sugarloafers pass pulled for no legit reason

[Trekchick]

Amen.

Just because you can say something doesn't mean you should.

:beer:

 

[Geoff]

Sorry Geoff, but I really disagree with this. Boyne/SL itself was well out of line in pronouncing at the first opportunity that the girl "lost control of her skis" and that "conditions had nothing to do with it". What Exiled said may have been insensitively communicated, but I'd be just as cynical and disappointed reading that sort of CYA language so early in the process.

These were news stories written by journalists using sound bites from Q&A on a conference call. Sugarloaf didn't issue a CYA press release. I'd be willing to bet that the guy who did the conference call was also the poor slob who had to call the family in Connecticut. It's not like ski resorts have dozens of staff kicking around who could be called on to do those sorts of things and the senior guy would have stepped up to the task rather than have some poor subordinate do it.

I'm sure part of the Q&A was "What were the conditions like on that trail?" When you ask a marketing guy about conditions, you get resort snow report-speak. It's not CYA, it's how they report conditions. How could they possibly have answered that question in a way that didn't sound like a CYA in a one sentence snip of a news story?

 

[tcharron]

Sorry Geoff, but I really disagree with this. Boyne/SL itself was well out of line in pronouncing at the first opportunity that the girl "lost control of her skis" and that "conditions had nothing to do with it". What Exiled said may have been insensitively communicated, but I'd be just as cynical and disappointed reading that sort of CYA language so early in the process.

How exactly do you go from a single line in a couple of paragraph blurb in a paper to them going out of their way to ensure it was clear that conditions where not a factor? I mean holy crap, ONE little sentence was quoted? Do you SERIOUSLY THINK that the reporter called them up, and they said..

"Let me interupt you, Mister. She lost control of her skis. It was not conditions." *CliCk*

Let me ask you a question then. Do YOU think it was due to the conditions and misrepresentation by the team at the mountain? If you do, sincerely believe, that it's their fault, then you've got a gripe. If your just concerned with a single line that was quoted, and your simple pissed off because you didn't like the language, you MUST be one of the most HARDCORE english geeks I've met in my life.

 

[legalskier]

what you are writing here is incredibly uninformed

N.Y. Times v. Sullivan and its progeny would protect the "blogger's" opinion against a defamation action. ("Poster" sounds like something that gets taped to a wall, but thanks anyway for the cites b.b.) This line of cases casts severe doubt on the potential of suing him for defamation. Perhaps SL became aware of this constitutional authority, as they haven't sued him but rather apologized. Moreover, shouting fire in a crowded theater is the right thing to do if there is a fire. On the other hand, if you're referring to falsely shouting fire, the reason it would not be constitutionally protected is because it is "directed to and likely to incite imminent lawless action," such as a riot. This is the standard set out by the Supreme Court in Brandenburg v. Ohio. Surely no one can argue seriously that Exiled was attempting to incite a riot by voicing his rather mild opinion on an internet forum. Incidentally, the task of "notifying the family" appears to have fallen to the doctors at C.M.M.C-Lewiston, as the racer had been flown off the mountain.* SL, as well as every area, ought to have procedures in place for dealing with the inquiries that inevitably follow; catastrophic injuries and deaths unfortunately are a part of the business. But regardless of whom these difficult tasks fall to, it doesn't change the law of free speech. You have your opinion, I have mine; but we can both express them without fear of retaliation.



* http://morningsentinel.mainetoday.com/news/local/5845104.html

 

[Geoff]

If your just concerned with a single line that was quoted, and your simple pissed off because you didn't like the language, you MUST be one of the most HARDCORE english geeks I've met in my life.

I usually agree with the Tin Woodsman about just about everything. We can disagree on this one.

This really was self-induced. If Sugarloaf hadn't closed down their message board several years ago, they wouldn't have lost control over it. This never would have happened in the first place. The Sugarloaf employee who was message board moderator would have deleted the post as inappropriate and life would have gone on.

 

[SLyardsale]

I usually agree with the Tin Woodsman about just about everything. We can disagree on this one.

This really was self-induced. If Sugarloaf hadn't closed down their message board several years ago, they wouldn't have lost control over it. This never would have happened in the first place. The Sugarloaf employee who was message board moderator would have deleted the post as inappropriate and life would have gone on.

Thats quite a stretch - calling the shutting down of the board the proximate cause of this whole thing. So, in your opinion, if anything naughty is posted about SL on another site not controlled by SL, something SL does not like, that is grounds for pass pulling? And you'd be OK with that???????

a) Ethan Austin is a stand-up guy. I would agree that the reporter asked the conditions question and he answered. But even he has said if he had it to do over again, he would pick his words more carefully.

Hey guys

After following this thread I feel a bit of explanation is needed on my part in regards to the initial quote in the paper.

The day of the accident last month was truly a terrible one for me and for the entire Sugarloaf family, and it’s more than a little disheartening to have people suggest that I felt anything less than the utmost grief and sympathy for the victim and her family.

In speaking to reporters on the day of the accident, I was asked by a writer what the conditions were like on the trail where it occurred, and if they may have played any part in the accident. I described the conditions to her and informed her that according to ski patrol it appeared that the accident was not related to the conditions, and that it seemed she simply lost control of her skis.

There was never a press release sent out about the incident, there was no prefabricated statement, and nobody told me to communicate anything about the conditions to the press. I answered the questions that were asked, with the facts that I had. The quote was 14 words out of a 15 minute conversation, and if I could go back I probably would have chosen them a bit more carefully.

We view tragic incidents such as this as very private matters, which is why I refrained from posting this until now. I sincerely wish that I didn’t have to bring this up again, but after recent posts, I felt the need to clarify my statement.

Ethan

b) SK made amends, he apologized for a terrible choice of words IMO and EVERYONE commends him for coming to the table with the apology

c) Jim Costello overreacted by pulling a pass, admittedly, over this one post plus the "tone" of prior posts by VZ.

I just think you're focused on the a-hole factor of the offending post and not the big picture when it comes to chatting about a ski area.

 

[kid3]

These were news stories written by journalists using sound bites from Q&A on a conference call. Sugarloaf didn't issue a CYA press release. I'd be willing to bet that the guy who did the conference call was also the poor slob who had to call the family in Connecticut. It's not like ski resorts have dozens of staff kicking around who could be called on to do those sorts of things and the senior guy would have stepped up to the task rather than have some poor subordinate do it.

I'm sure part of the Q&A was "What were the conditions like on that trail?" When you ask a marketing guy about conditions, you get resort snow report-speak. It's not CYA, it's how they report conditions. How could they possibly have answered that question in a way that didn't sound like a CYA in a one sentence snip of a news story?

"Poor Slob"!

You should just stop now before someone takes that out of context!

 

[Geoff]

a) Ethan Austin is a stand-up guy. I would agree that the reporter asked the conditions question and he answered. But even he has said if he had it to do over again, he would pick his words more carefully.

In a stressful and emotional situation, you're going to use your cliche stock terms of phrase. For a public-facing ski resort employee, they're going to use "snow report-ese" to describe conditions when asked.

I just think you're focused on the a-hole factor of the offending post and not the big picture when it comes to chatting about a ski area.

I see the big picture just fine. I think that under normal circumstances, you can write whatever you want about a ski area and you're free to criticize the public-facing employees. These weren't normal circumstances. There are lines you don't cross.

I also can't blame any business for telling a customer who is constantly negative about their business on public forums to take their business elsewhere. That has nothing to do with the internet or message boards.

 

[Vortex]

I have not posted much here on this., cause it would be nice if is just went away. Seems like it has been settled to the satisfacation of both sides.

We should be out making turns. Geoff and I usually can't agree on what time it is. I with him on most of this, seems everyone has has their say on it. Lets move to another topic.

 

[catskills]

I don't usually comment on threads about skier deaths. Here goes.

First I want to say my condolences to the Family. To loose someone so young (16 years old) is truly tragic. I think of my three grown up children and I can not even imagine what the family is going through. The death of someone so young magnifies how much it affects everyone involved. I am willing to bet SugarLoaf manager Austin, who was quoted in the paper, actually saw this young girl while they were working on her. I am sure they had a meeting with all the employees involved to try to help them deal with this tragedy. I would ask everyone to give Sugarloaf staff a break on any comments quoted on this tragic event. Looking back Austin and other ski areas managers may have learned how much should or should not be said to the public. Give them a break. They are all trying to deal with this tragedy.

As a Volunteer ski patroller and volunteer EMT-B I have seen a lot of people die over the years. Its part of the job. I can always remember my first patient death. It was a cardiac arrest on a ski trail many years ago. I did not save him. I played it over in my head a 1000s of times. Could I have done something differently. Although I did not do anything wrong, you second guess yourself anyway. Its what humans do. I did not sleep for 48 hours. I am sure the staff at Sugarloaf were all impacted by this tragic death. I am sure even the folks in all the forums were impacted. It will take time to heal. Part of the healing process is talking about it. Overall this is a good thread. It helps in the healing process.

I hope this posts helps.

 

[bosrocker51]

Rebecca McGill's death was a tragedy. She was only 16 and a single child. I have the most sincere condolences for her parents, friends and ski team peers.
While the offending comment was crass and in poor taste, the action of Sugarloaf management is totally out of bounds, IMO.

I was thinking of going to Sugarloaf this year, but I am rethinking going to ANY Boyne-owned ski area.
The thing that really pisses me off is that they not only refunded his pass, they banned him from Sugarloaf. That really offends me. Making a snide comment is grounds for banishment? Rediculous...

Any ski area that is so petty they ban a paying customer for airing his comments is not worthy of having my business. Further, the comment was on a web site, not in person to a Sugarloaf employee!! I could understand if somebody was a total a-hole to staff, and getting banned because of that, but online comments? Weird and creepy...

So... Sugarloaf management, eff you and your stupid policies.

 

[bosrocker51]

I'm sure this wasn't the first time the guy slammed Boyne on the internet. There's no law that compels an enterprise to do business with you. They gave the guy his money back. He wasn't damaged. He can take his business elsewhere. Assuming he's a white male, he has no grounds to sue.

While I agree your point is valid, this smacks of corporate denial of free speech. If they can't take the snide comment, they are too thin skinned.

Banishment is a serious step - to ban somebody for a comment is offensive to me.

They have lost me as a customer.

 

[wa-loaf]

While I agree your point is valid, this smacks of corporate denial of free speech. If they can't take the snide comment, they are too thin skinned.

Banishment is a serious step - to ban somebody for a comment is offensive to me.

They have lost me as a customer.

You are digging up old stuff. A marketing guy lost his cool. The passholder got his pass back and everyone made-up in the end. No one was banished.

FYI Loon is run by Boyne too.