 Poster: A snowHead
|
| Gerry wrote: |
| I promised the members that I’d kick some back bottoms for this and that’s what I’ve done. |
“The beatings will continue until morale improves”
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Breaking News: SCGB announces rebranding at gala event
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
Looks to me that the SCGB was so far up it's own rear passage, that it's been very successfully 'carpetbagged' with the value of the property assets now gone and it was possible because the 'club' was so lost in the fog of it's own self importance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Gerry wrote: |
Amazingly there was a staff and Council trip at the end of the 18/19 season though. I’m told it cost 15k. I challenge one of the outgoing Council members over this on Facebook in the run up to the AGM but they refused to even comment. What’s gone on over the last couple of years is unforgivable but people have been shamed and held to account. |
WTAF!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Raceplate wrote: |
Her attitude was what I would expect of a Corporate CEO but not a Club CEO. I fully expected her to say a quick hello to the people she already knew and then make an effort to introduce herself to the new people, ask them how they're getting on, need any help/info, ask for feedback etc. None of it. Literally went round a lunch table having a conversation with people she knew were long term members and not even making eye contact with the people sat next to them. I had to ask someone who she was. Complete opposite of what I would expect from the head of a recreational club. She could have had me as a member for life and future rep if she'd just said hello. Instead of which I left thinking, "Why would I put money into your pocket next time?" I didn't. |
Interestingly had the exact experience when on a Freshtraks holiday and she was there with staff doing some sort of promotion (Argentiere I think about 16-17 years ago) - not at all interested in the 'punters'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Levitt wrote: |
| the CEO's package was £200k. |
now that's a big package.
again WTAF
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ed123 wrote: |
| Levitt wrote: |
| the CEO's package was £200k. |
now that's a big package.
again WTAF |
He was getting 120k and pension contribution. Total cost to the Club after employer’s IN was probably getting close to 200k. I don’t have a single good word to say about Holt.
Some of what’s happened is utterly incredible. You really couldn’t make it up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Teflon Gerry wrote: |
| Some of what’s happened is utterly incredible. |
Yes, you mean like a Director of SCGB revealing publicly the CEO's salary package - unless there is an agreement that says it's ok to do that, you may find you have breached any salary confidentiality clause in the CEO's contract of employment. Well done.
You were a Director from 2011-2015 and then again from 2019. Disasters don't happen over night, it generally takes a bit of a run up. Somewhere on this forum you get honorable mention a few times (and not in a good way) - some even saying they left the Club 'because of you'. Are you the right person to be flinging sh*t around?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Idly googling re the CST last night I cam across this post on our very own pages after her departure from @snowcrazy# - 2012
| Quote: |
As far as making the club better, where to start: the web site needs a lot of work, being able to message direct with other members (like we can on here), getting better discounts (you can get almost all their discounts these days online without belonging to the club), making freshtracks cheaper (it is crazy expensive for most holidays), being honest about the snow conditions (you get more truthful reports on here), being truthful about where leaders can really go off piste before getting people to join the club etc. If I tried I could think more, but these are a few ideas for starters. Maybe now the old CEO is leaving there might be a few positive changes and not just more wasting of members subs. But I would be very surprised if much changes.
|
Plew sa charnge as they say Rodders.
#recognise @snowcrazy has his own specific history with "the Club" but not entirely sure what that is
Last edited by You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net. on Wed 10-06-20 14:46; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and who actually gives one small poop?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| under a new name wrote: |
| and who actually gives one small poop? |
Those whose personal skiing history is intrinsically linked with the SCGB. And I guess for the rest of us it's like a very slow motion car crash which has been going on for years - we shouldn't look, we feel for the victims but we can't help feeling that the driver being in a full blindfold while whacked out on meth is a contributory factor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
It's so funny...
I have been involved in "forums" semi professionally for some years and the one thing you can guarantee, especially in Britain, is that every forum hates every other forum in the same sphere of activity. You can extend that upwards: every "organisation" hates every other "organisation".
And slagging off the others is a rite of passage. In some cases it is a requirement, because promoting one forum on another is a no-no.
There is always the "volunteer organisation problem" whereby "colourful" characters rise upwards, p1ssing off everybody along the way but nobody does anything about it because they aren't paid so they don't really care, and eventually the whole top is run by funny characters. I don't know the SCGB characters but Snowheads is dominated by a small group which quite enjoys beating people up 
I know how Snowheads started. Around 2004 there was some dodgy stuff at SCGB and a bunch of people left and started Snowheads. This is normal in social media. But it would be so much better if people could work together.
Incidentally today it would not have been possible because most people now spurt out on FB, Twatter, etc and web forums are dying. But in 2004 everybody was desperate to post. It was a good time...
Sure the SCGB forum is pretty dead but at least you don't get beaten up on it, whereas here you have to be really careful. Things get "personal" really fast.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Suggest you avoid TGR then
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
@Peter Stevens, Things get "personal" for you really fast here because you have a tendency to post something aggressive and opinionated which turns out not really to be justified or supportable and you double down on being a victim about it. There is no huge network of people co-ordinating in order to personally victimize you except in your mind. Get over it and perhaps reflect on the feedback.
There are plenty of things to mock about sHs and sHs bashes - at heart we are after all "a middle England gaperfest" and one that perhaps is diferentiated from the SCGB by not taking itself too seriously (@Weathercam obviously excepted  ). Those of us that have been around and about recreational skiing for a number of years in Europe will have crossed paths with the SCGB in one form or another. Sometimes good, sometimes neutral, sometimes negative. And of course many sHs are or have been SCGB members, renouncing one is not a precondition of another. But you probably know that but you just wanted to play another victim card.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Quote: |
Snowheads is dominated by a small group which quite enjoys beating people up
|
Having spent a quite inordinate amount of time "chatting" on here, I can categorically say, with feeling, that that is completely untrue. In any other situation it could be considered libellous.
If you don't like it, don't lurk here.
Your choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Pruman wrote: |
| Teflon Gerry wrote: |
| Some of what’s happened is utterly incredible. |
Yes, you mean like a Director of SCGB revealing publicly the CEO's salary package - unless there is an agreement that says it's ok to do that, you may find you have breached any salary confidentiality clause in the CEO's contract of employment. Well done.
You were a Director from 2011-2015 and then again from 2019. Disasters don't happen over night, it generally takes a bit of a run up. Somewhere on this forum you get honorable mention a few times (and not in a good way) - some even saying they left the Club 'because of you'. Are you the right person to be flinging sh*t around? |
His salary was already in the public domain as of last October. When I was last on Council we didn’t squander millions on a delusional strategic plan to triple the membership in 3 years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Peter Stevens wrote: |
| ... Snowheads is dominated by a small group which quite enjoys beating people up .. |
I think that's not correct, although making unsubstantiated claims will elicit a polite request for your evidence, which is what this is.
One of the attractions of this place is that there's less of the rude and aggressive behaviour than most places in the wild web, plus of course it still exists.
I think those facts are related to the demographics, plus the work the administrator and moderators' do to keep things on track.
I mostly don't bother discussing with TGR people because it seems to be very much a boxing ring.
Rather like the baddies at rec.skiing.alpine back in the day, I think they've lost the plot and probably can't ride either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| philwig wrote: |
| Peter Stevens wrote: |
| ... Snowheads is dominated by a small group which quite enjoys beating people up .. |
I think that's not correct, although making unsubstantiated claims will elicit a polite request for your evidence, which is what this is.
|
Well, you would say that. There's a lynch mob mentality in here, imo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
#recognise @snowcrazy has his own specific history with "the Club" but not entirely sure what that is |
He was chopped for breaking the off-piste leading policy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Do you want quotes and the phone numbers of the people being quoted so you can ring them and check?
The quote below is as recent as a few days ago in this thread.
| Pruman wrote: |
| SCGB has a turnover less than one average David Lloyd Club yet according to an ex-Director on another forum it has lost £2.5m over two years and the CEO's package was £200k. £2.5m represents over £100k a month LOSS. |
Last edited by You'll need to Register first of course. on Wed 10-06-20 18:11; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Davina Goldballs, your Facebook link above is broken?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Gerry,
| Quote: |
There's a lynch mob mentality in here, imo.
|
So why do you hang around?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| ster wrote: |
| @Davina Goldballs, your Facebook link above is broken? |
What he wrote has been removed/censored. He's only allowed one post a day on here so don't expect a reply from him until tomorrow.
Last edited by You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net. on Wed 10-06-20 18:19; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Gerry wrote: |
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
#recognise @snowcrazy has his own specific history with "the Club" but not entirely sure what that is |
He was chopped for breaking the off-piste leading policy. |
Thanks - assumed as much. But given that he appears to have developed a fair little peer-to-peer skiing community* on his patch since parting ways nothing the SCGB can learn from what he does?
* no direct experience, long time since I've skied there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| under a new name wrote: |
@Gerry,
| Quote: |
There's a lynch mob mentality in here, imo.
|
So why do you hang around? |
Because I want to read what's being said and comment on it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 wrote: |
| ster wrote: |
| @Davina Goldballs, your Facebook link above is broken? |
What he wrote has need removed/censored. He's only allowed one post a day on here so don't expect a reply from him until tomorrow. |
I wonder why. Thats ok, I’ll wait.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ster wrote: |
| Gerry wrote: |
| ster wrote: |
| @Davina Goldballs, your Facebook link above is broken? |
What he wrote has need removed/censored. He's only allowed one post a day on here so don't expect a reply from him until tomorrow. |
I wonder why. Thats ok, I’ll wait. |
Has it been removed, or do you need to join the group to see it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Try it. Broken I think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| midgetbiker wrote: |
| ster wrote: |
| Gerry wrote: |
| ster wrote: |
| @Davina Goldballs, your Facebook link above is broken? |
What he wrote has need removed/censored. He's only allowed one post a day on here so don't expect a reply from him until tomorrow. |
I wonder why. Thats ok, I’ll wait. |
Has it been removed, or do you need to join the group to see it? |
Apparently it is there. He's making a big thing out of me confirming this post by Pruman:
| Quote: |
| Pruman wrote: |
| SCGB has a turnover less than one average David Lloyd Club yet according to an ex-Director on another forum it has lost £2.5m over two years and the CEO's package was £200k. £2.5m represents over £100k a month LOSS. |
|
He's got some interest:
| Quote: |
David Lilly
Hopefully it will go bust, get wound up and never been seen again in form whatsoever. I will keeping an eye out and my lawyer primed for any Phoenixing going on! |
| Quote: |
Julia Edwards
Posh snobs fuck things up, quelle suprise.
|
Julia is bang on, it was primarily two posh snobs what done it. Here's a picture of Julia: https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=1198129137020410&set=picfp.100004700051768
Last edited by Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name: on Wed 10-06-20 18:35; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| Gerry wrote: |
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
#recognise @snowcrazy has his own specific history with "the Club" but not entirely sure what that is |
He was chopped for breaking the off-piste leading policy. |
Thanks - assumed as much. But given that he appears to have developed a fair little peer-to-peer skiing community* on his patch since parting ways nothing the SCGB can learn from what he does?
* no direct experience, long time since I've skied there. |
Snowcrazy does a great "job" in Les Arcs, bringing together Brits to ski together. Thanks Chris.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
I remember skiing with Snowcrazy when he was a SCGB rep. He was excellent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Peter Stevens wrote: |
| Snowheads is dominated by a small group which quite enjoys beating people up |
This has not been my experience with Snowheads.
I think it succeeds in maintaining a good balance.
The only threads in which I've been prompted to consider dropping involvement in Snowheads are those to do with SCGB - they always seems to end up being toxic in a way atypical of any other subject.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| LaForet wrote: |
| Peter Stevens wrote: |
| Snowheads is dominated by a small group which quite enjoys beating people up |
This has not been my experience with Snowheads.
I think it succeeds in maintaining a good balance.
The only threads in which I've been prompted to consider dropping involvement in Snowheads are those to do with SCGB - they always seems to end up being toxic in a way atypical of any other subject. |
One of your contributions:
| Quote: |
All the reps I've come across have been of a type: failed public schoolboys with a plummy accent and ingrained sense of entitlement whose pitch is along the lines of 'of course, anyone discerning would want to be a member, yah?' and a total inability to justify the cost/benefit of membership.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Gerry wrote: |
| LaForet wrote: |
| Peter Stevens wrote: |
| Snowheads is dominated by a small group which quite enjoys beating people up |
This has not been my experience with Snowheads.
I think it succeeds in maintaining a good balance.
The only threads in which I've been prompted to consider dropping involvement in Snowheads are those to do with SCGB - they always seems to end up being toxic in a way atypical of any other subject. |
One of your contributions:
| Quote: |
All the reps I've come across have been of a type: failed public schoolboys with a plummy accent and ingrained sense of entitlement whose pitch is along the lines of 'of course, anyone discerning would want to be a member, yah?' and a total inability to justify the cost/benefit of membership.
|
|
Oh dear Gerry, you seem to need to somehow justify stuff, and at 430am.
SCGB council and management have shown terrible decision making and judgement.
As you are doing here IMHO.
You come across as someone who goes on the attack rather than considering the point being made constructively.
You seem to want to come across as a saviour, a members champion even.
But this post does you no favours, and would seem typical of the attitude that has got SCGB in the mess it is in.
You do realise you are not helping to give any confidence in SCGB don't you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Peter Stevens wrote: |
It's so funny...
I have been involved in "forums" semi professionally for some years and the one thing you can guarantee, especially in Britain, is that every forum hates every other forum in the same sphere of activity. You can extend that upwards: every "organisation" hates every other "organisation".
And slagging off the others is a rite of passage. In some cases it is a requirement, because promoting one forum on another is a no-no.
There is always the "volunteer organisation problem" whereby "colourful" characters rise upwards, p1ssing off everybody along the way but nobody does anything about it because they aren't paid so they don't really care, and eventually the whole top is run by funny characters. I don't know the SCGB characters but Snowheads is dominated by a small group which quite enjoys beating people up
I know how Snowheads started. Around 2004 there was some dodgy stuff at SCGB and a bunch of people left and started Snowheads. This is normal in social media. But it would be so much better if people could work together.
Incidentally today it would not have been possible because most people now spurt out on FB, Twatter, etc and web forums are dying. But in 2004 everybody was desperate to post. It was a good time...
Sure the SCGB forum is pretty dead but at least you don't get beaten up on it, whereas here you have to be really careful. Things get "personal" really fast. |
Personally I think a lot of what Peter says in this post is true.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Gerry wrote: |
| ... There's a lynch mob mentality in here, imo. |
Perhaps if you insulted fewer people the "mob" you fear would not be so big?
The damage done to the SCGB in these pages is coming from you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am not sure I have come across any failed public schoolboy reps at all for SCGB. The ones I have come across have usually been successful in business, the services, the law occasionally or farming.
I think someone does touch on an issue tho' - the SCGB is very self perpetuating as its Directors have tended to be there because they are part of the "club", very often have been qualified Reps or leaders, and probably all very good skiers.
They probably need a load of more ordinary people with different perspectives on what membership should involve, who may not be ardent off piste skiers or even off piste skiers or even more than one or two week a year skiers, but may have outstandng skills to match needs. When I was a governor of a large charity, we had a skills matrix for non-Execs and then we decided where we were weak in a particular skill and went out and recruited someone to cover that skill. The fiasco over the website one would hope would have been covered by having a non Exec with excellent IT background to query and challenge the CEO and if necessary get the non Execs to stop the project. It does demand more work from an unpaid non-Exec than some are prepared to put in though and that should be a good reason as any for not recruiting someone.
I know SCGB does ask for volunteers to stand for Council but may be it needs to put more work into knowing its ordinary members - perhaps by gathering voluntarily more data, and perhaps also being more aggressive through its Nominations Committee, if there is one, in proactively engaging/pressganging. Sometimes a way to get people involved and to "test" them out is by having a specific group for a particular project.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| philwig wrote: |
| Gerry wrote: |
| ... There's a lynch mob mentality in here, imo. |
Perhaps if you insulted fewer people the "mob" you fear would not be so big?
The damage done to the SCGB in these pages is coming from you. |
I couldn't disagree with you more. On either dig.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Gerry wrote: |
| LaForet wrote: |
| Peter Stevens wrote: |
| Snowheads is dominated by a small group which quite enjoys beating people up |
This has not been my experience with Snowheads.
I think it succeeds in maintaining a good balance.
The only threads in which I've been prompted to consider dropping involvement in Snowheads are those to do with SCGB - they always seems to end up being toxic in a way atypical of any other subject. |
One of your contributions:
| Quote: |
All the reps I've come across have been of a type: failed public schoolboys with a plummy accent and ingrained sense of entitlement whose pitch is along the lines of 'of course, anyone discerning would want to be a member, yah?' and a total inability to justify the cost/benefit of membership.
|
|
Rather proving my point, I think? Because if I was trying to answer my own - entirely valid and true - observation constructively, then what I would say is something along the lines of
"@Laforet - I know from previous posts that you feel you've had a bad experience with one or two SCGB Reps, probably some years before, but this is not really representative of the many hundreds of great people that SCGB has across the Alps, as the extensive membership figures give testament to." or similar.
Instead, you're trawling through your back catalog of hundreds of pages of posts across multiple threads at 5am to find something I posted that you took offence at ages ago. Which is, frankly, vaguely sinister. Its certainly counterproductive if you're trying to put the SCGB in a good light. Don't you think this is exactly the 'toxic' level of response that I was referring to?
Last edited by Ski the Net with snowHeads  on Thu 11-06-20 11:17; edited 7 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
