 Poster: A snowHead
|
Snowheads exists for one reason only. The Ski Club of Great Britain closed its discussion forum to non-members on 5 February 2004. As a result, the remaining 'members only' forum is of limited value to members.
Opposition to the decision - which was taken by the SCGB Council - has been almost universal. I think it is fair to say that the reasons given have been unconvincing. The Club initially suggested that the forum had been closed because of negative comment. Subsequently, legal and commercial reasons were given. There has been no dialogue between senior officials of the Club and the forum itself.
I have been a member of the Ski Club since 1962, a journalist for the Club since 1978, and served as an elected member of its Council in the late 1980s. I have never known a decision to create such exasperation, and for such goodwill (and the open forum had gained huge goodwill for the Club) to be thrown away so carelessly. The Club was founded in 1903 with an eagerness for debate, free speech and intellectual exchange. In 2004 it should be the primary national forum for British skiers. Many new members can be recruited to the Club from an open forum, as we were beginning to discover.
Despite negative comment here on Snowheads there is probably a collective wish for a national club that truly represents the needs of skiers in Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland (and, of course, to welcome many overseas members and expatriates). Perhaps it is time for the Club to become more 'information and communication based', perhaps less hierarchical. Perhaps it is time for the membership fee not to be a barrier, by offering alternative membership packages to suit different people's budgets.
It is time now for 'internet friendly' members of the SCGB to influence the Club for the better, perhaps to develop an alternative plan. There are many clever, creative and talented people here who could help the organisation grow.
It is obviously urgent and essential for 'internet friendly' members of the SCGB to sit on the Club's Council, so that decisions on the internet and the website are positive for the Club. Changes could come about as soon as the next Annual General Meeting this autumn, or sooner if an Extraordinary General Meeting was demanded by members.
The Ski Club of GB is a members' organisation. Therefore its future is determined by its paid-up members. It is not appropriate for a discussion on the future of the Club to take place on Snowheads. But if you feel for your Club and would like it to have a bigger future - in every sense - then the discussion must take place.
If you are interested in a discussion of this sort - which would take place on an external 'Blogger' type site, protected by password entry (have a look at www.blogger.com to get an idea) then please make yourself known. I'm thinking that this site would be established in the next few weeks, depending on support.
If you like the idea of all this, please post a comment below, with your name and membership number. Membership numbers will obviously have to be checked with the Club's administration to validate this discussion. If you want to email me privately, use dgoldsmith@btinternet.com, but I think we should be as open as possible about this whole thing. No more secret discussions in smoke-filled rooms!
My membership number is 5**1. What's yours?
[P.S. By the way, if you're not a member but would like to help change the SCGB for the better, why not join? New members of the Club will be welcome to this members' discussion. Remember, the SCGB is an organisation with lots of human, financial and physical resources, which can be put to good use for British skiers. It has done some great things to date. It maybe just needs a few tweaks in the right direction for the future!]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
P.S. Sorry for the length of all that, above! If you haven't dropped dead through exhaustion, please log your interest below !
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
David, well done for being proactive.
However, I think (hope) I misunderstood part of your post. It sounded to me as if you are going to discuss possible changes to the membership structure etc. - which is excellent. But then I (mis)read the next part of the post about only being invited to the discussion if you're a member.
I am opening a business, and if I only focused on my existing customer base then I wouldn't have a very dynamic business. Especially if you're looking to attract new customers! Companies and political parties spend millions of pounds each year on focus groups, surveys and other market research. It's called market research because they speak to the market - NOT to existing customers.
At the moment, I am not remotely interested in joining a club that is a) expensive to join (for what I'll get out of it), and b) perpetuates this "exclusivity" by limiting discussion on how to attract new members to existing members!
Sorry if this comes across as harsh - I realise you are trying to move forward, but may have to work within a restrictive framework. But all your hard work will be undone if non-members still have this perception of exclusivity and attitude of "if you're not with us, you're against us".
If, on the other hand I've got completely the wrong end of the stick, I apologise! I often do read things the wrong way (maybe I'm dyslexic?!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Maybe the SCGB needs to take the lead here and show some kind of desire to want the likes of us back David. It would be difficult to perhaps drum up enthusiasm after the way SCGB have behaved.
I am sorry the messed up as it was a good thing going and they didn't realise it. They had the chance to establish themselves as the premier snowsports website and ignored it. Incidently the www.theboarder.co.uk is now the largest internet base snowsports website in the UK. I fear the SCGB will shrink to an even more exclusive club than it is now. why should snowhead members work to get acceptance form the SCGB.
With the maximum respect I can afford the people at the SCGB they come across as a bunch of ski enthusiasts whom have not a clue how to take the club and site to the next level.
Sorry for being negative but SCGB have brought about their own destruction here.
Last edited by You need to Login to know who's really who. on Wed 25-02-04 15:35; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
A couple of questions, David.
Are you organising this with the knowledge / approval of SCGB?
I ask because without it, how are you to check membership numbers for validity? If they do approve, why not use their existing members' only forum and save setting up a new one?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
masopa. Your question is very easily answered. The Ski Club of Great Britain is a members' organisation with a voting structure. Therefore, change to the club can only be actuated by those voting.
Certainly we should have a non-members' discussion about the future of the Club, which can take place right here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U brain. No, this is a freelance exercise. And I quite like the Blogger format. Obviously the aim is to create a groundswell of member opinion which can deliver change through the voting mechanism and constitution of the Club - i.e. not some sort of coup.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My membership number is 10***0.
I, for one, applaud your initiative, David. I fully intend to use the next (possibly last) year of my membership in any way I can to influence the future of the SCGB.
In spite of the councils short-sightedness in the closure of the forum, I still feel that ultimately it should and could represent the views of UK snow sports enthusiasts and that it is best placed to do so. The best way to reform anything is from within and I'll gladly support any move to bring about the changes needed.
Last edited by After all it is free  on Thu 26-02-04 14:04; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
I realise your intentions toward the club are honourable David but, the organisational core, as it stands, has not shown an eagerness to engage in discourse with their membership, even within the confines of their own forum; that they might do anything toward facilitating a critical debate in a place beyond their control seems perhaps over-hopeful?
My point is, I think it unlikely they will assist you with the membership number check.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U brain. I can't imagine why anyone would find this exercise unwelcome. If there are problems, then a declaration of membership by the individual concerned is good for me. I trust people's good faith, as do you in organising this brilliant site.
My intention is to take the heat off both the Club and Snowheads for the moment. Then change may be possible, in an orderly fashion, at the AGM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
David Goldsmith, I realise that changes can only be brought about by members (and their votes), but I was concerned that discussion about such changes would be limited to members. Your other topic has swiftly answered those concerns!
I really hope you manage to use your leverage in the Club to have some of the thoughts from us "outsiders" listened to. I would like to see a club we all want to join and are proud of.
Cheers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
So, two SCGB members (me and Mark) so far. Anyone else like to register an interest?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Membership 1****8
I am most upset at the way this decision was handled. It was imposed with no consultation whatsoever. Why could they not use the old member's only section if the views of non-members were not required?
SCGB may have a role to play, but needs to realise that the 21st century is here, and treating people as they have, is totally unacceptable.
Yes, I support change that modernises the club to make it more relevant to the everyday skier, who works hard all year to save for his or her 1 or 2 weeks of pleasure. At present, the elitist image only serves to alienate the majority.
I will let my membership lapse as I have cancelled my direct debit, as I can see little benefit from membership. They hopefully will convince me otherwise by next November.
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 Wed 25-02-04 23:29; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Membership ******
I must admit my enthusiasm for arguing with/about SCGB is lagging! I think I'd like to echo Peter's comments regarding at the way in which these changes have been conducted. I think they would have had a whole lot less strife if they'd have publicly said that they intended to close the forum in, for example, two weeks time. The open forum was a valuble element of the SCGB; it did give a real feeling of community. The coexistence proposals, where snowHeads became a semi-official open forum, complimenting SCGB's online offerings seemed to me to be an ideal solution and I was deeply dissappointed when this seemed to have been utterly rejected as a way forward.
I'm worried that the debate within the SCGB members only forum has got rather too personal and has spread beyond the original issue regarding the open forum, and for those that remain that this has become too much of an us and them argument, with SCGB and snowHeads being the us and them.
Last edited by You know it makes sense. on Wed 25-02-04 20:29; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
membership 1****5
I don't think we should condem the whole club for a mistake, even such a large mistake, made by a few individuals i.e. the current committee.
It was not the club that closed the forum, but 10 or 12 individuals acting for the club. The club is bigger and deserves better.
I'd like to take a greater interest in the future of the SCGB. One of the major barriers to this is any information on how to get involved, and what is happening "on the inside". I see Davids suggestion as a positive step in the right direction to resolving the current culture problem
Last edited by Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name: on Thu 26-02-04 13:06; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
membership 1xxx2
I'm not in favour of doing things this way, whilst I deplore the actions of the committee I think that this will just upset everyone, also we do not yet know just what the ski club lawyers said to the committee, it is entirely possible that after the report from the lawyers the committee felt it had no choice but to close the forum to outside members, now weather or not I agree with the decision it has been made and I cannot see that us arguing will make things any better.
That said I am inclined to agree with many of Sir Davids coments, so I'm not sure what to do, part of me wants to say hell I'll resign and not renew my mebership subscription, whilst another part says no hang on see if they can change 
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Wed 25-02-04 22:26; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
On an aside, I'm not sure about the wiseness of publishing member numbers...to be safe I'm editing mine out. I understand we are operating on an 'honour' scheme anyway but if not then we can always use private messaging.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
DGO - Do not resign nor should any other member. You have a vote and do count. Make it heard at the AGM or EGM if earlier. And vote YES to any resolution put forward at the AGM that supports transperancy, good management procedures, and inclusiveness. To do otherwise is to succumb to intimidation and apathy. This may be a long game or it could be very short. Time will tell. Rgds. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
David, please would you provide some information which would help me to decide on my involvement to bring about change.
At an SCGB AGM, does the whole committee go up for reelection or just a proportion?
Does the SCGB publish to members financial details which show what income and expenditure goes on which activities, for example, costs of providing reps, profit and loss on SCGB weeks, general administration overheads or agency fees for holiday company sales?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
John. Retiring Council members are replaced at each AGM - usually 2 or 3 each year out of the 9 (I think) total. In addition there is a President, Chairman and Treasurer. Council members serve for 3 years.
The annual report carries the income and expenditure breakdowns. There have been no published accounts for the website since its inception, and several other major areas of income or expenditure are consolidated. That could be an area for examination and discussion.
DGO. This is certainly a move to present fresh thinking, but in a non-confrontational way. Personally I would very much welcome your involvement. The objective would be to look at the club in the round, and not focus excessively on the website, though I personally see this as the most important thing for the Club's future, because everyone is likely to be an internet communicator in years to come.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Following Ian's lead I too have edited my membership no. mainly because it suddenly occured to me that with the info I have made available about myself anyone could access the SCGB site and get in under my name.
David I think for the time being I shall stick with them and if we can all agree to be constructive rather than controversial I'd be happy to put foward ideas and/or bounce arround other peoples ideas, though the cynic in me will say that it won't have any real effect, the optimistic part says it can't hurt to try.
As for the accounts, the information sent to members with regard to the accounts is at best sketchy, e.g I think it gives a total income to the SCGB from members nut no details as to how many family / single / young persons or special offer memberships and so on, I seem to recall that the accounts for last year came to about 1 column on an single side of A4 but I could be wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DGO /DG- I am a professional accountant/auditor/tax advisor in professional practice so I have have some insight into the interpretation company accounts. Please use my skills. I do not have a copy of the latest accounts but will be requesting a copy from SCGB tomorrow. I believe that we must use logic, rather than emotion, to effect change. SCGB ( possibly a name change ( snowsports ) is necessary - but that for another time ) can be a true great representative of snowsports in Britain for which we all can be proud ( when did we last hear that!! ) to be a member.
I believe that we need to formulate a resolution for the next AGM, but we need to meet and co-ordinate what the wording of that resolution should be. Change will eventually come. It is up us in 2004 to decide how soon that is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
joseph I can read and understand most accounts (Own my own buisness) the problem is the lack of detailed information in th eSCGB accounts sent out to members as there is insufficient info in there to be able to do any sort of analysis beyond basic profit and loss stuff
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
David,
Well done on another fine initiative.
I also have reservations about proclaiming a membership number for exactly the reason cited by Ian, so I'll e-mail it to you. Apart from that, I'd be happy to be associated with the attempt to bring the structures of the club into the 21st century.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Terry, An emailed membership number is fine. I should have thought of that.
DGO and joseph, I very much welcome your interest in the question of accounts. I'm not an accountant, but an objective factually-based analysis of the Club's allocation of its resources would be an important element of planning a better future for the Club.
joseph. Be aware of the present Memorandum and Articles of Association vis-a-vis resolutions. They require significant support to be tabled. I don't have the M&AA (I've asked for them to be reinstated on the Club's website). It will be more effective for us to put up candidates for Council, IMO.
What level of support do members feel would be good before setting up our discussion and website?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
David, I have sent a e-mail with my membership number. I agree that the future of the club needs to be determined and where change can be made and is wanted by the majority then change should happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Hopefully acknowledgments to all emails have reached senders now. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'd say large numbers are unlikely ever to be involved/interested (one way or another), so probably double figures is enough as a realistic initial target. Generally, very few people are ever likely to go to the E/AGM of any organisation. Candidates for council is the best option, ideally popular reps for example. Anyone know any popular reps?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Unfortunately it's not just a case of being a popular rep, in fact a certain school of thought might be to suggest that a rep (loyal to the council ?) might be a bad idea, the other problem is that they will need to be withing easy travelling to London and not mind going there for meetings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Terry. I'd advocate great patience on that one. An analysis of the Club's situation, in many dimensions, needs detailed consideration over some months before a plan is drawn up. A manifesto might be a good idea. Then it would be appropriate for candidates to step forward. Unity is the name of the game, so I'd agree that any candidate for election to SCGB Council should be popular!
Anyone else like to join the proposed discussion?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Yes please. V busy at the mo, so don't have time to bore you all just yet with my opinions on the subject! Though count me in. I'm away for the next week, but will try to join in discussions properly when I get back. Manifesto (or some sort of position statement at least) is essential to provide focus and direction to any movement for change - doubt that we'll all agree on content though!
Membership 1****8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
David I'm in. And for the record I'm a rep (not for me to judge whether I'm popular) but not necesarily loyal to all council decisions. I'll e-mail mu membership number.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
Have e-mailed you my membership no Dave.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
DGO: Yes, obviously. I had not meant to suggest that we should address a perceived problem by simply adding to it.
David: You're quite right; just a little precursor! Won't happen again.
Red: goody!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
So far, so good. I believe we have 12/13 SCGB members signed up to take part in the discussion, as below. I'm sure that we can recruit others via private messenging, as some very constructive points have been made in this forum and the SCGB forum over the past weeks and months.
David Goldsmith
Mark Hunter
Peter B
Ian Hopkinson
greedy
DG Orf
joseph
John Wells (not sure from the above)
Terry Wells
Chris M-J
Dave Burt
Red Dave
Helen Beaumont
If anyone else would like to add their name, they are most welcome. Please email your membership number to me, if you've not already done so: dgoldsmith@btinternet.com. I hope to set up the Blogger site at the end of next week, or if anyone has an alternative idea, please fire away. In the meantime, have a good weekend.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
members should Know why an exec has made a decision. I've emailed my memb. no. to dave
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Me too please - number mailed to David (another David, David).
We (GB, UK) need a Ski Club for the twenty-first century.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As it is we appear to have gone backwards from what the original SCGB founders intended, too much comercialism possibly ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Hey DGO
In other words, if it's new and you (not you personally, but anyone) don't like it, the club has 'gone backwards from what the original SCGB founders intended'. If it's new, you like it, but the council don't, then the club aren't progressive enough! Is that what you're saying?
But seriously, can the council win either way, bearing in mind there will always be a counter point?
Last edited by You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net. on Mon 1-03-04 7:35; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not exactly the clubs founders were in favour of getting the word out too as many people as possible in as many ways as possible, the current commitee seem to be less willing to do so, I'm not saying the club isn't progressive just that it should seriously think about what it wants to present itself as, if my information is correct then the club itself is not sure where it wants to go or how to persue those aims which is why I've been told that they have comissioned a report on just that.
As to weather the council can win either way I don't know, if you look at one of my earlier comments you will realise that I am not certain that this thread is a useful thing or that it will do any good.
If you stopped thinking that everyone had a hate campaign going against your friends on the SCGB commitee and started reading what people actually said, rather than implying what you feel they said. Then perhaps people would feel you yourself were not as antagonistic as your messages portray you to be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ