or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Uproar at Snowbasin? - Page 5

post #121 of 259

I think that mainly on-piste skiers that spend most of their time skiing crowded groomed runs probably have  hadplenty of close calls and might consider that he was too close to the blue jacket. Yet a mainly off-piste skier, like myself gets much closer to trees (i've hit many branches) and natural features to consider that plenty of room.  I've never skied in the east so I don't know the terrain, must be much different than the west.

post #122 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by CascadeConcrete View Post

 

My point isn’t lacking, you have just chosen to ignore it.  Once four pages deep into a thread most people become selective in which posts they read.  Anyway, others did respond.  They didn’t agree either, which is ok. I just called you out because your snarky response just oozed “Im in bed with tim taylor”.  Or do you not remember, BRO.


Oh, I remember just fine and feel that it was spot on the money. And your point is still nonexistent.

 

Bro.

post #123 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by billyymc View Post


1 - it appears he was not closer than six feet. I'm not an expert in forensic video analysis, but the angles and size relationships certainly don't show him being very close.

 

2 -- of those who "told me" that something happened -- were any of them there to witness the incident? Were you there to see it?  You have no idea if anything else happened with these kids...none at all. You're speculating, which is another way to say you're making sh-t up.

 

I think you're the one who needs to take your knocks and move on dude.  I'm not sure why you're defending Snowbasin or this patroller so much, but the consensus is stacked against you. 

 

By the way, when you're trying to write persuasively it helps to not exaggerate.  You lose credibility fast that way. 


Do I really need to repeat it again? What we told you is that there are preexisting issues on the run. My wife has been run into in that same area by some hot-dogging snowboarder that couldn't handle his shit. It's a problematic run, so it's not surprising patrol is a little overzealous there on a holiday week where only a third of the mountain is open. This is why every local in this thread understands the issue and isn't going off on the patroller as much as Troy, New Yorkers and Squaw locals that know nothing but what they saw in the video.

 

Patrol went over the line in that case, but I'm glad they're out there blocking jumps and discouraging kids from speeding and jumping amidst first-timers on a GREEN run. The terrain park is open, btw, there's no reason to be hitting half-foot kickers on a beginner's hill.

 

You can stuff the line about credibility. It's a friggin' forum full of opinions and bull-shitting, no one has any more credibility than anyone else. And no, it doesn't look like six feet at all. The patroller could have reached out and touched the kid. And there is no consensus--that's why there's five pages of this here, 17 on TGR and 800 comments deep on FB. Since you live in NY and travel here for a day a year at most, you should be the one moving on.

post #124 of 259

H'mm recently suggested on a TGR forum post.

 

Could the snowboarders have planned this sting operation out?  Could the ski patroller be the victim of entrapment due to the well planned sting operation by the boarders? 

 

Conspiracy theory maybe?

post #125 of 259

"no one has any more credibility than anyone else"

 

Since when?  I seem to remember you indicating that my point was invalid and my story lacked credibility because i only had a handful of posts on epic.  And since you had sooooooooooooooo many more posts, i should believed YOUR side of a story that I was apart of, not you.  Did i pass the mendoza line? Must be that after 15 posts all opinions have credibility.

post #126 of 259

geez...enough, joeUT and Cascade... get a room already.

 

 

post #127 of 259

JoeUT - when people around you throw their hands up in the air and walk away, it doesn't mean touchdown.

 

post #128 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitamin Ski View Post

Yeah, he had room, and was completely in control.

 

That was totally a sting operation.  The two blue-coats were looking for people to bash.  If they are official resort employees (whether paid or not), that is pretty sad on some levels.

 

 

I really don't even think the guy should have been stopped at all.


You are delusional...and border line insane, keep your shorts loose, I think your brains are needing oxygen.

 

post #129 of 259


The terrain difference between East & West for skier acreage is like night and day difference. I have skied at 32 areas in 12 states and provences. Farthest East was Michigan and Wisconsin. The trees are so tight most stick to the trails and when you only have 300-400 acres of skiing the slope density gets very high.

 

The angle from the lower instructors point of view would have looked like the stationary instructor was almost hit. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by huhh View Post

I think that mainly on-piste skiers that spend most of their time skiing crowded groomed runs probably have  hadplenty of close calls and might consider that he was too close to the blue jacket. Yet a mainly off-piste skier, like myself gets much closer to trees (i've hit many branches) and natural features to consider that plenty of room.  I've never skied in the east so I don't know the terrain, must be much different than the west.



 

post #130 of 259

JoeUT is just pissed he found out he was fired here on Epicski and not in person at the resort.

post #131 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by catskills View Post

H'mm recently suggested on a TGR forum post.

 

Could the snowboarders have planned this sting operation out?  Could the ski patroller be the victim of entrapment due to the well planned sting operation by the boarders? 

 

Conspiracy theory maybe?


While we are on that topic...

 

I think the Kid seen in Red in the video is most likely the off great-grand child of both the lindbergh Baby and Tsar Nicholas... That would be something huh?

 

post #132 of 259

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Post

YES!!!!   icon14.gif   biggrin.gif   power trippers suck!


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitamin Ski View Post

+1


Really?  Really?  You think the guy should lose his job over this?  You don't see any possible mitigating factors or less drastic solutions to this?  Because the guy was mean to a kid hitting jumps on the WROD?  

 

Lynch mob much?  

 

nonono2.gif

post #133 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by k2skier View Post


You are delusional...and border line insane, keep your shorts loose, I think your brains are needing oxygen.

 



Wow, this is a mature and well-constructed response to my opinions on the matter.

 

 

Thanks so much for the enlightenment.

post #134 of 259

First, like shoplifting, it is never the first, last, or only time for abuse. people ALWAYS act according to who they are. I have no doubt Tom was perfectly in character.

 

Second, there are so many good people wanting these jobs,  why retain a person who is a detriment to the area?  You could get someone really great, and this guy did everyone a favor by showing them where the resort could be improved. (It's not too far fetched to imagine a person with temper issues getting into a brawl with a customer; this little eruption was a gift, take advantage of the free insight)

 

Sure, this functions like ganging up which sucks, but it seems the nature of a forum that a viewpoint which is popular will gain visibility. I wouldn't presume to have influenced any decisions made, nor would VS I'm sure. so not really a lynch mob. airing viewpoints. that OK out there?

 

I saw a sign in town on a dilapidated and deserted property, ex motel: no skateboarding!  What a petty and mean statement. Our society is being built with no recreational spaces in the towns and cities. The kids see nothing but prohibitions for what they enjoy. Constant barrage of hostility towards them, against teenagers specifically. It's no wonder they are tired of it as it has a cumulative and wearing effect.  (skateboard and bike parks in the cities are the direction to pursue, IMO, like features on the ski hill)

 

edit: Catskills, the conspiracy theory was breached on post 91 and there is interesting information, a link, in post 67 by toecutter.


Edited by davluri - 12/31/11 at 8:21am
post #135 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Lee View Post

 


 


Really?  Really?  You think the guy should lose his job over this?  You don't see any possible mitigating factors or less drastic solutions to this?  Because the guy was mean to a kid hitting jumps on the WROD?  

 

Lynch mob much?  

 

nonono2.gif


You mean like the fact that the patrol-er apologizes to the kids? If this were a decent snow year, its all water under the bridge. Personally I think we should all forget about the whole thing...

 

post #136 of 259

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Post

First, like shoplifting, it is never the first, last, or only time for abuse. people ALWAYS act according to who they are. I have no doubt Tom was perfectly in character.

 

Second, there are so many good people wanting these jobs,  why retain a person who is a detriment to the area?  You could get someone really great, and this guy did everyone a favor by showing them where the resort could be improved. (It's not too far fetched to imagine a person with temper issues getting into a brawl with a customer; this little eruption was a gift, take advantage of the free insight)

 

I'm very impressed by your powers of deduction - you got all that from a short one-sided clip posted by the complainer.  Can you also tell how good the patroller is as a medical care provider?  Or about his snow safety and avalanche control skills?  Can you tell what he brings to the team in terms of training and experience?  And is it possible to see what he has gone through during the day/week/month?  Just curious.

 

Quote:

Sure, this functions like ganging up which sucks, but it seems the nature of a forum that a viewpoint which is popular will gain visibility. I wouldn't presume to have influenced any decisions made, nor would VS I'm sure. so not really a lynch mob. airing viewpoints. that OK out there?

 

If you want to paint spots on something and call it a leopard I can't prevent that, but this is classic internet lynch mob behavior.  You seem to concede that to a degree in your first sentence.  

 

Quote:

<...snip irrelevant sympathetic posturing...>

 

There were four douchebags in that video, but AFAICT only one lost his job and that was the one that apologized.  

 

And you didn't answer my question:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Lee:
 
You think the guy should lose his job over this?  You don't see any possible mitigating factors or less drastic solutions to this?  Because the guy was mean to a kid hitting jumps on the WROD?  

 

The questions stand.  

post #137 of 259

Conspiracy theory much?
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitamin Ski View Post

Yeah, he had room, and was completely in control.

 

That was totally a sting operation.  The two blue-coats were looking for people to bash.  If they are official resort employees (whether paid or not), that is pretty sad on some levels.

 

 

I really don't even think the guy should have been stopped at all.



 

post #138 of 259

It's interesting to see how an event like this can have such polarizing perspectives.  The first time I watched the video clip, I thought what a jerk the patroller was.  Then I watched it again and thought what an idiot the boarder was for intentionally coming so close to the instructor.

 

Did the patroller overreact to the given situation?  Absolutely.  Should he be fired for this?  Absolutely not.  In fact, the language that the "victim" used when he posted the video on easyloungin is no better.

post #139 of 259

Ski Patrol is such a tough job. You can have superlative skills in every technical area, but if you have no control of your emotions, if you are easily riled up, if you have an explosive temper, if you are not able to remain cool under stress, well, you're just not good enough for the job; so knowing his technical proficiency is not relevant to me. When I have had experience with patrol, I am most impressed with their ability to remain cool under fire. They can all ski; they can all enforce hill restrictions. they can all splint a leg. and someone on the team can organize and lead a complicated rescue.

 

In a world where there was time and money in excess, before firing this patrol, a psychological evaluation could be ordered and the decision to fire or suspend or warn or commend held off until that process was complete. similar to a police department process, as I understand it.  But the resources simply aren't there.

 

This thread is about more, now, than Tom. It's about how respect and co-operation can be achieved in both directions. First step: get to know each other.

post #140 of 259

Maybe the patroller had a history of hostile interactions with customers.  We never know the full story.

 

 

In an economy where employers are picky as hell, it's hard to feel sympathetic for someone who messes up egregiously.

post #141 of 259

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Post

Ski Patrol is such a tough job. You can have superlative skills in every technical area, but if you have no control of your emotions, if you are easily riled up, if you have an explosive temper, if you are not able to remain cool under stress, well, you're just not good enough for the job; so knowing his technical proficiency is not relevant to me. When I have had experience with patrol, I am most impressed with their ability to remain cool under fire. They can all ski; they can all enforce hill restrictions. they can all splint a leg. and someone on the team can organize and lead a complicated rescue.

 

In a world where there was time and money in excess, before firing this patrol, a psychological evaluation could be ordered and the decision to fire or suspend or warn or commend held off until that process was complete. similar to a police department process, as I understand it.  But the resources simply aren't there.

 

Or, or maybe have the patroller write up a formal apology then ream him mercilessly in private and write a letter to his file to document it.  Cost=$0, job and training saved.  

 

Quote:

This thread is about more, now, than Tom. It's about how respect and co-operation can be achieved in both directions. First step: get to know each other.

 

Well see, ^this is what has me shaking my head about people that are happy he got fired. You gave me the distinct impression that you knew him.  

 

post #142 of 259

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitamin Ski View Post

Maybe the patroller had a history of hostile interactions with customers.  We never know the full story.

 

So, admittedly you don't know the full story - he could just as well have a history of excellent service.  Yet you're happy he got fired.

 

Quote:

In an economy where employers are picky as hell, it's hard to feel sympathetic for someone who messes up egregiously.

 

Try.  Because that same economy makes it hard for people that need a job to get one.  

post #143 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedToSki View Post

It's interesting to see how an event like this can have such polarizing perspectives.  The first time I watched the video clip, I thought what a jerk the patroller was.  Then I watched it again and thought what an idiot the boarder was for intentionally coming so close to the instructor.

 

Did the patroller overreact to the given situation?  Absolutely.  Should he be fired for this?  Absolutely not.  In fact, the language that the "victim" used when he posted the video on easyloungin is no better.



The way I see it, it's the attitude not the f-woid that bothers me.  It's his way of doing business.  I think he was too strict and that the infraction was minor, if at all.

 

I agree that he, the patroller, should not be fired.  But he sucks for treating that kid the way he did.  There are plenty of spoiled kids who are rude and disrespectful but he was quite well behaved.  I admire the boarder for holding his own in the conflict.  It is an important consideration that the boarder is much younger than the three over zealous dick-heads are abusing their position of authority.  To me they seem to be looking for a fight in the video.  Something I see often in situations that involve enforcing the rules and ski patrol - especially when it comes to younger people.

 

 

post #144 of 259

That would certainly be acceptable to me, not that it's my call to judge. Had that occurred I would have given it a thumbs up also, unless it seemed to be BS spin to ignore the public's perspective.

Happy is not an emotion for anyone on any side of this. 

How can you weigh his need and right to hold the job compared to other applicants who want the job? Some people become jaded or frustrated with the job. time to move on before problems occur.
Hypothetical: another incident with Tom occurs and someone's lawyer says: how can you not have seen this coming? He has a record of losing his temper.

In addition to the measures you advocate, I'd add that the resort give the kid a 6 pack of day passes to make up for ruining part of his ski experience.

By "get to know each other" I don't mean personally, I mean know each other's position and perspective.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Lee View Post

 

 

Or, or maybe have the patroller write up a formal apology then ream him mercilessly in private and write a letter to his file to document it.  Cost=$0, job and training saved.  

 

 

Well see, ^this is what has me shaking my head about people that are happy he got fired. You gave me the distinct impression that you knew him.  

 



 


Edited by davluri - 12/31/11 at 10:15am
post #145 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by billyymc View Post

JoeUT - when people around you throw their hands up in the air and walk away, it doesn't mean touchdown.

 



No it means they quit because they didn't have an argument to begin with.

post #146 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by guroo270 View Post

JoeUT is just pissed he found out he was fired here on Epicski and not in person at the resort.



You're right you are funny!

 

 

post #147 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Lee View Post

 


 


Really?  Really?  You think the guy should lose his job over this?  You don't see any possible mitigating factors or less drastic solutions to this?  Because the guy was mean to a kid hitting jumps on the WROD?  

 

Lynch mob much?  

 

nonono2.gif

He should lose his job.  It's a business, and if an employee talked like that to a customer at any other business he would be fired.  What makes this any different? 
 

 

post #148 of 259

It would seem to me a warning would have sufficed in this situation?  Unfortunately this gives area management and ski school a black eye.  Our own Jim Forrster works for the ski school at Snow Basin and could perhaps shed more light on the management's sediment regarding such actions?

post #149 of 259

If you watch the video again after reading a few of the comments here, it does appear to be a sting operation on the part of the two blue coats.

 

The first one is blocking the regular run-up to the kicker, preventing anyone capable of boarding in a straight line for a few meters (yards)  from catching any decent air without passing  (if going straight at the ramp from above) too close to the upper blue coat.   The boarder however has enough skill and control to go around and below the guy blocking the path and turns into it from below the first blue coat, and does what in past generations would be considered sticking it to the man by hitting the kicker anyway, at a pretty lame speed with no real air, but hitting in none the less.   This upsets the blue coats, who pull him over.  The second blue coat posted below the kicker to catch the offenders, then tells the patroller that the boarder almost went right on top of the first blue coat and (paraphrasing) almost took him out.  In his defense, and a weak one at that, the angles are such that the lower blue coat really couldn't judge how far below the first blue coat the boarder turned and may have thought he was closer.  The patroler takes the blue coat at his word and assumes that the boarder almost hit the upper skier, just like the judge will take the cop at his word that you were speeding, driving wrecklessly, made a rolling stop, had a tail light smashed out,  or any other lie he wants to tell (good luck with that if it ever happens to you and you don't have video).

 

What the boarder should have done was say, "Oh, I'm sorry.  I thought five was enough room.  How much room should I leave next time?"  Now if there is a "no jumping" sign and he was jumping, then he should have been taken to task for that offense, and have it explained to him.  What the patroller should have done is taken more care not to fall into a language pattern that is inappropriate in his positionRules.gif.  

post #150 of 259

The only participant in all this to come out smelling like a rose is the kid. It activates my suspicious reptilian-mind somewhat. The outcome is such a successful and devastating attack on the ski patrol that I have to wonder:  Did the kid behave so well because the whole thing was planned, and his role was to anger the patrol and then remain absolutely blameless in the confrontation?  I don't really believe this is the case, no reason to except some of the apparent code in the lounge website, but it's fun at this point, with all the serious issues tossed back and forth, to speculate on the more bizarre possible explanations. at least to me.

 

It is interesting to think about changes in a society when so many cameras, helmet and phone, are at the ready. This could be an early instance of a new strategy. People, don't be so predictable.  It makes you vulnerable to traps as simple as a deadfall or a box on a peg.

 

I'm still far more aggravated with Instructor #2.  He started it all, and in a way, got the patrol into a dumb situation.

 

Another irony. If there were more snow across the nation, this discussion never would have taken off and the resort never would have had to respond to the pressure.

 

About all these U-tube clips. Let's say a kid films some weird event and puts it up and gets 2 million hits on it. aside from bragging rights, is there any way to profit from the clip.  Kids do seem highly motivated to post up a successful video clip.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Jones View Post



The way I see it, it's the attitude not the f-woid that bothers me.  It's his way of doing business.  I think he was too strict and that the infraction was minor, if at all.

 

I agree that he, the patroller, should not be fired.  But he sucks for treating that kid the way he did.  There are plenty of spoiled kids who are rude and disrespectful but he was quite well behaved.  I admire the boarder for holding his own in the conflict.  It is an important consideration that the boarder is much younger than the three over zealous dick-heads are abusing their position of authority.  To me they seem to be looking for a fight in the video.  Something I see often in situations that involve enforcing the rules and ski patrol - especially when it comes to younger people.

 

 



 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion