Jump to content

 

 

The Real PapaBear

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,366

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by The Real PapaBear

  1. The Real PapaBear
    au contraire, it makes perfect sense.The Post Office (or Royal Mail for the pedants) have set up a system whereby if you complete a sending action, i.e put a letter in a big red box, they will deliver said letter to intended recipient. SoS have set up a system whereby if you complete a sending action, i.e. press a button, they will deliver said email to intended recipient Both cases require the sender to send something. Whether the sender knew he was sending is immaterial; the fact remains he is the sender, thereby answering the initial question as to who should be regarded as the sender SoS or the signatory to the petition.
  2. The Real PapaBear
    Your analogy is the wrong way round and you are juxtaposing perpetrator and victim. What would be the crime you had committed and what would you be charged with if you switched on the light detonating the bomb that somebody had planted? if *you* do something illegal, ignorance of the law is no defense. Thus if you caused an email to be sent to SE by your actions and/or by your failure to read the small print on the website, that's no defense and you are guilty because you are the sender.
  3. The Real PapaBear
    Well, you would clearly be the sender. Whether you knew you were sending or not is not the issue - after all ignorance is no defence in law - the fact is that you still sent the e-mail by signing the petition..
  4. The Real PapaBear
    But you could not reasonably argue that SoS were the senders any more than you can argue that the Post Office is the sender of every bit of junk mail you receive.
  5. The Real PapaBear
    If there was every a salutary tale, it's what happened to Leeds Utd. This is a club every bit as big as we are, who ended up penniless because the ambition of the owner blinded him to financial reality. The ensuing devastation left them badly wounded and they have been unable to get back to their rightful place as one of England's natural top 10 clubs ever since.
  6. The Real PapaBear
    Depending on the nature of the "bombardment" it may break other laws if these are sent to a private individual, e.g. if they are threatening or defamatory. In this case, it is the content rather than the frequency of the communication that is liable to fall foul of the legislation. However, the emails here concern the running of the business for which Easedale is largely responsible and were presumably sent to the business address. This is perfectly legal, right and proper.
  7. The Real PapaBear
    Except, as has been shown, the senders were informed that Easedale would be notified. Furthermore, when e-mails are sent to a director of a company whose 'customers' are unhappy with the running of that company, these e-mails can not be regarded as "harassment" by any right thinking person.
  8. The Real PapaBear
    Whatever it is, It's not spam as there is no marketing or commercial aspect to it, therefore it's not unlawful in that respect. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/2426/contents/made
  9. The Real PapaBear
    In what way is it unlawful?
  10. The Real PapaBear
    So I gather now - and, btw, my enqiry wasn't one of reproach, but rather to see if we could streamline the process if required. Personally, I think you did Mr Easedale a service. The man plays a key role in the management of the club and I would have thought that he'd be keen to know the extent of fan feeling on the issue. Now he does
  11. The Real PapaBear
    I have to say, I'm struggling to imagine him sitting at a keyboard. Do you think , if he sat there long enough he'd manage to type the entire works of Shakespear?
  12. The Real PapaBear
    have I understood this correctly BG - did you send him 1200 emails?
  13. The Real PapaBear
    kinda accords with mine as well. We ('we' share one ticket between three of us due to work committments) and people we know have not renewed because we smell a rat. To be honest, we really don't know who the various fan groups are (RST, SOS, UOF etc) because we have businesses to run, families to enjoy and lives to live, so we don't have the time or interest to investigate the CVs of those involved, but we trust and believe they are Rangers fans. Not saying we agree with them all, but we trust their loyalties. We also know, by word and deed that those running our club at the moment are not Rangers fans. We suspect, strongly enough that it may as well be knowledge, that those in control of our club are being controlled by others, even more remote and even more disengaged with Rangers. They, the board and their masters, are interested only in one thing: making money while they can. If they calculate that they can make most money by destroying the club, then they will. Read this slowly: They. Do. Not. Care. Once again, for the Grampian viewers, the people running our club do not care if we live or die, just as long as they make as much money from us as they can. Our only hope of survival is to get rid of these leeches.
  14. The Real PapaBear
    and by doig so - i.e. surrendering Auchenhowie - you consign yourself to mediocrity, to being happy to be a club that floats somewhere between Hearts and Celtic in terms of ambition and size. Let me remind casual viewers that we should not be competing with Celtic. Celtic should be competing with us. Murray park has been pretty much a failure to date, on that we can all agree, but that's not the fault of the instituition or the facilities, it's the fault of the philosophy and the people who run it. Children, teenagers and youths are treated as "footballing prospects" first and foremost and as developing people second. The pastoral and educational requirements that must be foremost in any education of young people seem to be ignored at Rangers. If you go back to the 'Blue Heaven' programme of 2010 (or therabouts) I'll bet you whatever you want to wager than not a thing has changed - and if you watch the programme, you'll see where the problem lies.
  15. The Real PapaBear
    Pity they couldn't both have lost. Watched the first half at the gym - if that's what passes for football int he top division in this country, we really are screwed. Hoof the ball up the field, gather the ball, re-gather the ball because you couldn't control it first time, make a clueless short pass, make another aimlss short pass, hoof the ball up the field and repeat. dire dire dire
  16. The Real PapaBear
    And who elected the board? The people you disparage all have lengthy and provable track records of supporting Rangers, unlike a single one of the clowns sitting on the board. They can provide the only legitimacy this board will ever get. They can provide security through season ticket sales, because the great bulk of the 'non-aligned' support would take UoF backing of the board as the green light to buy season tickets. Oh, it certainly wouldn't be in the best interests of the vultures who want to preside over years of decline and mismanagement so that they can "regretfully and sadly be left with no alternative" but to sell and lease back the stadium & training ground. Such an agreement is not only not 'questionable', it could be set up and finalised within one working day if all parties got up early enough.
  17. The Real PapaBear
    football is a tribal pastime and we, who once ruled the tribe for a century, have been cast out of the tribe. Where we were feared, we are now mocked and ridiculed. Yet the tribe needs us to remain within reach so that they can continue their mockery and still use our size to give them credibility with tribes of other nations. I'm sure there will be aappropriate biblical parable; maybe one of the Orange Order on here can provide it?
  18. The Real PapaBear
    A cynical person might think he was there to kep an eye on things and report back to the people who pull his strings.
  19. The Real PapaBear
    This could be a game-changer. It was always going to be a last resort for the board to hold serious talks with the fans so it looks like that resort has been reached for them. They really must be are at their wits end when they feel forced to sit at the negotiating table. The UoF mustn't compromise the core demands that Ibrox and Auchenhowie to taken out of harms way.
  20. The Real PapaBear
    also, a certain degree of 'mentalness'
  21. The Real PapaBear
    I thought we looked stronger and fitter as the game went on - maybe Auchenhowie working? Hearts looked like they were hanging on for penalties after the second goal went in.
  22. The Real PapaBear
    that was worse than Fiorentina! well done the laddies - never say die attitude, held their nerve and behaved with dignity in victory. Finally a team that looked like a Rangers team.
  23. The Real PapaBear
    I think the big difference is that Hearts were a crippled beast which the wolves let go when they had to run away. Rangers was a wounded animal thrown, trussed, bound and defenseless to the waiting wolves.
  24. The Real PapaBear
    and with good reason. That's a club that will be revitalised, with a purpose and with spirit. We have better players for sure, but that may not be enough.
  25. The Real PapaBear
    Locke is a dyed in the wool Jambo and I can't see him ever dissing the club. I reckon he was told by budge, "Levein's the man I want, Levein doesn't like you, time to go and here's a wee something for your trouble".
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.