Fri Jun 22, 2012 6:10 pm
nerd wrote:Sludge, I've the utmost respect for you and your views, but this isn't a good day for the Trust.
Figures were, I believed quoted with regards to membership which seemed to be higher than 688 - apologies if it's the case only that number were eligible to vote.
it's pretty clear those at the top of the Trust are anti-change. So, consult your members.
During the time of the vote, the Trust, via twitter, linked to several articles about the rebranding.
Things like :-
http://www.sabotagetimes.com/football-s ... l-be-next/
http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/other-s ... 6bgs.email
Not a single article was tweeted to provide balance. If you want your members to vote, don't poison the well.
So, let's be blunt. The aim was to get mandate to campaign against the change. Instead that didn't happen and Tim Hartley is in full spin mode.
The majority of members within the Trust do not necessarily rail against the change. The low turnout with regards to voting can't be counted as either being a yes or a no. What it shows is pretty worrying for the Trust if it wants to be taken seriously - namely that people generally aren't interested in engaging even within the Trust.
In a lot of ways the trust has shot itself in it's foot, the Malaysians had all the ammunition they needed to shoot the crucial point of the vote down.
Personally, all ST holders should have been consulted. The Trust aren't special, no better than any other fan. Consultation is just that, consultation.
You seem a pretty level headed guy for a Labour supporter Sludge, are you going to stand for election? It wouldn't be enough to make me join it, but if it has aims to be anywhere close to relevant, it needs more people like you and Keith involved at the top level, imo.
Fri Jun 22, 2012 6:20 pm