Turmoil at Sunshine Village

[jamesdeluxe]

What is not at all known or confirmed are the reasons why Skiing pulled their on-line article about the situation, not what happened at Sunshine.

Admin, this is why you earn the big money. What have you heard?

 

[soulskier]

All of this is conjecture. The only thing we know for sure is that Skiing pulled the article. None of this is confirmed. I don't necessarily disagree with the guesses and suppositions, but that's a far cry from fact.

What is not confirmed?

You've totally missed the point. What is not at all known or confirmed are the reasons why Skiing pulled their on-line article about the situation, not what happened at Sunshine.

Your a smart guy, why do you think Skiing Magazine pulled the article?

 

[Admin]

What is not at all known or confirmed are the reasons why Skiing pulled their on-line article about the situation, not what happened at Sunshine.

Admin, this is why you earn the big money. What have you heard?

Nothin'.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

 

[Marc_C]

All of this is conjecture. The only thing we know for sure is that Skiing pulled the article. None of this is confirmed. I don't necessarily disagree with the guesses and suppositions, but that's a far cry from fact.

Your a smart guy, why do you think Skiing Magazine pulled the article?

You're a smart guy. Why don't you reread what I originally posted? The pertinent line is bolded above.

 

[soulskier]

All of this is conjecture. The only thing we know for sure is that Skiing pulled the article. None of this is confirmed. I don't necessarily disagree with the guesses and suppositions, but that's a far cry from fact.

Your a smart guy, why do you think Skiing Magazine pulled the article?

You're a smart guy. Why don't you reread what I originally posted? The pertinent line is bolded above.

Are you in politics?

 

[Admin]

Your a smart guy, why do you think Skiing Magazine pulled the article?

You're a smart guy. Why don't you reread what I originally posted? The pertinent line is bolded above.

Are you in politics?

He's absolutely correct. We can surmise what transpired but we have no confirmation of our suspicions.

 

[soulskier]

Out of Bounds... Out of Line?

Pique Newsmagazine

http://www.piquenewsmagazine.com/pique/ ... d+out+1806

Wonder what the editors of Skiing Magazine would think of this piece?

 

[Patrick]

Two great quotes from Pique's piece that probably represents what a lot of people that really care Sunshine Village feel right now.

Regardless whether you're a right to lifer or a personal choice protagonist, there are simply some cases that cry out for retroactive abortion.

According to their filing, the reasons given for their dismissal include "loss of trust" and "clerical errors made on waivers." CLERICAL ERRORS? Sunshine put up with, collectively, 88 years of clerical errors? Seems like the crap doesn't fall far from the arsehole.

 

[Marc_C]

Are you in politics?

Nah. I just find your attitude obnoxious.

 

[soulskier]

Skiing Magazine article has been republished with a less offensive title and some revisions.

http://www.skinet.com/skiing/articles/s ... ff-firings

 

[soulskier]

Thought provoking post from the Angry Snowboarder

http://www.angrysnowboarder.com/?p=8803

 

[Marc_C]

Skiing Magazine article has been republished with a less offensive title and some revisions.

http://www.skinet.com/skiing/articles/s ... ff-firings

And you were the one that was so certain in your smugly superior condescension that Skiing pulled it because Sunshine is an advertiser. A more reasonable conjecture is that the publisher's legal department said they might run into trouble with the original article, but of course you never even considered that possibility since the entire ski industry is evil and in collusion. Again, it seems that your attitude and ego may be your biggest obstacles in establishing an MRA style ski area.

 

[Patrick]

And you were the one that was so certain in your smugly superior condescension that Skiing pulled it because Sunshine is an advertiser. A more reasonable conjecture is that the publisher's legal department said they might run into trouble with the original article, but of course you never even considered that possibility since the entire ski industry is evil and in collusion..

They might have also had some complaints for having removed the article also. Many people noticed it had been removed and Skiing is no longer a print publication. They might have compromised with an edited version. Again, this is speculation.

What about the Explore piece? It too has dissapeared.

Again, it seems that your attitude and ego may be your biggest obstacles in establishing an MRA style ski area.

Nah. I just find your attitude obnoxious.

I'm pretty sure it's no contest. Who has the most obnoxious attitude between yourself and soul across the internet? Just saying. =;

 

[Marc_C]

But I'm paid to be obnoxious, and I'm not trying to start a ski area. :-"
Some folks are just thin-skinned, too, and just can't resist chum in the water.

 

[soulskier]

But I'm paid to be obnoxious, and I'm not trying to start a ski area. :-"
Some folks are just thin-skinned, too, and just can't resist chum in the water.

I'm putting you in for a raise.

 

[soulskier]

Skiing Magazine article has been republished with a less offensive title and some revisions.

http://www.skinet.com/skiing/articles/s ... ff-firings

And you were the one that was so certain in your smugly superior condescension that Skiing pulled it because Sunshine is an advertiser. A more reasonable conjecture is that the publisher's legal department said they might run into trouble with the original article, but of course you never even considered that possibility since the entire ski industry is evil and in collusion. Again, it seems that your attitude and ego may be your biggest obstacles in establishing an MRA style ski area.

The new article is revised to be far less offensive and removed all mention of a past court case involving the current owner. I think it's a fair assumption some muscles were flexed from one or more ski corporations.

 

[Tony Crocker]

Who has the most obnoxious attitude between yourself and soul across the internet?

Perhaps a worthy subject for a poll. :lol:

But the point is well taken that a diplomatic approach toward potential supporters would likely enhance MRA's chances for success.

 

[soulskier]

Sunshine Battles Social Media Pressure And Labor Lawsuit, OnTheSnow.com, February 12, 2011

http://www.onthesnow.com/news/a/15594/s ... or-lawsuit

 

[Geoff]

Sunshine is going to drag this out as long as they can. You've been working for an employer for 25 years, you are fired on the spot without any notice or severance pay. Weren't talking about a summer students here. There is a minimum notice and pay that the fired employee is entitled.

It depends on whether it is termination with cause or not. I don't know about Canada but in the US, saying negative things about your company outside of work usually violates your non-disclosure agreement you sign the day you start work. If the sled dog was mouthing off in the bar about the unfairness of it all before he got canned, his employer has every right to fire him with cause. Same goes for the rest of them.

 

[Marc_C]

Skiing Magazine article has been republished with a less offensive title and some revisions.

http://www.skinet.com/skiing/articles/s ... ff-firings

And you were the one that was so certain in your smugly superior condescension that Skiing pulled it because Sunshine is an advertiser. A more reasonable conjecture is that the publisher's legal department said they might run into trouble with the original article, but of course you never even considered that possibility since the entire ski industry is evil and in collusion. Again, it seems that your attitude and ego may be your biggest obstacles in establishing an MRA style ski area.

The new article is revised to be far less offensive and removed all mention of a past court case involving the current owner. I think it's a fair assumption some muscles were flexed from one or more ski corporations.

No, it's not a fair assumption - it's blatant conjecture based on your biases. As I said it's equally, and possibly more, likely that their lawyers informed them that the original article opened an avenue of liability and lawsuit. Unless you were in the meeting room or on the phone call at Skiing when the decision was made, you have no basis to assume one possibility is more likely than another. Your attitude toward the ski industry collective prevents you from seeing anything other than your preconceived notions.