Editor's lack of 7S stories
4 posts
4 users
2k+ views
June 24, 2006
Member since 08/26/2005 🔗
113 posts
Seems like we always get a generous editoral insights about Snowshoe (seems like there must be some sort of co-interests between the ed. staff of DCSki and SS) , and other resorts. The biggest news all year and not a peep from the editoral "Headlines".

I appreciate your Wisp coverage, but other than the message board, DCSki seems to continue to under-editoralize/ ignore 7S even in light of big news!

Maybe DCSki should change it's name to "Focus on Intrawest and other lesser ski sites in the mid-atlantic"
June 24, 2006
Member since 01/6/2000 🔗
3,551 posts
Remember that this site is maintained off-hours while Scott is working a full-time job. From my very limited contact with him, he generally works on system upgrades during the "off-season" since most ski area news doesn't happen during the warmer months. Instead of complaining, why not become part of the solution and do some reporting on Seven Springs yourself? I'm sure your constructive input would be appreciated by DCSki viewers.
Scott - DCSki Editor
June 24, 2006
Member since 10/10/1999 🔗
1,249 posts
John is right. On top of that, I just got back after being out of town for over a week.

DCSki does not favor one resort over another. I have had difficulty providing coverage of Seven Springs because the resort has never added DCSki to its media distribution list, despite repeated requests and attempts on my part. Other resorts regularly provide news releases and photos to DCSki, and respond promptly to my questions. At the end of the day, there is only so much time to go around.
snowsmith - DCSki Supporter 
June 25, 2006
Member since 03/15/2004 🔗
1,576 posts
We DO appreciate your efforts. Perhaps the new owners will be more receptive. I e-mailed Robert Nutting to ask him a question, and he responded. I was actually surprised. Give him a try.

Ski and Tell

Speak truth to powder.

Join the conversation by logging in.

Don't have an account? Create one here.

0.15 seconds