Keeping the culture war alive at Crystal

that blog post was......not awesome. sorry kim. but wtf do you think revived the ski industry? snowboarding thank you very much.

now carry on furthering the crystal skier elitist reputation.

i'll be busy lapping hard boot wearing skiers on the skin track.

-mc

Kim's blog seems to be written for the masses without any real insight.  I suspect that is intentional and may not reflect her true understanding.

"the ones flailing around at the ski resort are not really snowboarders...just people with snowboards on their feet..."

I have to agree with this.
My perspective may be different than some:

I have been on hard boots since the mid 80's
My BC board is a Voile Mtn Gun 171
My resort board is an Avalanche Tom Burt 172 (I have a near identical backup Tom Burt by Winterstick)
Current boot is a TLT4, also have a backup pair from when mine broke
Burton Race Plate bindings
Both boards are long radius
I can't imagine technical skinning without full edges
I ride almost exclusively with skiers (I actually like them)

I was once on top of a ledge and came upon a couple of skiers deciding what to do.  I pointed out one exit chute only to find on my next run that they side slipped it even though it was not quite wide enough.  Stupid skiers (insert boarders here if you like) should learn how to ski before ruining all the good lines.

I really enjoy the rivalry between tool types, but it can be annoying when people take it too seriously.  You may not want to listen to me though, I even like people who own snowmobiles.

I have photoshopped the photo below to hide the fact that I side slipped the slot right in front of my ski buddies.

Kim's got it right. Snowboards are inefficient general tools, at least compared to skis.

They work great in a limited set of terrain/conditions - often better and more fun than skis! And yeah, you get really good at observing the slight terrain undulations and maintaining your speed (and that can be a fun challenge). And with a splitboard you get to develop really great skinning skills (and floppy skiing skills for those exits that aren't all downhill (most of them)).

But with skis you don't need to bother with that. They just work!

Flame on.

Crystal Mountain: Where skiers go to traverse under all the good runs.

I guess I agree about a board being inefficient at times. Exits that aren't completely downhill can be a pain and I am not fond of long traverses but overall I find that to be a small price to pay.  With the advent of wider skis, I am less (still a little) affected by skiing partners that don't set a track wide enough for my split.  I have also been on an exposed ice traverse where my partner walked his edges while I had to let go and hope my single edge would hold the line.
   I still feel that difficulties imposed by my choice of device are balanced by many advantages and the difficulties are also usually insignificant compared to environmental issues that are experienced by boarder and skier alike.
   
"They work great in a limited set of terrain/conditions"

I would characterize this as a gross exaggeration.  I think a more fair statement would be:

"They have minor disadvantages in some terrain."

I find I usually have a comfort level at least equal and usually greater than that of my skier partners in difficult snow conditions.  The most obvious are: breakable crust, heavy snow, tight trees, and alder busting.
   I wonder why you always hear about board limitations but there are at least as many situations where skis are less than ideal.  (If you were hoping for flame, how about: "Skis are a stupid choice for touring in a maritime snowpack.")

Crystal just sucks. The people their have some of the worst, elitist and ill-founded attitudes I've encountered.

The debate about snowboarding vs skiing? Is this friggin 1992? Who cares? What's wrong with having fun? Efficiency on flat runouts only matters inbounds at poorly designed resorts. There are plenty of skiers and snowboarders that can smoke old Kim, so what's she all fired up about snowboarders for?