Fan Meet on the 14th

So there we go. Ian has direct access to James. Bit of a bloody pointless meeting then as all the important things are being discussed behind closed doors

ZeeZan6 wrote:

.....
All previous meetings have run smoothly, and been no problem at all, I don't understand the negtivity on this thread towards an open meeting that is yet to happen.

Bit in bold - I obviously can not talk on behalf of anyone. Ian seems to have direct access to talk to James Brent should he wish to ask him any questions, therefor, I would assume that Chris would chose the other person with their hand up to have probably their only chance to ask JB a direct question..

Firstly, I agree with your general point about the likely selection of a "stranger" over Mr Newell.

But just because a meeting runs "smoothly" it doesn't mean it's a "good" meeting. I have sat in many meetings and conferences where the meeting has run so "smoothly" it has been a waste of time because nothing of substance has been dealt with. It's a bit like a family who never communicate with each other, neither to express love nor anger, but sit there smiling vapidly. And to the rest of the world everything appears to be fine whilst under the surface there is a turmoil of unsatisfied needs. Of course, a meeting that degenerates into everyone trying to talk at the same time is also stupid. The chair's job is to enable and allow the expression of contrary views in a safe way. If I manage to make it, I will be interested to see what the room manages.

Yep, it's a rally, a get to know you coffee morning.
I predict polite applause just like all the other meetings that affected nothing. A golden opportunity to get lots of people together to sell them a product or an idea.

funny man wrote:

ZeeZan6 wrote:

.....
All previous meetings have run smoothly, and been no problem at all, I don't understand the negtivity on this thread towards an open meeting that is yet to happen.

Bit in bold - I obviously can not talk on behalf of anyone. Ian seems to have direct access to talk to James Brent should he wish to ask him any questions, therefor, I would assume that Chris would chose the other person with their hand up to have probably their only chance to ask JB a direct question..

Firstly, I agree with your general point about the likely selection of a "stranger" over Mr Newell.

But just because a meeting runs "smoothly" it doesn't mean it's a "good" meeting. I have sat in many meetings and conferences where the meeting has run so "smoothly" it has been a waste of time because nothing of substance has been dealt with. It's a bit like a family who never communicate with each other, neither to express love nor anger, but sit there smiling vapidly. And to the rest of the world everything appears to be fine whilst under the surface there is a turmoil of unsatisfied needs. Of course, a meeting that degenerates into everyone trying to talk at the same time is also stupid. The chair's job is to enable and allow the expression of contrary views in a safe way. If I manage to make it, I will be interested to see what the room manages.

Well that's the point I'm trying to make tbh, come judge for yourself, why make assumptions on something yet to happen... People are so irritating. You can't pull something apart if there is nothing there to pull

ZeeZan6 wrote:

[Well that's the point I'm trying to make tbh, come judge for yourself, why make assumptions on something yet to happen... People are so irritating. You can't pull something apart if there is nothing there to pull

You are ZZ. You're asuming it's going to be fine. If you can't pull anything apart before an event, you certainly can't praise the idea either.
I assume there are lots of things you don't attend because you don't fancy what it's all about. Just take that feeling and asume other people have it as well. Then you'll understand... easy really.

penzancepirate wrote:

ZeeZan6 wrote:

[Well that's the point I'm trying to make tbh, come judge for yourself, why make assumptions on something yet to happen... People are so irritating. You can't pull something apart if there is nothing there to pull

You are ZZ. You're asuming it's going to be fine. If you can't pull anything apart before an event, you certainly can't praise the idea either.
I assume there are lots of things you don't attend because you don't fancy what it's all about. Just take that feeling and asume other people have it as well. Then you'll understand... easy really.

Where have I praised what is yet to happen?
I have only stated how the other meetings have run.
If ppl wish to get along and ask some questions, I suggest they do, rather than moaning how they won't have the opportunity to speak, without even trying.
It's like me saying I'm not going to Tesco tomorrow because I know their customer service will be poor and they wont have the Tesco value rice I normally buy. Even though normally they are fully stocked with that particular rice and if its not there the staff are normally friendly.. but for some reason I think its going to be bad tomorrow, so I'm not going and I'm going to moan about how bad they are.
Makes no sense

ZeeZan6 wrote:

funny man wrote:

ZeeZan6 wrote:

.....
All previous meetings have run smoothly, and been no problem at all, I don't understand the negtivity on this thread towards an open meeting that is yet to happen.

Bit in bold - I obviously can not talk on behalf of anyone. Ian seems to have direct access to talk to James Brent should he wish to ask him any questions, therefor, I would assume that Chris would chose the other person with their hand up to have probably their only chance to ask JB a direct question..

Firstly, I agree with your general point about the likely selection of a "stranger" over Mr Newell.

But just because a meeting runs "smoothly" it doesn't mean it's a "good" meeting. I have sat in many meetings and conferences where the meeting has run so "smoothly" it has been a waste of time because nothing of substance has been dealt with. It's a bit like a family who never communicate with each other, neither to express love nor anger, but sit there smiling vapidly. And to the rest of the world everything appears to be fine whilst under the surface there is a turmoil of unsatisfied needs. Of course, a meeting that degenerates into everyone trying to talk at the same time is also stupid. The chair's job is to enable and allow the expression of contrary views in a safe way. If I manage to make it, I will be interested to see what the room manages.

Well that's the point I'm trying to make tbh, come judge for yourself, why make assumptions on something yet to happen... People are so irritating. You can't pull something apart if there is nothing there to pull

Sorry, there is so much flak that goes back & forth, I'm not sure if you are saying I have already made my mind up by prejudging and pulling it apart. If that's not what you are saying, my apologies.

But, if it is what you are saying, my post was simply to express a hope that the meeting won't be an anodyne waste of time. And that there will be some balance between a sanitised order and messy open debate - both pro & anti. I actually wasn't judging an event before it happens.

Bloody hell! This gets complicated don't it!

I am hopeful that the meeting will stick to its purpose - to identify the best way of fans giving their input - and I also hope that the resolve is that Trust is the body that does that. I am sure Wozzer his team will do what they need to in order to get the nod from all attendees.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

I am hopeful that the meeting will stick to its purpose - to identify the best way of fans giving their input - and I also hope that the resolve is that Trust is the body that does that. I am sure Wozzer his team will do what they need to in order to get the nod from all attendees.

Not an assumption that you know but do you mean you think it will be a properly open meeting with a proper debate? As opposed to statements from Brent about what he wants the fans' representations to be? I agree that the Trust should be the fans' voice to the club.

So, a 90 minute(?) meeting (assuming everyone can get in for the start), the topic of which nobody is quite sure about.

Sounds interesting!

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

I am hopeful that the meeting will stick to its purpose - to identify the best way of fans giving their input - and I also hope that the resolve is that Trust is the body that does that. I am sure Wozzer his team will do what they need to in order to get the nod from all attendees.

Why does it take a meeting to work out that a democratically elected body is the best option? I suspect it's another chance for Webb to pretend he's important again, it's very very boring.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

I am hopeful that the meeting will stick to its purpose - to identify the best way of fans giving their input - and I also hope that the resolve is that Trust is the body that does that. I am sure Wozzer his team will do what they need to in order to get the nod from all attendees.

Encouraging, Damon, but I think that will only happen if other protaganists have already secured their positions further up the food chain. I also think it would be nigh on impossible to stick to the single issue of fan representation given our league position and the seeming inertia to get things sorted.

Yea Man wrote:

Remember though, no awkward questions because Brenty is a gentleman

From what I've seen you're right on the latter. I would guess that he hasn't got to where he is in the business world without being able to ask and answer difficult questions. Not very many owners in post attend open fans question & answer sessions, I would urge anyone who can attend who has a genuine question to go and face the person who owns this great club of ours.

Like I said. I'm not going because I cannot spare the time.

The real reason is that whenever I question something, it's so I can be shouted down with the immortal words 'you had your chance to ask that on January 14th. Not my/our fault you weren't there'

The meeting at The Pavilions with Guilfoyle and Ridsdale wasn't that great with the two question format.

The second question seemed to get answered first, and then they couldn't really remember the first question, so just made a statement around a similar subject.

There was no opportunity for rebuttle from the questioner so it moved on.

There were a few good questions, but most of them were skirted around.

The lack of time meant things had to be kept moving.

Cerbera wrote:

Like I said. I'm not going because I cannot spare the time.

The real reason is that whenever I question something, it's so I can be shouted down with the immortal words 'you had your chance to ask that on January 14th. Not my/our fault you weren't there'

You'd only get that on pasoti though, the prez doesn't like it ere anymore

The best Q&A session's in the past were the ones on pasoti with Keith Todd and Tony Campbell. Everyone got to ask the question they wanted and everyone got an answer, maybe something ATD could look at doing in the future?

Yea Man wrote:

The best Q&A session's in the past were the ones on pasoti with Keith Todd and Tony Campbell. Everyone got to ask the question they wanted and everyone got an answer, maybe something ATD could look at doing in the future?

The problem with that set up is that you don't see the whites of the mans eyes. I appreciate that it is better than nothing but surely a good old face to face meeting beats anything on-line.

Bodmin Tew wrote:

Yea Man wrote:

The best Q&A session's in the past were the ones on pasoti with Keith Todd and Tony Campbell. Everyone got to ask the question they wanted and everyone got an answer, maybe something ATD could look at doing in the future?

The problem with that set up is that you don't see the whites of the mans eyes. I appreciate that it is better than nothing but surely a good old face to face meeting beats anything on-line.

Certainly agree there. I think this meeting arranged for saturday just isn't the right set up. We need something longer where there is more time for questions but then we could have an all day meeting and that still couldn't be enough!

How about a democratically elected Trust leadership, who could meet with JB on a regular basis (say every two months, or monthly, or even more often if the situation warrants).......oh I see, that's what's the meetings about?

Yea Man wrote:

The best Q&A session's in the past were the ones on pasoti with Keith Todd and Tony Campbell. Everyone got to ask the question they wanted and everyone got an answer, maybe something ATD could look at doing in the future?

The Keith Todd Q & A was a total waste of time, get more answers from my cuddly toy. Although says more about him than the method of communication I spose. If James Brent was to do that on Pasoti, it would work well, and would give those who couldn't attend Saturdays meeting a chance to ask a question.

ZeeZan6 wrote:

Yea Man wrote:

The best Q&A session's in the past were the ones on pasoti with Keith Todd and Tony Campbell. Everyone got to ask the question they wanted and everyone got an answer, maybe something ATD could look at doing in the future?

The Keith Todd Q & A was a total waste of time, get more answers from my cuddly toy. Although says more about him than the method of communication I spose. If James Brent was to do that on Pasoti, it would work well, and would give those who couldn't attend Saturdays meeting a chance to ask a question.

Except for those who can neither attend on Saturday and are banned from Pasoti!

Cerbera wrote:

ZeeZan6 wrote:

Yea Man wrote:

The best Q&A session's in the past were the ones on pasoti with Keith Todd and Tony Campbell. Everyone got to ask the question they wanted and everyone got an answer, maybe something ATD could look at doing in the future?

The Keith Todd Q & A was a total waste of time, get more answers from my cuddly toy. Although says more about him than the method of communication I spose. If James Brent was to do that on Pasoti, it would work well, and would give those who couldn't attend Saturdays meeting a chance to ask a question.

Except for those who can neither attend on Saturday and are banned from Pasoti!

and those who do not attend Saturday and have a life and get out more than us internet losers, and those who don't attend Saturday and do not have access to the internet.. etc.

Can't please everyone.

Please explain why with Todd you got more answers from a cuddly toy yet with Brent it would work well?