or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › EpicSki Community › Community Discussions & Forum News › Location for 2004 Gathering
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Location for 2004 Gathering - Page 6

post #151 of 199
Might I be so bold as to suggest one of the organizers start a POLL at this time to take votes, if we are to have a final answer by the end of the month? This way we can view the results as they are voted on.

Thanks for considering this.
post #152 of 199
Bonni,

We have thought about a poll but it is problematic because anyone can vote even non attendees. This would ruin any results.

Ed
post #153 of 199
PowDigger,

How can you tell who is going to attend and who is not at this point in the game? If you don't poll everyone interested enough to vote, even if some ultimately do not attend, you won't know which way interest is trending. Given that you're down to two choices, you have a 50% margin of error. Why not hedge the bet a bit with a poll?
post #154 of 199
152 posts. I think Alta skier owes me a damn apology.
post #155 of 199
Hey Kick,

You have a good point on this thread. It should be renamed "How to Loose Friends and Alienate People"!

post #156 of 199
As I contended way back, democracy can be a pretty lousy and inefficient system for many things. I think Nolo and the Academy got it right by avoiding the charade of "hearing everyone out" and instead simply telling people "this is where it's going to happen."

I trust Gonzo, AltaSkier, and PowDigger enough to make a sensible executive decision. And God knows, it's preferable to the litany of me-inspired posts and PMs that have been flooding in: I can't make it; it's not convenient for me because I'll be at the Academy; or my vacation budget doesn't allow a four-hour drive to JH (all of which contributed to Gonzo's somewhat understandable outburst a few days ago).
post #157 of 199
JD,
While I appreciate your arguement, there is one thing I would have to say:
If I can't make it, you all lose out.



S

P.S. Ego trip over, induced by a lunchtime beer or two of Samuel Smith's Oak Cask Bitter.
post #158 of 199
Well, it's funny, isn't it?

You put out the call asking people where they want to ski for the Gathering.

Then we are admonished for actually thinking of what WE INDIVIDUALLY would want to do!

Pardon me, but I don't know what YOU want. I only know what I want, and what I'm willing to do. If that's self centered, then I suppose I am. I'm not gearing my voice toward what SOMEONE ELSE WANTS, since I don't know what that is.

As for a poll, well, nolo is right. How do I know I'll go to the Gathering until I know WHERE IT IS???? I know I am not going to take a day and drive to Jackson Hole. My luggage alone would take up half a van (ask Oboe how lightly I travel).

Do the poll, get an idea of the numbers, and then decide. We have enough information on places here to make an educated vote. Anything less is not fair to all others who don't want to SLOG through this endless thread to get to the facts.

Edited for typos

[ June 27, 2003, 06:18 AM: Message edited by: Bonni ]
post #159 of 199
she's absolutely right, actually. don't ask people what they want unless you're ready to deal with the answers.
further, the post that began this thread very clearly indicates that SLC was ("tentatively") the deal, and a couple reasons were given, including consideration for academy members. nowhere in that post was a problem with that expressed. we were then asked to discuss which areas to hit, etc.
as i tossed in jackson hole, and added links that supported that, i am guilty, as well, for adding to the digression.
i did NOT answer the question* as it was put forth.

* "so, for now, we are aiming at the SLC area. we would appreciate suggestions on which ski areas to hit."

[ June 27, 2003, 08:29 AM: Message edited by: ryan ]
post #160 of 199
Snowbasin gets my vote!
post #161 of 199
Thread Starter 
1) we don't need a poll, we can read posts. what, you think us illiterate?

2) I don't much care about nolo's hypothesized margin of error. statistics are BS. sorry, nolo, but that's my feeling. you are free to use polls in your own stuff, doesn't matter to me. here, we're not.

3) what would a poll do? I don't see the need.

4) Bonni, if you would read the posts the way they're written, and not the way you want them to read, you'll understand things better. My origin post asked for individual preferences based on the itemized points I set forth. All else is superfluous. (That includes the penny-ante comments and whining.)

5) this will be much simpler for EVERYONE if each person just casts his/her vote and quits imagining and then complaining about pseudo-issues.

Cast your vote, not your complaints. [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]
post #162 of 199
Thread Starter 
Quote:
she's absolutely right, actually. don't ask people what they want unless you're ready to deal with the answers.
further, the post that began this thread very clearly indicates that SLC was ("tentatively") the deal, and a couple reasons were given, including consideration for academy members. nowhere in that post was a problem with that expressed. we were then asked to discuss which areas to hit, etc.
ryan,

1) all 3 of us have been ready to "deal with the answers" since we agreed to be the Gathering Committee. I don't know what you're speaking to here.

2) you are correct that the tentative plan was SLC, based on rumor, innuendo, inference, implication and sideways commentary from various attendees at last year's gathering. the push also came from the Epic Ski Academy (ESA). however, PowDigger, AltaSkier and I decided that the Academy should not be the tail that wags the Gathering dog. the eventual plan is to have them totally distinct. each function (ESA or Gathering) has reasons for choosing certain places. ESA has more restrictions, Gathering has VERY few. what it boiled down to is this: even though SLC is more convenient, does anyone want to go elsewhere. hence, this thread began. are you complaining about that?

3) what "hidden problems" do you think we've hidden?

these penny-ante vaguely described and hardly connected potshots are VERY childish.

Please grow up.
post #163 of 199
anyway, onto vacation. look forward to finding out where i'll be skiing come...uh, when is the Gathering again?

anyway, my thanks to Pow, Gonzalot, and LCC's favorite pocket rocket lover; all of this has shown why i have chosen to chirp from the bleachers, rather than get as actively involved as y'all. i mean that. a thankless task with little in the way of reward. (unless you fix it so that you can ski with Fox, a sight NObody should miss witnessing.)

thanks, guys. this WILL all be worth it when we make turns at JACKSON HOLE!!!!!!! BuhWAHahahahahaha....

p.s. Gonz, one more "grow up, please" and i'm gonna hurl. PLEASE desist with that.

also, having posted THEN read your latest, all three of your "points" are too easily countered. and #3, i don't get at all. "hidden problems"? WHAT?
do NOT respond via this thread if you MUST respond. this thing's a mess enough. PM's work well, as per your suggestion.

see y'all wherever. be back when the snow flies.

:

[ June 27, 2003, 11:03 AM: Message edited by: ryan ]
post #164 of 199
While part of the draw is to ski with people on this forum, for me the biggest enticement is the opporunity to ski at some of the best resorts with people that know their way around. My vote is for Jackson Hole because I really want to ski there with someone familiar with the area.
post #165 of 199


These are the new leads. These are the Glengarry leads. And to you they're gold, and you don't get them. Why? Because to give them to you is just throwing them away. They're for closers.
post #166 of 199
Something has been said here that doesn't quite add up.

If the Gathering is purposely trying to distance itself from ESA, why is it 'tagging' the week of the academy? Thinking that academy attendees want to ski one area all week, and then spend a night traveling to another ski area for the weekend is just a little more than what I have ever considered a vacation. I might be the major wuss on all this, but I feel like those attending the academy shouldn't be put in a situation of feeling like they are 'betraying' the rest of the group if they don't want to jump through a bunch of whoops.

$0.02 worth
post #167 of 199
so, feal, would you like to make your suggestion for where you would like the Gathering to be?

PLEASE!

S
post #168 of 199
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by feal:
Something has been said here that doesn't quite add up.

If the Gathering is purposely trying to distance itself from ESA, why is it 'tagging' the week of the academy? Thinking that academy attendees want to ski one area all week, and then spend a night traveling to another ski area for the weekend is just a little more than what I have ever considered a vacation. I might be the major wuss on all this, but I feel like those attending the academy shouldn't be put in a situation of feeling like they are 'betraying' the rest of the group if they don't want to jump through a bunch of whoops.

$0.02 worth
feal, your query is illogical. all the rationale exists in this thread and the prior Gathering thread that AltaSkier started.

to summarize - we recognize that some people -- almost exclusively, this group is the ESA attendees -- may prefer to have the two piggybacked. The Committee is not fond of that precedent. If someone wants to go the Gathering AND has no interest in attending the ESA, why should the ESA control the location and time of the Gathering?

In other words, no matter how it might SEEM to you and others, the Gathering IS NOT part of the Academy. Purely, simply true.

now, please digest this bit of news, and give us a vote. more complaints will result in closure of the discussion.

ryan, just for you - PLEASE GROW UP, EVERYONE!
post #169 of 199
Quote:
Originally posted by jamesdeluxe:


These are the new leads. These are the Glengarry leads. And to you they're gold, and you don't get them. Why? Because to give them to you is just throwing them away. They're for closers.
.
.
.



I thought coffee was for closers.
post #170 of 199
I am only asking that you use a poll format to accept VOTES.

What a hinderance to progress you are, Gonzo.

(edited to take out slam to another member. I was being childish yet again. This is like a sweeps week train wreck story. )

[ June 27, 2003, 12:27 PM: Message edited by: Bonni ]
post #171 of 199
Ladies and Gentlemen, Guys and Girls, please show some guts and cast your votes. [img]graemlins/evilgrin.gif[/img]
My vote goes to:
Alta on Friday
Snowbasin on Saturday
Solitude on Sunday

[ June 27, 2003, 12:17 PM: Message edited by: BobasEB ]
post #172 of 199
Bonni,
The problem is there are too many variations to make a worhtwhile poll (I should know after the grief I got last year for the Epic Awards polls!)
You need to allow people to nominate areas, then you need to select say 4 or 5 of the most popular then you put out a poll. The drawback of that is you will end up with a lot of people voting who have no intention of going, but just want you to know where they would like to have it.
I suggest we let the guys decide, based on the information so far, and their own valued opinions, after all, they are the committee. I'm not going to avoid skiing with someone because they suggested somewhere else, in the same way that I'm not going to avoid the French people I will meet over the next two weeks in Provence.

Alta, Gonzo, Pow, I think maybe this thread should be closed. I will leave the decision in your capable hands.

S

[ June 27, 2003, 12:18 PM: Message edited by: Wear the fox hat ]
post #173 of 199
Fox,
What about the people who SAY they'll go each year, and then don't show? Shall we cast out those votes automatically?

It matters not who will show. It's not like we have to PAY to go. I may vote, but if it's not LOGICAL or PRACTICAL for ME to go, I won't be there, so are you saying that I should not be allowed to vote?

Committee: At least, start another THREAD that people will know WHERE to vote!!! No one will plow through this to get to the nitty gritty.
post #174 of 199
No Bonni,
I'm saying NO VOTES.
Let the committee decide.

S
post #175 of 199
Quote:
posted by Gonzo:
now, please digest this bit of news, and give us a vote
Just tryin to figure it all out, Fox. They asked us to vote.

Snowbasin.

[ June 27, 2003, 12:53 PM: Message edited by: Bonni ]
post #176 of 199
Quote:
Originally posted by gonzostrike:
now, please digest this bit of news, and give us a vote. [/QB]
Guys

Whether you like gonzo's tone or not is irrelevant, he and the rest of the Committee have offered you the chance to vote. Either vote or don't, it's your choice. For Christ's sake, they haven't even ask for a committment, just a vote!

Gonzo, Alta, PD:

My suggestion is that if you can't get this group to vote either a) solicit votes only from those who attended the '03 Gathering, or b) you 3 select the site based on the input you've received. All this other BS is counter-productive. Thanks again for the efforts.
post #177 of 199
1. Snowbasin/Powder Mountain

2. Jackson Hole

3. Anywhere between the two that has the best snow when we're there.
post #178 of 199
Gimme the Moose!

Jackson Hole

post #179 of 199
<font size=+15 color=red>JACKSON HOLE!!!!!</font>
post #180 of 199
Alright,

I will put a poll up. But it is unofficial!!!! The results will be reflective of anything. Like who voted or why. Non attendees could vote just to mess with the results.

Ed
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › EpicSki Community › Community Discussions & Forum News › Location for 2004 Gathering