FAO Rickler

Rule 81 of the society rules state that there should be an elected chairman and vice chair. While a democracy is a good thing you need someone who can lead, to be fair to Gareth he seems to be doing just that but in doing so he is undermining the remaining board.

The Board is being undermined, and regularly, but it's former Board members, yourself included, who are doing this. The present Board are doing an excellent job in extraordinary circumstances. It does seem that there's a concerted campaign from former Contingency Plan Committee members and ex-Trust Board members to bring down the current, democratically elected, Trust Board. Strange how the most vociferous opponents of the Trust have never been elected to any of the Boards or Committees they were on.

Andy_Symons wrote:

The Board is being undermined, and regularly, but it's former Board members, yourself included, who are doing this. The present Board are doing an excellent job in extraordinary circumstances. It does seem that there's a concerted campaign from former Contingency Plan Committee members and ex-Trust Board members to bring down the current, democratically elected, Trust Board. Strange how the most vociferous opponents of the Trust have never been elected to any of the Boards or Committees they were on.

Disagree mate but te truth will out eventually. Btw, we were never elected onto the board.

This board is doing nothing extraordinary, in fact for all intents and purposes they are doing nothing at all.

Mrrapson wrote:

Greenjock wrote:

Mrrapson wrote:

Greenjock wrote:

Mrrapson wrote:

Greenjock wrote:

Mrrapson wrote:

Jock, this epitomises everything i said before about vendettas. Thomas, sorry greatwestern is copying and pasting pm's on this site. More double standards than a double standards factory this place.

I have no idea who GW/Thomas is, but he definitley has some beef with Ian Newell, so it's upto him if he publishes pm's.

A bit like when Grovehill was banned from Pasoti for apparently sending threatening pm's to Mr President in response to similar pm's from Chris. The Pasoti mods copied and pasted the pm's from Grovehill and banned him, yet Grovehill still denies sending any. It seems like one rule for certain people and another for everyone else.

Is copying and pasting a pm any worse than several people posting bullshit tittle tattle they claim to have overheard, to cause trouble with The Trust? At least GW/Thomas is not using a generic account set up with the intention of allowing a select few posters to have a dig at people they don't like, and rather than ban the people who did it, sweep it under the carpet and ban people who comment on the hypocrisy of it all instead.

I don't mean to have a dig at you directly Leigh, but the Deep Throat/Windsor Boy/Wozzer incident exposed practices that a lot of ATD posters already knew about and have been subjected to some pretty shitty tricks for daring to speak out against.

There is definitley a clique on Pasoti who all have a similar goal at the moment, and they all seem hell bent on discrediting The Trust by whatever means it takes. The Pasoti mods are in on it because they are trying to sweep it under the carpet and silence anyone who even tries to talk about it.

I would say that also constitutes double standards, but on a much grander scale.

You are pretty vocal currently about The Trust not cracking on with the 20% share offer right now. Have you ever considered that the current Trust Board are so busy fending off attacks from the same people every week that they want to make sure that there is any point in beginning negotioations if their authority is constantly being challenged? Maybe they want to wait until things calm down so that they can get on with the job they were democratically elected to do?

Or perhaps they don't want to buy the 20% and are doing their level best to destroy it?

Specualte all you want jock, as for them defending themselves, none of the trust leaders post, well except self appointed chair Gareth.

Didn't DT and WB and IJN all speculate that there were divisions within The Trust Board and an attempted coup being planned? And would you want to post on a site where you don't know who exactly is who and what their motives are? Seriously it's so stage managed all the leading questions that get asked by one of the gang and then the rest of the pack join it instantly. I'm sure that there are lots of people like myself who are unsure of whether to join The Trust because of recent incidents, and I would suggest that this is the aim of a number of prominent Pasoti members.

You are way off base. NO ONE wants to destroy the trust, in fact its the furthest thing from anyones mind.

They just want the democratically elected board replaced with people they want on it then.

YES YES YES, you got it, well done, i'll buy you a chufty badge!

No, we ALL want the trust to succeed.

For succeed read, "Do what we want"?

I don't want most of the reforms being carried out by Mr Cameron at the moment, but the rules of the General Election meant that not enough people voted for The Labour Party, so they had to go.

In The Trust Elections the people with the most votes were elected. One of them, who was your friend, resigned leaving the others to carry on as The Trust Board.This does not seem to have been well received in certain quarters, but you would have to ask yourself why he did?

There will be other elections where yourself or somebody you would prefer to be on the board can stand, and if you/they are successful, then I would like to think that the new board are not attacked in the same way that the current one has been.

Mrrapson - To say that 'the people who did what they did have been dealt with' is a canard, Knecht is quite right. The only one to have taken the consequences, it seems to me, is Wozzer Bowden. When you read about the reasons given for bans on Pasoti (not that you can anymore without being logged in to Pasoti - there's Catch-22 in a nutshell), it is extraordinary that IJN, for example, but not only him, was not given a ban of whatever length. And that is only over the Deep Throat affair which was (probably) fully disclosed, I'm not even mentioning what I saw with my own eyes on the famous Flickr account. He should have been given a ban on principle of course, but I'm a bit surprised that those running Pasoti didn't realise that it would at least have been expedient to do so, if only to calm the clamour over double standards.

I would say that it is time to let go of the 'time to let go' argument. This isn't going away. It is an absurd argument - if something was wrong two weeks ago, it's still wrong now and needs to be explained. There are people here, who strike me as perfectly reasonable and civil, who have been very ill-used by some who are involved in Pasoti. I think they deserve an explanation and, actually, I think they deserve some justice.

Telling people that they should go to IJN if they want to ask him questions about his behaviour isn't reasonable either. Going on the activities which he has been involved in, and again, I saw it with my own eyes, I am not ashamed to say that I would be scared to go anywhere near him, physically or on the net, for fear of seeing details of my private life on a web page. If that was what he wanted to achieve (not just with regard to me but in general), then he has won, but my god what a pyrrhic victory.

Oh and by the way, 'more double standards than a double standards factory'? Mediocre at best. 'More double standards that a malfunctioning flag factory' is far from brilliant, but at least it shows a bit more effort. Coming on here to accuse ATD members of double standards is...erm...double standards to say the least.

Mrrapson wrote:

This board is doing nothing extraordinary, in fact for all intents and purposes they are doing nothing at all.

Nothing new there then.
However, I am hopeful that the comments I've heard from Gareth herald a new more proactive and INDEPENDENT way forward for the Trust. The administration process arguably left it obligated to follow events. It does not have to do that now we have an owner that 'gets it'. Let that owner do what he said he would do and provide the funds to get this club back to where it belongs... whereupon he says he will offer it for sale.
The Trust needs to be in a position to get together a buy out at that stage when this guy wants to sell. He says he wants a club at the heart of the community. Then he will be pre disposed to a Trust owned club... and let's face it, it won't cost much.
It's our club, it has no assets, only debts. If the Escape Committee of Tom Dick and Harry want to put in 20%, that's up to them.

100% or nothing.

Penz wrote:

Mrrapson wrote:

This board is doing nothing extraordinary, in fact for all intents and purposes they are doing nothing at all.

Nothing new there then.
However, I am hopeful that the comments I've heard from Gareth herald a new more proactive and INDEPENDENT way forward for the Trust. The administration process arguably left it obligated to follow events. It does not have to do that now we have an owner that 'gets it'. Let that owner do what he said he would do and provide the funds to get this club back to where it belongs... whereupon he says he will offer it for sale.
The Trust needs to be in a position to get together a buy out at that stage when this guy wants to sell. He says he wants a club at the heart of the community. Then he will be pre disposed to a Trust owned club... and let's face it, it won't cost much.
It's our club, it has no assets, only debts. If the Escape Committee of Tom Dick and Harry want to put in 20%, that's up to them.

100% or nothing.

It's good to have you back.

Whenever Brent is interviewed and asked what level of funding he will provide for the football club, he always replies with something along the lines of,' This is a big club in the lower leagues and can self fund through the turnstyles etc to strengthen the playing side'. This is true but what he omits to say is that our 'advantage' support wise, over most of our competitors, is nullified by the football club being saddled with the staff debts etc., making us no better off financially than our competitors for decent players wages wise.
If and when, in a few years the debts have been cleared and we start the long journey back, it is he who will benefit from selling a Championship club with a probable 16k fanbase and the potential for much more if an owner will invest.
As Penz says, he is expecting the supporters to pay for everything and if he wants the fanbase to turn out in large numbers , he needs to let them see that it will be a trust owned club, which can then invite investment from outside to have a go at reaching the top flight. The activities of the likes of Webb n Newell and the GT's as his passionate and fund raising generals,will not work on the majority of thinking fans.
If supporters truly believe it is their club they will turn out.

Mrrapson wrote:

knecht wrote:

Mrrapson wrote:

Jock, this epitomises everything i said before about vendettas. Thomas, sorry greatwestern is copying and pasting pm's on this site. More double standards than a double standards factory this place.

Double standards?! I won't go there.

I have been suspicious of greatwestern since s/he joined but it is him/her doing the posting of alleged private messages NOT this site.

Now, as for vendettas. I actually think some of the people on here have been over the top with their comments about Mr Newell, Mr Webb & pasoti. Sometimes it has bordered on the obsessive, in my opinion. Annoys me frequently. But that doesn't mean they are wrong. In fact, in the light of recent and ongoing events, I'd suggest they are right. (I just wish they'd put a different record on sometimes )

Oh, alright..... double standards? What is your opinion of the fact that a number of people on pasoti have broken the rules of the site significantly left right & centre and yet appear to be carrying on as before with no official consequences. Others would have been banned without any question whatsoever. Mates are OK, it seems. My mates right or wrong. Bugger everyone else. How far do they have to go? That's double standards, in my humble opinion.

I'll calm down now.

Nothing humble about your opinions Knecht.

I think the people who did what they did have been dealt with. I haven't once defended what ian did, I have defended ian for the abuse he has recieved which has overstepped a significant number of boundaries.

I told Woz he was a pillock and he paid the price. Time to let go. I know you struggle to do that, what with every paosti post making a reference.

So Woz has paid the price for what he did, the fact he couldn't have done it without the help of a mod breaking every rule on the pasoti rule book seems to have passed you by, when is Newell going to be punished for what he has done?

Mrrapson wrote:

Rule 81 of the society rules state that there should be an elected chairman and vice chair. While a democracy is a good thing you need someone who can lead, to be fair to Gareth he seems to be doing just that but in doing so he is undermining the remaining board.

Leigh,

Here are the rules of the Trust. http://www.argylefanstrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/AFT-Rules.pdf

I can't see anything similar to your reference to 'Rule 81' in there. Indeed, a search for the word 'vice' provides no responses.

If you think we didn't make sure that Supporters' Direct were content before we decided to operate without a Chair, you are wrong. The most crucial role in the Supporters' Trust is that of the Secretary. That is the only role that is specified in the rules as a 'must' and that is the only role with statutory responsibility.

We elect a Chair for each meeting we have as per the rules.

I can assure you that none of the other Board members are being undermined and nor do they feel they are being undermined. We are in regular dialogue and they are of course available to talk to in person (as some might say as REAL people) at the gazebo on Saturday and in the info points.

Feel free to pop down to check on their welfare at any point.

For future reference, I and we will answer fair questions on the activities and intentions of the Board. But I am unable to respond further to inaccurate assumptions based on no evidence, such as your suggestion that I am undermining the rest of the board.

Have a good day.

Is Gareth the current board member you have an issue with Leigh? It seems like he is the target of your angst towards the current board.

Maybe it would be better if you came right out with it and said who it is and then perhaps you could talk over your issues together, face to face instead of appearing to want to throw a spanner in the works constantly.

Why don't you all just go and talk to Gareth like REAL people instead of hiding behind user names and making cowardly accusations behind peoples backs? It's almost as though certain people have to either be in complete control or destroy things.

Rapson getting it wrong again and casting more inaccurate aspersions. No surprise there then oh this one

No doubt on some other sites, having lost the argument, made to look like a complete idiot and not argue his corner, someone would come along and save him with "done to death/ nothing to see here then" LOL

This is just a continuation of the attacks started by Deep Throat.

Can I indulge in some speculative mischief-making?

Could it be that the reason the (Democratically Elected) Trust Board is copping so much flak these days is because, with Wozzer's departure, there's now no-one on the Board with links to the Contingency Plan Committee, making the Trust Board that little bit more difficult to destabilise/disrupt/control. After all, look at the list of prominent CPers and their past associations with the Trust. It's not quite so cozy these days. That's the problem with democracy, sometimes you don't get the result you wanted.

Mrrapson wrote:

Greenjock wrote:

Mrrapson wrote:

Greenjock wrote:

Mrrapson wrote:

Jock, this epitomises everything i said before about vendettas. Thomas, sorry greatwestern is copying and pasting pm's on this site. More double standards than a double standards factory this place.

I have no idea who GW/Thomas is, but he definitley has some beef with Ian Newell, so it's upto him if he publishes pm's.

A bit like when Grovehill was banned from Pasoti for apparently sending threatening pm's to Mr President in response to similar pm's from Chris. The Pasoti mods copied and pasted the pm's from Grovehill and banned him, yet Grovehill still denies sending any. It seems like one rule for certain people and another for everyone else.

Is copying and pasting a pm any worse than several people posting bullshit tittle tattle they claim to have overheard, to cause trouble with The Trust? At least GW/Thomas is not using a generic account set up with the intention of allowing a select few posters to have a dig at people they don't like, and rather than ban the people who did it, sweep it under the carpet and ban people who comment on the hypocrisy of it all instead.

I don't mean to have a dig at you directly Leigh, but the Deep Throat/Windsor Boy/Wozzer incident exposed practices that a lot of ATD posters already knew about and have been subjected to some pretty shitty tricks for daring to speak out against.

There is definitley a clique on Pasoti who all have a similar goal at the moment, and they all seem hell bent on discrediting The Trust by whatever means it takes. The Pasoti mods are in on it because they are trying to sweep it under the carpet and silence anyone who even tries to talk about it.

I would say that also constitutes double standards, but on a much grander scale.

You are pretty vocal currently about The Trust not cracking on with the 20% share offer right now. Have you ever considered that the current Trust Board are so busy fending off attacks from the same people every week that they want to make sure that there is any point in beginning negotioations if their authority is constantly being challenged? Maybe they want to wait until things calm down so that they can get on with the job they were democratically elected to do?

Or perhaps they don't want to buy the 20% and are doing their level best to destroy it?

Specualte all you want jock, as for them defending themselves, none of the trust leaders post, well except self appointed chair Gareth.

Didn't DT and WB and IJN all speculate that there were divisions within The Trust Board and an attempted coup being planned? And would you want to post on a site where you don't know who exactly is who and what their motives are? Seriously it's so stage managed all the leading questions that get asked by one of the gang and then the rest of the pack join it instantly. I'm sure that there are lots of people like myself who are unsure of whether to join The Trust because of recent incidents, and I would suggest that this is the aim of a number of prominent Pasoti members.

You are way off base. NO ONE wants to destroy the trust, in fact its the furthest thing from anyones mind.

No they just set up a multi account to stir up trouble for it.

They may not want to destroy the trust but they certainly don't want it being as powerful as it could be.

[quote="Yea Man"][quote="Mrrapson"][quote="Greenjock"][quote="Mrrapson"][quote="Greenjock"]

Mrrapson wrote:

You are way off base. NO ONE wants to destroy the trust, in fact its the furthest thing from anyones mind.

Well if that is Mrrapson's view (However genuinely believed), based on his current form of getting the facts wrong, I think we all can work out the truth

Andy_Symons wrote:

Can I indulge in some speculative mischief-making?

Could it be that the reason the (Democratically Elected) Trust Board is copping so much flak these days is because, with Wozzer's departure, there's now no-one on the Board with links to the Contingency Plan Committee, making the Trust Board that little bit more difficult to destabilise/disrupt/control. After all, look at the list of prominent CPers and their past associations with the Trust. It's not quite so cozy these days. That's the problem with democracy, sometimes you don't get the result you wanted.

I think you are right. Sadly a lot of good people have become addicted to prawn sandwiches, and now that the supply is in danger of being cut off they are getting desperate.

You really have some prize fools supporting your Club. Newell, Rapson, Bunney, Webb, Bowden and Jameson seem to be a complete bunch of losers content to attempt to slur people and cause harm wherever they go. I know some will try to defend Bowden, (nobody defends the other pricks) but he was stupid enough to trust Newell and that proves what an idiot he was/is. I think your Trust had a lucky escape.

Thank God they are yours rather than ours. They should not be allowed to have any involvement in Argyle, however it is clear from outside that they are being used to make it easier for your Board to get what they want. They have been tasked with the job of creating division within Argyle. I really wouldn't like to be them when all their dishonesty becomes known to your wider fan base. Some of your unforgiving fans will want blood.

Those involved in the Trust now, seem to be intelligent, honest people and should be supported. Anyone involved in Deep Throat or Windsor Boy should be banned from the Argyle Trust for life IMO

Andy_Symons wrote:

Can I indulge in some speculative mischief-making?

Could it be that the reason the (Democratically Elected) Trust Board is copping so much flak these days is because, with Wozzer's departure, there's now no-one on the Board with links to the Contingency Plan Committee, making the Trust Board that little bit more difficult to destabilise/disrupt/control. After all, look at the list of prominent CPers and their past associations with the Trust. It's not quite so cozy these days. That's the problem with democracy, sometimes you don't get the result you wanted.

If that is an underhand dig that I was in their pockets you are very wide of the mark.

The Red Star wrote:

You really have some prize fools supporting your Club. Newell, Rapson, Bunney, Webb, Bowden and Jameson seem to be a complete bunch of losers content to attempt to slur people and cause harm wherever they go. I know some will try to defend Bowden, (nobody defends the other pricks) but he was stupid enough to trust Newell and that proves what an idiot he was/is. I think your Trust had a lucky escape.

Thank God they are yours rather than ours. They should not be allowed to have any involvement in Argyle, however it is clear from outside that they are being used to make it easier for your Board to get what they want. They have been tasked with the job of creating division within Argyle. I really wouldn't like to be them when all their dishonesty becomes known to your wider fan base. Some of your unforgiving fans will want blood.

Those involved in the Trust now, seem to be intelligent, honest people and should be supported. Anyone involved in Deep Throat or Windsor Boy should be banned from the Argyle Trust for life IMO

Thank you for your input, if you don't mind I won't be taking any notice of it.

Only a simpleton or a farm mod would trust bowden rapson jameson or anyother of nools pals ,if i was Gareth i would tell rapson and the deepthroat muppets to fook off.

wozzer wrote:

Andy_Symons wrote:

Can I indulge in some speculative mischief-making?

Could it be that the reason the (Democratically Elected) Trust Board is copping so much flak these days is because, with Wozzer's departure, there's now no-one on the Board with links to the Contingency Plan Committee, making the Trust Board that little bit more difficult to destabilise/disrupt/control. After all, look at the list of prominent CPers and their past associations with the Trust. It's not quite so cozy these days. That's the problem with democracy, sometimes you don't get the result you wanted.

If that is an underhand dig that I was in their pockets you are very wide of the mark.

No, it was a comment to the effect that you were the last person with any sort of connection to the CP from the Trust Board. Now you're gone there's no-one there to, for example, give passwords to multi-accounts to, no-one who will have any truck with the sort of pathetic game-playing that you, Newell, Jameson et al have proved so monumentally inept at.

wozzer wrote:

The Red Star wrote:

You really have some prize fools supporting your Club. Newell, Rapson, Bunney, Webb, Bowden and Jameson seem to be a complete bunch of losers content to attempt to slur people and cause harm wherever they go. I know some will try to defend Bowden, (nobody defends the other pricks) but he was stupid enough to trust Newell and that proves what an idiot he was/is. I think your Trust had a lucky escape.

Thank God they are yours rather than ours. They should not be allowed to have any involvement in Argyle, however it is clear from outside that they are being used to make it easier for your Board to get what they want. They have been tasked with the job of creating division within Argyle. I really wouldn't like to be them when all their dishonesty becomes known to your wider fan base. Some of your unforgiving fans will want blood.

Those involved in the Trust now, seem to be intelligent, honest people and should be supported. Anyone involved in Deep Throat or Windsor Boy should be banned from the Argyle Trust for life IMO

Thank you for your input, if you don't mind I won't be taking any notice of it.

you admitted to using the DT profile as well have they banned you from the farm yet ?

Gareth Nicholson wrote:

Mrrapson wrote:

Rule 81 of the society rules state that there should be an elected chairman and vice chair. While a democracy is a good thing you need someone who can lead, to be fair to Gareth he seems to be doing just that but in doing so he is undermining the remaining board.

Leigh,

Here are the rules of the Trust.

I can't see anything similar to your reference to 'Rule 81' in there. Indeed, a search for the word 'vice' provides no responses.

If you think we didn't make sure that Supporters' Direct were content before we decided to operate without a Chair, you are wrong. The most crucial role in the Supporters' Trust is that of the Secretary. That is the only role that is specified in the rules as a 'must' and that is the only role with statutory responsibility.

We elect a Chair for each meeting we have as per the rules.

I can assure you that none of the other Board members are being undermined and nor do they feel they are being undermined. We are in regular dialogue and they are of course available to talk to in person (as some might say as REAL people) at the gazebo on Saturday and in the info points.

Feel free to pop down to check on their welfare at any point.

For future reference, I and we will answer fair questions on the activities and intentions of the Board. But I am unable to respond further to inaccurate assumptions based on no evidence, such as your suggestion that I am undermining the rest of the board.

Have a good day.

Gareth:

OFFICERS
81. The Society Board shall elect from among their own number a Chair, treasurer and such other Officers as they may from time to time decide in accordance with the Society’s Board Membership and Conduct Policy. These Officers shall have such duties and rights as may be bestowed on them by the Society Board or by statute and any officer appointed may be removed by the Society Board.


Hope this helps you.

Andy_Symons wrote:

wozzer wrote:

Andy_Symons wrote:

Can I indulge in some speculative mischief-making?

Could it be that the reason the (Democratically Elected) Trust Board is copping so much flak these days is because, with Wozzer's departure, there's now no-one on the Board with links to the Contingency Plan Committee, making the Trust Board that little bit more difficult to destabilise/disrupt/control. After all, look at the list of prominent CPers and their past associations with the Trust. It's not quite so cozy these days. That's the problem with democracy, sometimes you don't get the result you wanted.

If that is an underhand dig that I was in their pockets you are very wide of the mark.

No, it was a comment to the effect that you were the last person with any sort of connection to the CP from the Trust Board. Now you're gone there's no-one there to, for example, give passwords to multi-accounts to, no-one who will have any truck with the sort of pathetic game-playing that you, Newell, Jameson et al have proved so monumentally inept at.

You're so kind.