maineflyer

Very much so. It only gets worse.

I did. The least able member of the RST board thought it would remove any basis for criticism if they returned my life membership fee. Since this obviously sets a useful precedent, I guess any life member is now free to request a refund. Assuming of course they still know where to find the readies.

Unity is always a dream, we're not pursuing unity, only the proceeds it helps to bring about.

Unless you present them with something genuinely relevant and genuinely better.

The alternative (the third way) of course is to ignore the RST and solve the problem by setting up the Independent RST. It would certainly polarize things for a spell but it would deliver a clear choice and it would provide a means of reaching a conclusion sonic membership would make one side or the other completely unsustainable, particularly if the good guys could successfully engage with the club, which we could.

I have to say my instincts were the same as yours regarding the proposal to investigate options for reporting breaches of regulations. However, the benefit of a single voice, demonstrating as it would the desire to work together, would lie primarily in gathering support and therefore influence behind opposition to the unmoving obstacle. I'd advocate further dialogue with the other sites and that you might want to consider coordinating or indeed leading it - this would be acceptable to all concerned.

Ascender, While being a solid perpetrator of the current soap opera, I'll be the first to admit that much of this is distasteful to anyone who believes that the affairs of the RST should be conducted in a proper and thorough manner. However, there is a clear need for rebuilding here and that can't be started until the site is cleared of debris. The difficulty here has never been running an effective RST, it's been removing entrenched factions whose aim is only to further their own interests. Unless the other board members grow some testicles and use the means at their disposal, the bad guys cannot easily be removed from the outside - hence the need to apply as much pressure as is at our hand, even when it applies to individuals, to expose and hopefully strengthen resolve where it needs strengthening and weaken resistence where that is required. VB and RM will be contacting Gersnet with a view to joint action to save the RST, not destroy it. Hopefully this site will agree to join with others to formulate more vigorous, although perhaps less visible, action. This might have the look of a vindictive squabble but, in actual fact, it is probably the last chance to save this RST.

Aw come on that's the (ex)Treasurer your talking to, why would you expect the RST treasurer to understand about basic financial obligations? it's absolutely outrageous how incompetent these people are at every level. I've been trying manfully to point out their failings for years, thankfully it's now there for everyone to see beyond their bullshit and bluster.

I have to say that, after the last few days, any decent bear still associated with the Mistrust ... shouldn't be. Any member of the RST board with an iota of integrity and conscience should now be penning their immediate resignation, leaving only those too tarnished to redeem themselves. It's better all round if only the rats go down with the ship.

FFA, will someone please give this man a ticket so we can end this bad run

I think I'll offer to do the job at half the salary. Apart from the obvious saving to the club, we would immediately improve gate receipts by converting most of the press seats for use by paying fans.

Perhaps you're right. The board's least able member is probably so immersed in her own inadequacies and cultivating pointless defiance that asking her would be an utter waste of time ... like expecting her to exhibit competence and integrity on behalf of the RST membership. You're utterly sunk, aren't you? Red handed and nowhere left to hide comes to mind. And you know the best bit ... there's so much more still to emerge and the least able member is centre stage.

If my FD came to me and said we didn't earn interest on our cash balances, I'd be looking for a new FD. What was your excuse? Why were you holding funds in a current account?

Nice when both sides are so in tune. I've no regrets either.

I'm the last guy to criticise executive salaries but an increase of this magnitude seems close to outrageous at a time when our chairman is announcing further belt tightening will be required. Hardly the most consistent or credible message to send to the support.

Shouldn't be too difficult to get it on target either!

Now I'm a whole lot more thick-skinned than you might think and I think you're willingness to play victim is revealing. I'll welcome any comeback you want to offer but don't play naive games about someone not gaining from that amount of money over that period of time, don't expect to be taken seriously if you do.

There's no personal fallout involved, just expressing an opinion. Anyone is similarly free to express an opinion about my views too.

Post 121. No innuendo involved, I'm stating openly that I believe you're trying to pull the wool over the eyes of this forum.

You're being deliberately obtuse. Of course he gained from the deceit ... either by employing the money himself for the time he had it ... or by the saving interest on money he would otherwise have had to borrow over that time. Stop trying to defend the indefensible - I think you're at it my friend.

Since these forums are all about expressing opinion, I'd like to express my opinion that Northampton Loyalist is playing a very dangerous game, proposing as he does to promote fair-mindedness while simultaneously massaging certain facts to suit what obviously nothing more fair-minded than his own inherent bias. Personally, I find something fundamentally suspicious when people suppress opinion in favourite of self-image, only to reveal themselves in what they don't say. I believe this is a game of drawing the sting of reasonable accusation by asserting an apparently even more reasonable "faults on both sides". Something doesn't quite add up, despite the amount of effort employed. Of course I'm just an old cynic, eh?

So, other than clinging with determination to your seat on the fence of personal convictions, what exactly are your intentions here ... to be hailed as fair-minded, revered by your peers as the man who saw both sides, a pillar of probity amongst all these radicals? You've never been guilty of hiding in the shadows or shunning publicity so it's a little stretched to see what looks like an inability to weigh up and judge such polarized positions. You cannot expect to get away with an argument that says everything is equally good, equally bad, equally east, equally west, equally grey - and no one should attempt to offer any opinion that might compromise your assertion that the middle is neither one end of the seesaw nor the other. Why the mock allofness? Isn't is just possible that beyond your indecision lies a place where one side IS more wrong than right ... and that those who have the eyes to see it could be justified in confirming it by description?

It's us then!

Yes but is that us or them........? :D:D

Yeah, whatever, just glad you've caught up at last. and, just for the record, the dignity word was yours.