Maidenhead Con Club - add?

[Quinno]

Back to the add/not to add debate, there's Maidenhead Con Club.

I was in there on Saturday - 4 ales on in very good nick. GBG-listed though the usual caveats apply of having to have said publication or CAMRA card with you. I initially wasn't sure whether there was enough public interest in adding it - unlike the Egham USC which does a regionally/nationally-renowned beer festival - but I see that it is now on BITE and is listed on WhatPub. This then makes PuG the odd one out.

Should it be listed, based on the above?

[Farway]

Personally no, following the anyone walk in guidelines etc, but I am never likely to go there anyway.

Just because someone else does is not a reason to follow IMO, perhaps our standards for listing should be a tad higher?

[aleandhearty]

The issue of clubs is another minefield, not to mention a bit of an old chestnut. I've always been against inclusion of establishments that have restrictions on entry and for that reason never suggested The Red Shed (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/68789/) (Wakefield Labour Club), although it was eventually proposed by RogerB, anyway. I think the key thing is to be consistent. Just before Egham USC was listed, I asked for the Brookhouse WMC, Hemsworth to be deleted. The management was quite baffled (and miffed) at the time, even joining the forum to voice their concern and with hindsight I wish I'd never bothered. As I recall, the argument at the time for the inclusion of Egham was that PuG is a community site and if members feel strongly enough about a venue being included, then that's OK. I never really bought that argument then and still don't. To reiterate, we need to be consistent.

[Al 10000]

I dont think it should be added to the site,

It is a club that either needs membership or you have to be a member of Camra or cart an heavy beer guide round with you to gain entry,so i will never get into the place, like some other clubs that are on the site, and the hundreds of Cafe Ruges's and La Taskas that have been added by serial photographers.

Regarding clubs,i went in a club in Hull a few years back when i was trying to do all pubs there,i was told by someone in the street that this place was a pub and i could go in,i did go in and got served,when i asked if it was a pub or a club i was told it is a club but we serve anyone at quieter times,if i had added this place someone else who likes doing different pubs may have gone there in an evening when it was busier and been asked for a membership which would have wasted their time.

What Pub which is a Camra online guide will have places like this on their site because the Camra national beer guide is not a pub guide but a guide to good beer where ever it may be served.

Pubs Galore on the other hand is a guide to pubs and not good beer.

[sheffield hatter]

What Pub which is a Camra online guide will have places like this on their site because the Camra national beer guide is not a pub guide but a guide to good beer where ever it may be served.

Pubs Galore on the other hand is a guide to pubs and not good beer.

In a nut shell.

[Aqualung]

The GBG also has off licences where you have to take the drink away with you. If it can be consumed on the premises then I'm happy. Some of the micropubs are a bit like off licences and not all brewery taps are pubs in the true sense. I'm sure some of the anti JDW brigade would argue that Spoons are not really pubs and I can see where that argument comes from.

The fact is that clubs HAVE been added so they either have to be included or all of them removed. I have added one which I really believe was worth while (I wouldn't have bothered otherwise). At New Year I was in Hertford and passed the Hertford Club. I was thinking of giving it a go but it looked like something from a Harry Enfield and Paul Whitehouse sketch so didn't bother. This leads me to my criteria for adding a club :-

1) It must be available to CAMRA members or GBG owners.
2) It must sell Real Ale
3) The person adding it must really like it, submit a review and think it's worthwile adding, not just an excuse to see one of their photographs added to the site.

On that basis the Con Club is all down to Quinno, but I would add that Maidenhead is a haunt of ARSENALFAN36 and it may be worth adding just to provide a handy escape route from his presence.

As far as I am concerned the Pub site argument can't be applied as there are loads of dodgy venues listed that are not really pubs. Ask Al 11000 about his visit to Bromley.

I'm visiting Kinver in a few months and will definitely be going to the Constitutional Club as it's been strongly recommended to me. If it turns out I like it I will submit it for addition. To be honest, if I don't like it for any reason I will be really gutted!

[sheffield hatter]

This leads me to my criteria for adding a club :-

1) It must be available to CAMRA members or GBG owners.
2) It must sell Real Ale
3) The person adding it must really like it, submit a review and think it's worthwile adding, not just an excuse to see one of their photographs added to the site.

I'm visiting Kinver in a few months and will definitely be going to the Constitutional Club as it's been strongly recommended to me. If it turns out I like it I will submit it for addition. To be honest, if I don't like it for any reason I will be really gutted!

I would disagree with your criteria. To be a public house, it must be open to everyone, not just those who are members of an organisation or carrying a particular book with them. There are loads of pubs on this site that don't sell real ale - would you delete all of them? And since when was liking a pub a criterion for inclusion on the site? Perhaps we should rename it Really Really Good Pubs (Galore).

So if you go to the Kinver Constitutional Club but you don't like it, you won't add it to the site? How then will users of the site know that it's a pub but not very good (in your opinion)?

[Aqualung]

I would disagree with your criteria. To be a public house, it must be open to everyone, not just those who are members of an organisation or carrying a particular book with them. There are loads of pubs on this site that don't sell real ale - would you delete all of them? And since when was liking a pub a criterion for inclusion on the site? Perhaps we should rename it Really Really Good Pubs (Galore).

So if you go to the Kinver Constitutional Club but you don't like it, you won't add it to the site? How then will users of the site know that it's a pub but not very good (in your opinion)?

My criteria ONLY apply to clubs not pubs! I wouldn't like to see a free for all for adding clubs to the site, only ones that are really worth adding, otherwise I feel there should be no clubs at all and ALL of the existing ones should be deleted.
I would add that I think that Clubs should have a built-in header so that people who don't realise from the name that it is a club rather than a pub are aware of the fact. I'm not being facetious here, Farr's School For Dancing is an Antic pub not a ballet school.

[sheffield hatter]

My criteria ONLY apply to clubs not pubs! I wouldn't like to see a free for all for adding clubs to the site, only ones that are really worth adding, otherwise I feel there should be no clubs at all and ALL of the existing ones should be deleted.

I realised that. My point was that I don't see how you can have different criteria for adding a club to the site, especially if one criterion is whether someone likes it or not. In my view, the club has to be (near as dammit) a public house to appear on a site with Pub in the name. Once it's crossed that hurdle, it should be treated the same as any other entry.

[Quinno]

I think I'll take this a no then :D

[Aqualung]

I think I'll take this a no then :D

It's a yes from me providing you're happy with it. I have reserrvations about it being a Conservative club but that's another story and not really relevant.
If no new clubs are to be allowed at all then in my opinion every existing one should be deleted and I have to ask why were any allowed on in the first place.

[Aqualung]

I realised that. My point was that I don't see how you can have different criteria for adding a club to the site, especially if one criterion is whether someone likes it or not. In my view, the club has to be (near as dammit) a public house to appear on a site with Pub in the name. Once it's crossed that hurdle, it should be treated the same as any other entry.

A club can never be a public house by definition. What made you come to the conclusion that this (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/80918/) was effectively a public house when you added it to the site? Your description makes it sound like a club to me despite the fact that you called it a pub on more than one occasion. As far as I can see it meets my criteria above as I can't believe you would have added it unless you actually liked it.

[Mobyduck]

A club can never be a public house by definition. What made you come to the conclusion that this (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/80918/) was effectively a public house when you added it to the site? Your description makes it sound like a club to me despite the fact that you called it a pub on more than one occasion. As far as I can see it meets my criteria above as I can't believe you would have added it unless you actually liked it.

I agree with the example given, shouldn't be on the site,in my opinion, unless open to all and sundry which in this case it appears not to be. However I agree with S.H's earlier comment whether you personally like it or not shouldn't be a criteria as to whether an establishment is included or excluded, one mans poison is anothers nectar so to speak.

[sheffield hatter]

A club can never be a public house by definition. What made you come to the conclusion that this (http://www.pubsgalore.co.uk/pubs/80918/) was effectively a public house when you added it to the site? Your description makes it sound like a club to me despite the fact that you called it a pub on more than one occasion. As far as I can see it meets my criteria above as I can't believe you would have added it unless you actually liked it.

I added it because I had a drink in it and no one asked me to provide evidence that I was a member. Liking it had nothing to do with adding it.

[Aqualung]

I added it because I had a drink in it and no one asked me to provide evidence that I was a member. Liking it had nothing to do with adding it.

What you are actually suggesting is that only clubs that are prepared to breach the terms of their licence are allowed on the site. A club legally is for members and guests. Your review didn't mention the fact that you weren't asked for ID but does clearly say that CAMRA members or GBG carriers can be signed in.
The Orient Supporters Club has been added (and I agree with that) but there is no way it is a Public House. As Al 11000 points out above, there are lots of places that have been added to the site that are questionable as pubs. Once some clubs have been added I don't see how you can justify that no others with similar credentials can not be. As for my criteria of "liking" the club I am quite prepared to change that to "I believe it would be of interest to users of the site". As Al 11000 points out above there are lots of places that have been added that are not really pubs (night clubs, wine bars, residential hotel bars, restaurants etc etc) and if there is going to be a witch hunt I would rather see it directed at these rather than the odd club that might get added because it is a great real ale venue that is accessible to CAMRA members.