that content is made easily accessible and available.
if you're looking for information on snow condtions, which is the sort of content I would expect the average SCGB user to be looking for, then it's easy to find.
If you're looking for the chat forum, which I think the average SCGB user isn't then it's harder to find.
Usability in terms of locating information on snow conditions is good, looking for the chat forum, its poor.
In that sense, I think the SCGB website has it pretty well spot on. Finding the content that the average user wants is pretty easy to do. As a chat-forum user on the SCGB website, you're in a minority and so that content is less obvious, but still not difficult.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Bode Swiller, I think it sucks. I hate fly-out/mouse-over menus.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
I'll just pitch in a little observation here:
As mentioned, my own history with the SCGB goes back to the days of lace-up leather boots (50 years and a bit). In my experience, the Club was always a bit of a bumbling organisation. I recall, though, that the original SCGB website - 10+ years ago - was well ahead of the curve. And, in earlier years, the Club was ahead of the competition with things like premium-rate phone lines for snow reports (an excellent money-spinning wheeze of its time).
The Club, in earlier times, was run by slightly hilarious military types. It was even commanded by a brigadier at one time. They may have been a bit clueless about the more commercial aspects of skiing, but they were benign types and were quite popular with the Sloanes who formed the backbones of the staffing. They knew how to manage a team who maybe didn't want to be on the front line.
I'm not entirely sure where we are now, but let's see how things pan out. The frankness and candour of the 2012 AGM minutes was quite encouraging. The Club clearly knows it's in a bit of a crisis with new media and its demographics, so maybe a knight with shining armour (do they still exist in the British military establishment?) will come to the rescue.
...In two days time I will be on the S9BB being very laidback and lazy and wanting to ski on-piste with my partner - and the relaxed approach will be where it's at,
Pretty much my approach for next week, too, though I might just do a little off piste
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.
Bode Swiller wrote:
feef, would love to see results of usability testing though.
Like this one?:
Quote:
The Times has listed skiclub.co.uk as 42nd out of 50 Top Travel Websites. And it's the only one snowsport related.
Maybe it's just you?
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Today the SCGB report the following for Glencoe:
Quote:
Upper piste depth 70cm
Lower piste depth 25cm
This afternoon at approximately 3500ft in the Main Basin and at 3400ft in Happy Valley, using two sites marked and measured out in the autumn, the following depths were measured:
Happy Valley: 147cm (up from 95cm)
Main Basin: 312cm (up from 270cm)
Previous depths measured 24/1/13.
These two points which were predetermined and measured/marked in the autumn (so was not a case of hunting in the biggest looking drift with a probe!) give an average of 230cm depth on the upper slopes.
SCGB data is also being used on the STV reports. However following discussions this week between more than one ski area and the new Chief Executive there seems to be a willingness to deal with this issue - though not necessarily the ability to quickly solve the issues raised. As a temporary fix links to Ski Scotland have been added to the Scottish Reports.
Incidentally, I've not attempted to measure lower slope depths as never had a chance to measure out specific points before the snow came. However the wooden fence at the top of the Access Chair is 1m high and is buried and that is the foot of the main ski area.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
Winterhighland, we would all forgive you if you drove to Wimbledon and a fired an RPG up their collective arѕeѕ.
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.
Dramatic SCGB-related news from Bonny Scotland and 'The Mighty One' - Glencoe ski area. You can read it for yourself:
igloo4you is - as he reveals - Andy Meldrum, the owner and operator of Glencoe's lifts. The fact that he's now in conversation with the Scottish CEO of the SCGB is interesting indeed. I wonder if Frank McCusker will make 'the trip north'? If he does, he'll not only ski one of the most treasured and eccentric ski areas in the world, but will have the chance to see nearby Glen Etive - the valley that terminates at the indescribably beautiful Loch Etive. Glen Etive is where the climactic scenes of Skyfall were filmed, except that the house itself (which was a cardboard cut-out) was filmed in Surrey!
Last edited by And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports. on Sat 2-02-13 11:55; edited 1 time in total
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
Comedy Goldsmith wrote:
Dramatic SCGB-related news from Bonny Scotland and 'The Mighty One' - Glencoe ski area. You can read it for yourself:
igloo4you is - as he reveals - Andy Meldrum, the owner and operator of Glencoe's lifts. The fact that he's now in conversation with the Scottish CEO of the SCGB is interesting indeed. I wonder if Frank McCusker will make 'the trip north'? If he does, he'll not only see ski one of the most treasured and eccentric ski areas in the world, but will have the chance to see nearby Glen Etive - the valley that terminates at the indescribably beautiful Loch Etive. Glen Etive is where the climactic scenes of Skyfall were filmed, except that the house itself (which was a cardboard cut-out) was filmed in Surrey!
One of the posts on goldsmith's link:
Quote:
"Whether "Britishness" even comes into is is quite another matter and I don't see the benefit in bringing nationalist politics into this myself (indeed I have no right to, beacuse I'm English, despite the parentage!). the fact is that SCGB is run by people more comfortable in Davos, Wengen or the wine-bars of Knightsbridge rather than Aviemore or Fort William (For that reason I think that many really committed skiers would never consider membership anyway because they can't relate to the way the club seems to be run by old class standards that really have no place in modern society)."
The ski club is obviously nothing like he describes it. I suspect he has been reading Goldsmith's rubbish.
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
What are you talking about? I actually take some care to write fact-based stuff.
The SCGB's ruling Council is all-male (there's been an unexplained departure from the committee of the only female member) ... and appears to be entirely English .... I'm not aware of a single person on that committee who has a track-record of skiing in Scotland or understands what it's about ... and the information department has spent recent winters putting out false information on Scottish snow depths, repeatedly listing Cairngorm as "closed" when it is open.
When I served on the SCGB council there was, at least, one member who was resident in Scotland. And it's not that long ago that the Club had a structure of regional representation generally. To use the old 'tree' metaphor ... the branches of a national organisation are its roots.
The internet hugely facilitates all aspects of communication and representation, at any level of detail and networking, but what I see is a group of leaders (reps) in southern England closely guarding their interests of expenses-paid skiing, supported by a minority of members who enjoy skiing with expenses-paid leaders. That's OK to a point ... but as I've said, so many times, the majority of members pay for all this jollying. [As I understand it, Freshtracks customers continue to obtain half-price SCGB membership, for some reason. They enjoy the same (or greater) benefits as full-paying members].
The membership figures for the end of this financial year are important, and it would be good to see them passed by the auditors - it was not a good signal for the 'paying units' figure to be omitted from the 2012 annual report for the first time. And the 34,000 gross membership number seems very odd. It's the highest figure the Club has ever published. But, as I've conceded, it was good to see some candour in the reportage at the 2012 AGM. Let's take the 'truth and reconciliation' all the way.
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
I'm going on a Freshtracks holiday in a couple of weeks, but I'm not getting a membership rebate. Is this another one of your 'facts'? Currently you pay £6 towards the Leading programme, which you claimed to be a 'large chunk' of your subscription fee. Rather misleading comment to say 9% is a 'large chunk'..
Now you seem to be claiming the organisation is a snobbish (old) boys club. This on the back of you claiming it was run by anti-Semitic Free Masons.
It seems to me that you are trying to bring the club down as some kind of long-running vendetta you have against its leaders.
You really need to take a step back - or maybe even a step forward, into a medical healthcare provider's office.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
It's not relevant whether you personally are getting half-price membership. The deal is half-price membership ...
Quote:
All our holidays are for Ski Club members only. If you are not already a member of the Ski Club, take advantage or our special offer of half price membership when you book on a Ski Club Freshtracks holiday ...
And it would be interesting to know - because it's constitutionally important - who currently receives free SCGB memberships (i.e. free ownership and control of the organisation)? It's all very unconventional, when one compares the SCGB with other mutual member-controlled organisations.
PJSki wrote:
This on the back of you claiming it was run by anti-Semitic Free Masons.
Not a claim I've made. You must be confusing me with someone else. An anti-semitic remark was directed at me by a single senior person in the SCGB, outrageously (had I been a Jew) and stupidly (since I'm not a Jew). I've no idea if the person was a freemason. It's a matter of fact that the Royal patron of the SCGB - the Duke of Kent - is Grand Master of the United Grand Lodge of England. But I can't see how that makes anyone else a freemason.
What did I actually say?
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Goldsmith, you did what you normally do and made unsubstantiated accusations about anti-Semitism and freemasonry, which taken together left the impression that something was very wrong with the organisation. If you don't want to leave false impressions then you need to be clearer and stick to verifiable facts.
As far as half-priced membership goes, I don't have a problem with introductory offers. If you do, you can leave. I don't ski with the Leaders every season, but don't have a problem with some of my money going in that direction in those years. If you have a problem, then you should leave. Also, you don't speak for all those who don't ski with Leaders, yet you attempt, in your usual dishonest, way to imply that you are the spokesman for the non users of the service.
In short, I don't believe that you post in good faith.
Last edited by Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person on Sat 2-02-13 15:08; edited 1 time in total
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?
And the above is you trying to portray the people in that video as being atypical members of the ski club. Yet more evidence of you trying to invent some kind of class division between the ski club and the general UK skiing populous. Rather sad and transparent behaviour on your part.
Well no, I just thought it was quite an interesting broadcast to send back to SCGB HQ at the time. I'm not making a judgement of it.
The newscaster is SCGB leader Dan Habershon-Butcher ('Dan HB'), and it dates to the Dec 2011 Varsity Ski Club event in Val Thorens. Here's another package that he filed from there:
According to the SCGB website, Dan HB has been repping for the Club in Whistler from 5 Jan to 26 Jan, and is currently leading a 'Canadian Cat Adventure' Freshtracks holiday in Revelstoke.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
I see PJSki, is being a willy again, his back must be playing up to make forego his favorite occupation
After all it is free
After all it is free
Activity on the SCGB forum on the 1st day of February (24 hour period) was as follows:
One post at 11:23 (Lucy Jennings). A second post at 15:46 (Simon White).
Each poster filed 50% of postings for the day, against the maximum allowable of 4% under the new rules. I personally do not feel that this should be a cause for undue retribution or sanction.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
Comedy Goldsmith wrote:
Activity on the SCGB forum on the 1st day of February (24 hour period) was as follows:
One post at 11:23 (Lucy Jennings). A second post at 15:46 (Simon White).
Each poster filed 50% of postings for the day, against the maximum allowable of 4% under the new rules. I personally do not feel that this should be a cause for undue retribution or sanction.
Oh, well, that's fecking magnanimous of you! Why keep going on about it then? Is it because you can't stop yourself?
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
The White House, Wimbledon
PJSki wrote:
Why keep going on about it then? Is it because you can't stop yourself?
I'll stop if you take my Duracells out.
I think the simple point is that this thread was initiated - according to Windymiller - by someone at the command centre of The White House. The purpose of the opening posting was to reintroduce skiers to the SCGB chat forum. So it seems relevant to monitor the success of that campaign.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
Or lack thereof . . .
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:
You really need to take a step back - or maybe even a step forward, into a medical healthcare provider's office.
Perhaps you could direct the SCGB information department, not to the healthcare providers office, but the opticians, maybe then they'll be able to see what is actually going?
In the meantime I found PJSki's profile picture:
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
i have just out of interest and in trying to make sense of this ongoing thread had a quick scan through postings across the snowheads site. Can or has someone ( i suppose they have and can) show what proportion of snowheads post on the site. It seems that a high number of posts come from a core section of people. i see that the "views" section is quite high but that may come from people who post going back to see who has answered them etc, and not necessarily other snowies, but its the postings that are more relevant i would imagine. so with an "advertised" by the club, similar membership base, what is the comparison between a full on open forum whose business is internet based and thriving, and that of the T baggers club attempt ?.
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
limegreen1, The core of snowheads seems to be a couple of hundred people at most. Laughably, goldsmith claims that the 34k ski club membership prefers to post on here.
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
PJSki wrote:
limegreen1, The core of snowheads seems to be a couple of hundred people at most. Laughably, goldsmith claims that the 34k ski club membership prefers to post on here.
Well how many people do you reckon write The Sun? [Circulation: 2.6 million]
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
not a like-for-like comparison.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Its probably already been said but I posted on that forum myself all those years ago, it could have been THE place for talking wintersport. It threw it all away when they went members only. Thats why Snowheads came about if I remember right!
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?
RichardB wrote:
Its probably already been said but I posted on that forum myself all those years ago, it could have been THE place for talking wintersport. It threw it all away when they went members only. Thats why Snowheads came about if I remember right!
yes, i understand that but this thread seems to revolve around how many posters there are to the teabaggers website, and it seems from cg's analysis there are not that many, maybe 10 or 20 different posters although not many responses. However on snowheads there is a core of about 100 repeat posters, and on the face of it , i would have thought a thriving established forum would return better figures seeing the slagging "the clubs" forum gets after only being ressurected (re erected ) for a month or so ago, and returning a 10 to 20% of snowheads posters postings, from a perceived old, out of touch, non interested in internet forum demographic.
Thats all. I get so much info from here, but what if the teabaggers set up 20 "memberships" and just employ a couple of posters to sit there all day uploading info, and responding between themselves. How would that be seen ? traffic going through and all relevant info given ... it wouldnt be that hard to do... they could even source topics etc
limegreen1, Isn't that the case with most forums, there's bound to be loads of unrelated talk and avid users who post thousands of posts!
I think the club is getting bashed for their forum going members only in the first place. It was an attempt to raise the number of paid members at that time, I think that was fair enough as it is their choice to do so but it lost a major opportunity for the forum as it was getting popular!
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
limegreen1, I would put the 'hard core' here at nearer 300 and that on a rotating basis . . . but where this place makes a difference is that It has a HUGE 'lurker' community that while they may not post frequently or even ever . . . they know that what they are still part of this community.
The Tea Club is not . . . It's a business . . . stamping its muddy boots on a history . . . while pretending it has any relevance to our sport beyond what it can leverage for financial gain.
I have a lot of sympathy for Goldmember's position; He's trying to embarrass the Club into regressing a business back to the club it once was . . . but he fails to see that most 'members' these days seem to view the Club as just some sort of 'COSCO' and the people who run it are incapable of feeling any sort of embarrassment . . . venal is as venial thought.
Masque, you talk rubbish as usual. The ski club has thousands of members skiing together every season. Every night of the season there are hundreds of them in bars across the Alps attending club social events. Try walking into one of those bars and telling those people they aren't members of a real club.
You hate the club for reasons you have already stated. Your first impression was of members not wanting to ski with you. From that one incident you extrapolate and generalise about the other 30k plus membership.
Anyone reading your rubbish should take it with a silo full of salt.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Has anyone done an analysis of the percentage of posts on this thread by User? Just the top 5 say.
After all it is free
After all it is free
i think the "lurker" part needs to be adressed by the t baggers if they are ever to be really effective and that will be restrained by the "membership " issue, unless the membership grows ...... this thread is going to go round and round again isnt it ?? !!
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.
limegreen1 wrote:
i think the "lurker" part needs to be adressed by the t baggers if they are ever to be really effective and that will be restrained by the "membership " issue, unless the membership grows ...... this thread is going to go round and round again isnt it ?? !!
Goldsmith will bump it forever.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
PJSki, Go back to licking your genitals, you know it's the only thing that makes you happy
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
