trublusince1982

They've been charged with being part of a fraudulent scheme to buy Rangers Football Club. They will appear in court on Monday morning according to BBC

does that mean they have been held in the cells over the weekend?

 

plz pretty plz

If you are referring to the match v Alloa this Saturday, the answer is no. I received and dealt with a complaint about Cowdenbeath but that is the only specific match that I have had anything on.

no it was any questions related to Falkirk game they are worried about. Guess from your answers it was not that! Will see what if anything they find out. Not sure if it was you or jcd that asked a question on my behalf if it was you thank you for doing so. Sorry to hear what's happened seems we jump at any shadow nowadays.

Asked a couple of people in the club via text if the knew anything about what happened. One has got back so far and said they were surprised and hadn't heard anything and wondered if you had asked any questions about Saturdays game. Don't want to post specifics or any references just that any questioning of decisions relating to Saturday was a no no.

I haven't read the thread you're referring to mate.

 

On that note, I'd suggest that nobody here posts any links to threads (related to this) on other forums, thanks!

haha glad to hear you say that got a life time ban from rm today for having a go at a moderator for allowing that kind of thing! Say lifetime but seemingly I am welcome back in 2038!

did you ask anything about saturday alan?

He's had the rights to the logos since 2012.

is that not historic badges?

sorry to hear that mate. thank you for taking my question forward. Will ask a few questions of people in the club and see if i can find out what happened. Please know you did nothing wrong in asking questions.

 

hope its not from fan complaints. if it is they need to man up.

I'm not having a go at anyone or saying X is Y.

 

It's only that yesterday, bawsburst announced on RM, in part of a reply to BH......... "......it is time for me at least to withdraw from further comment on things that are now decided............".

 

and you replied to him directly..........."or in other words your contract has now been terminated."

 

 

Whilst you don't have to, it might have been easier to simply tell us what BB had said, rather than forecast the future.

 

fair enough, was trying to be diplomatic and maybe misunderstood the sites rules on speaking about other so called fans. Lesson learned:tu:

There's a bit of ambiguity on what you can say about other forums on here but I highly doubt the admin here will be bothered what you say about Bawsburst.

 

It's strange that on a forum which bins 95% of its members he is allowed to stay.

fair enough mate. as a poster who has lurked for a while but not really posted i was erring on the side of caution.

 

Its more than strange its down right disgusting. I have no worry in saying that as I have made my feelings to the admin through posts on RM very clear. To the degree where i have probably alienated myself and put a few noses out of joint.

 

To allow anyone no matter who to purposefully troll other sites looking for things he can spin into negatives then allow him/her to post them as threads is despicable and completely against every standard i was taught that being a Rangers fan meant. For me it leaves RM as complicit as he/she is. When you add it to his/her refusal to admit he/she is even a rangers fan it gets even worse. I don't know what user name he uses on here but i know he lurks as every other day it seems he quotes another post or thread, same goes for sos facebook page,FF and all the rest.

But given dates, your 'sermon' in #419 is very much at odds with your thoughts elsewhere. It included a reference to Gersnet being a "sane site" and an implied inferral that this status may be under threat. However yesterday, on another thread ('Our support and social media') you talked about what amounted to your 'controlled dual identity approach' for different messageboards (quote below). Your post was very interesting but I think most folk on Gersnet are simply being themselves and that is what helps sanity levels and honest debate,...... rather than "end goals".

 

 

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Volume of words, posts or pages have little relevance unless a satisfactory answer results and I think most would agree that to use this criteria would only encourage a lack of transparency in what is supposed to be the first step towards us achieving such, further up the chain. There are skilled indefatigable operators who can say a lot but don't really say anything or get to the nub of the matter regards the contentious.

 

No need to 'apoligise' again because it's not just me, but then you know that and there are many on this thread who aren't happy. For example, when an objective, knowledgeable and measured poster such as Bluedell really 'corners' BH on the fansgroups access to directors issue, there is no reply.

 

It's now apparent that this thread won't recieve the clarity many want to see although it's been an excellent discussion on the matter and would make good reading material for all members of the RFB prior to the next meeting.

 

Its what deems a satisfactory answer that i see as the problem. Satisfactory should be an honest and frank answer without and political speak or subterfuge. Not always necessarily what is wanted to be heard.

 

as for gersnet being the most sane I still believe that, but that doesn't mean that it will always be or is not devolving. Again doesn't mean it is worse than x y or z, its not.

 

the identity usage on RM is not because of factions or fans with differing opinions, that is to do with what i see as paid antagonists using social media to push agendas driven by their customers. That is something I have never seen on here. Although it happens often that posts are taken from the likes of here and used to antagonize or mock opinions of individuals in our support, before the merits of what was said can be discussed or spread to the wider support .That is part of the this camp versus that camp strategy. A truly cringe worthy thing to allow I am sure you agree, that serves no good purpose for Rangers or its fans.

 

 

what I was getting at in reference to the thread we are on is when and to whom do we pass responsibility? If we cant hand the baton to our own, who? We cant all continue to question every motive,every question from every speaker.Especially when the tone of the questions seem to go along the lines of "your trying to get one over on me" or doing something untoward. Its causing stagnation and paranoia amongst other things on top of all our shareholder related problems. I just feel like the support is heading down a very steep slope and gathering pace towards an eventual crash. If members of our own support cannot do as they are instructed to do and ask questions from the fans to the board in an official and elected capacity then we are ultimately saying nobody can speak without being cornered. That is not a healthy situation.Especially when our support is so varied, how do we appease everyone?Someone needs to suck it up! Vigilance should be utilized when looking outwith not within our own support surely?Don't get me wrong i am not naive and understand that will lead to abuse sometimes, but is that not the consequence of being? The one opinion we all share is that what is best for Rangers is what we want, i just worry that is being replaced by what I want for Rangers is right for Rangers. If the Rangers Fan Board is to evolve it must be allowed to learn from its own mistakes.

 

I find it evident that people care enough to have a go at fan reps for asking a question but do not have the care to ask the reasoning behind the question when faced with the source.

 

agree it's a good read and a definite homework assignment for those on the fans board! all I would add is maybe we should all do a bit of revision. Its early days here's hoping it becomes a vehicle the fans can get behind and the intervening time does not dissuade others from stepping forward in future.

 

anyway thats my two pence worth thanks for the interesting points it makes a change and reminds me of the old days before admin.

Do you refer to the poster 'bawsburst' ?

If I answer that kind of defeats the point in not saying in the first place!!

 

reason i don't want to say as I have no evidence other than my own opinion and gut instinct and I know Frankie doesn't like to see posters having a go at posters from another site. Although I do think most people have the same gut instinct and its not exactly a secret.

Thanks for the opinions so far.

 

As above, yes, they are definitely the front for the Green gang, whether still willing participants, or wanting but finding it hard to exit is open to debate?

 

Also yes, with Ashley getting more involved, will that herald the exit they maybe crave, or with them allegedly quite close to him in the lead up to his 'power grab' is there still a role for them?

 

I think McMurdo is their biggest champion.

They will not buckle to pressure. It means absolutely nothing to them, the old water off a ducks back. From everything I have heard they want more power not less. One thing I would say is they are yes men for nobody. They would not do another's bidding.They work to their own agenda whatever that may be. Don't get me wrong I don't mean that wasn't the intention of bringing them in, just that whoever did under estimated them.They will use anything to extend their position and blow kisses into whatever ear they need to right up to the point their usefulness runs out.Would love to see someone like Green try to get them to do something they didn't want to or which reduced their control.Would pay to see that!

 

As for Mcmurdo and his buddy on ** I would hope to see a slowing of their drivel in the coming weeks ,months, if not a complete stop.

Maybe. Mainly it has worked at deflecting from the allegations of criminal enterprise. If you google them now you are more likely to get stories linked to Rangers ,whereas before you got stories about commissions and such. They can now blame all the big bad Rangers fans for spreading lies. It has surprised me that nobody has came forward with personal accounts of their dealings, I had thought their tampering with Rangers would have been met with a refusal to accept. More big bad mean businessman than outright criminals.

 

Big downside is now kids at school no longer turn and ask if their dads are criminals, they turn and ask are your dads the c***s that are ruining Rangers!!

You patently don't understand what I wrote because if you did, much of what comes after those first three words doesn't make sense.

 

 

Strangely, neither do your own words from a post on RM seem to reconcile with your previous on this thread, # 419.

Yes one question not 42 pages of constant interrogation.You ask a question then receive an answer. If you don't like the answer then either have nothing to do with the fan board/board meetings or stand at next election. As I said was not meaning to point the finger solely at you, I apologise again if that is how you feel.

 

that being said there are channels available for all individual fans to communicate with the club on any issue causing distress (the more mundane). The club should deal with that issue on a majority rules basis. As for contacting the board then no individual customer should be able to do so directly. No fan has the right to access another fan doesn't. Everyone should use the same official channels and all have to jump through the same hoops to get there. Nobody should expect to get to nip the ear of the board because they talk for 200 members or 2000. None of them are worth more than the individual. When it comes to financial questions obviously there are things that can be discussed in the open and things that cannot. Giving information to the good guys unfortunately includes giving it to the bad guys. Every time another part of Rangers financial info hits the general public the clubs position at this time takes another slip.Banks mistrust, sponsors shy away, possible partnerships disappear, newspapers run a mock.The quote you highlight from me doesn't express my full meaning clearly(something i need to remember online).

 

The fans board should be able to take questions from fans on financial matters and put them to the board. The fans board must then be allowed to continue those discussions behind closed doors. returning to us only when they are positive all is well or being mended or the current board can do nothing to fix the problem at the time being. The only thing we(the fans) must ensure is those on the board are aligned with the wants and desires of the Rangers support as a whole, with common goals for the future running of the club. If you want to know the knitty gritty then you need to be on the inside, so run for election. Rangers should never wash its dirty linen in public as it harms our position further. we all have to put our faith in something or someone, personally think fellow fans selected from the whole and democratically elected is that someone/thing.

 

We should be well past the point of thinking public opinion/revelations will sway this board or remove individuals on it. They don't care, they have their excuses and patsies ready to take the hit.They have been two steps ahead the whole way. We need to try another strategy. More of the carrot and less of the stick. Same goes with official boycotts. They were a good effort but unfortunately didn't work, they have only lead to harming ourselves further and are tantamount to cutting off our nose to spite our face. That is not to be confused with those who just chose not to hand over their hard earned cash as it sickens them. Anyone who boycotted with a goal in mind should now see it didn't work in my humble opinion. If as it seems greed is their motivation then we must show they missed the bigger pie in their haste.

I understand that but at the end of the day they are the elected representatives. Without our full backing and support to find its feet in the first year the whole exercise will be a failure. At this point in time there are too many chefs in the kitchen. Its time to streamline and utilise the proper channels, instead of everyone and sundry questioning every move and motive . Our voice was heard during the elections. Its now time for our voices to quieten and allow those people we chose to do the talking on our behalf to do so.

 

Its time we all realised we can't get everything our way and whether we like it or not we will, if we want to move forward, have to get behind someone. Personally i think that should be a group with official links to the club.

 

Do you think the fog will ever lift with so many people wanting their way to be the way the club moves forward?

 

Do you not think that a fan rep should have the full year before he or she is judged?

 

Do you not think any talking to the press as the voice of fans should be done by someone in an official capacity with full over site? Same goes for attracting finance in any form under the name Rangers.

 

Personally i have found the whole RFB to work so far(very early days obviously). I had an issue i wanted taken to the top and it was. I am a lone voice but it was heard.For me that is all we can ask. Now i must sit back and hope the club agrees. If they don't then i need to move on and hope to circle back one day in the future.

 

Sorry if this comes across as a go at you personally, it is not meant that way. Was just shocked to find out people had been having a go about a question I asked to be taken forward. When i found out it was posters from here and seen who it was I was dumbfounded. This is the sane site! They immediately question in what can only be called a dismissive manner without any idea the context behind a very simple question, for no real reason. For what I personally thought intelligent and honest posters to be jumping the gun has been a bit of an eye opener and brought home the obvious effects the last three years has had on us all.

 

At the end of the day the only way to take the club forward is all together. Here's hoping it can happen.

Are you steaming?

haha. now your getting it.

how do you separate the two?

 

surely what is best for the club is what fans want? not much of a fan if you put your own personal wants ahead of what is best for the club. Each member was voted in. The only time to question what they have done or achieved is just before the next election. Vigilance not paranoia. There has to be a line that cant be crossed.

have been told one of the rfb members(not sure which one) has been getting stick for asking about buses from Ibrox. That was a question I asked him to put forward as first part of a larger idea. If anyone has a problem or wants to know more feel free to ask.I am on here and RM with the same user name. Other than that the board member was only doing his job, taking a fans question to the board. So give him a break and stop jumping the gun without having any context.

Social media (SM) has changed how an ever increasing number of our supporters interact with the club, including the battleground that passes for a political & financial landscape.

 

As with commerce, those interested recognise this and allocate more time and resources towards it in an effort to achieve a net gain. This is why there has been a plethora of agitators sent in an attempt to influence, shape and direct opinion on our messageboards.

 

Gersnet doesn't see so many as the likes of FF and RM because of numbers involved and that in a smaller community it may be more difficult to merge successfully. Over on FF, I've developed a nose for such agitators and it's a curious subject that is worth a thread of it's own.

 

SM has inserted new layers between what goes on upstairs at Ibrox and the supporter. These layers should help a flow of information and subsequent organisation (the positive), they do but this has to battle against disinformation, spin, confusion, the seeking of division etc. (negative). The negative forces who at the top are paid to do their worst, tend to be more organised, informed and have more established conduits to use after many years of doing similar or you could say developing the battleground to their requirements regarding division.

 

In simplespeak, the 'negative' forces fight for them what is a vital battle to keep the 'positive' down and facilitate an enviroment whereby it's easier for those in executive control to do as they will. Obviously this particular 'battleground' is wider than just SM and uses the traditional media as an essential tool within the struggle.

 

The disturbing tendency throughout society is that it is becoming easier 'to fool most of the people'.

 

Social Media is what you make of it.

agree with that.

 

Its similar to when a false claim is made against someone. They are found not guilty but whenever their name is mentioned people who don't know them but have heard of them remember them as the person who was meant to have done x to y. They don't remember their name or have any personality traits to recognise them through.They become defined by something they never did.

 

Same goes on social media and that misunderstanding between comment and personality is easily manipulated by those who chose too. On RM i will regularly use a weak and easily disproved and baited argument to suck in posters who are obviously there to push opinion in a designated fashion and have refused to openly debate any of their points, or answer any questions when obvious holes appear. Then once they are happy in their degrading and playing to the crowd I then turn that argument round to what they were trying to avoid.Showing my willingness to answer and be proved wrong against their refusal. After that i will leave the thread to take a more natural course of debate, with posters finally debating the points they were "meant" not to. All the agitator can do is run and hide without answer making their purpose more and more obvious over time to the uninitiated.

 

take the mendacious liar moniker, a unmitigated success by the poster in question. He was able to have fans who would not have even known the meaning of the word to use it as their reasoning to not like Dave king.All other reasoning went out the window.Before they knew it they are regurgitating another's argument verbatim instead of formulating their own.No weighing of pro's and cons. A true show of the power manipulating social media can bring. Add onto that a campaign of alienating new information by replacing "what was said" with "who said it" and there is no acceptable counter to what you have put out there.

 

 

Probably doesn't interest most but something I find interesting.

have heard it said in certain circles it may be to present a more acceptable front to their children. Present can wipe-out the past sort of thing. Could be wrong though.

I used to write,

I used to write letters I used to sign my name

Social media is one of the few places words stand on their own without the human traits of the speaker being imbued. Its a bit like seeing a snapshot of a moment in time and then thinking you know everything that passed before and after.

 

The same shockingly unintelligent post on social media when presented to you from the mouth of a person would be mitigated by circumstance(emotion,state,place,reasoning) therefore giving a more balanced and understandable meaning.

 

the most left field opinion can garner more attention and a willingness to listen if you know part of the speakers history. What they have achieved previously, their standing in society, their emotional responses when in extremes can be mitigated by knowing what they have gone through before when voicing this opinion.

 

Imagine Galileo on social media describing to anyone and sundry the finding of the earth rotating round the sun, he would be hounded and victimized in extremes. He would be mocked and degraded before anyone asked a question. His responses would become seemingly more irrational along with his grammar and structure as his emotional state changes through challenge of his ability and demeaning of his person. Ultimately being taken as evidence of the stupidity of Galileo without any frank discussion of his findings or willingness to listen.

 

Not to mention that a persons goals or reasons cannot be assessed easily through social media. For example posters on RM will attribute different traits to me than those on here. On RM i take a purposefully aggressive stance regardless of believing what I am debating because it is the best strategy for my end goal. My end goal or wants from Gersnet are different so i am more of a wall flower! Both of those will be evident in my respective posts but neither will on their own tell you anything about me.

 

The old fable of the Gers fans online are not representative of the support in the stadium is wrong mostly. Obviously it is a smaller group so cannot be extrapolated to being the thinking of the whole support, but it is at the end of the day the same people you meet in the stadium as you do online.A season ticket holder online is the same season ticket holder you meet in the stadium. The only difference is the listener has far more evidential attributes to discern the personality of the speaker than the reader does of the writer.

I don't use twitter but facebook in particular is hard going. It's not just the fact that the views are so ignorant and misguided (eg one of the main pages has everyone discussing who will be signed with Ashley's 10m ), but the level of intelligence seems very low. People write in illegible English and generally do not represent our support well. Does this say something about our support or is it the platform?

 

There's not a single person here who is incapable of conversing in legible English but on our fan facebook pages you are hard pushed to find anyone making well constructed arguments.

It says more about you. Your complete misunderstanding of the social part of social media. You should feel amongst friends, its socializing. Do you pull people up for bad grammar in the pub or when in the stands? Do you really think people would allow the same spelling mistakes/grammar at their work or in writing a letter or report?

 

It says you cannot tell the difference between dreaming and believing. It also shows you care too much about what other people think and should try and relax you are not under constant judgement. Never mind the fact you know nothing of the posters or the reasons for grammar etc.Maybe they have fat fingers and cant be arsed fixing mistakes through touch screen mistakes. Maybe they have learning difficulties like dyslexia, they may not spell as well as you but they may also be far more intelligent than you. There could be a multitude of reasons you know nothing about, personally I would take someone with bad grammar over someone who thinks they can judge a persons character and worth through two lines of text on social media any day of the week.

The macro concept of the fansboard was designed to facilitate the executive boards of RIFC/TRFC control and 'management' of the fanbase. Jack Irvine (MH) was very much the main man behind that concept as the idea first developed.

 

It isn't black or white though, there are prospective benefits and improvements that could come from it within the various areas covered, such as the lot of the disabled fan and the away supporter.

 

Beware future office bearers steering matters in such a way that provides the club with it's desired macro benefits.

personally dont think the club should meet with unofficial fans groups.

 

we have no idea how many current members they have ,who those members are or show any transparency on what they do with the money they use or have any idea how much sway they have with fans.Many of them dont even show any evidence ofwhether they have actually balloted their members or just assumed they know what the fans want asked

How about club ran buses leaving from Ibrox. Have always hated the fact we all pay to travel to games and the club makes HeeHaw.

 

With a couple of bus company owners in Bruce's and Mcgils on board surely favourable prices for hire can be achieved if not given for free as part of club sponsorship. Access to the carpark and to the new bar an hour or two before leaving Ibrox will increase sales along with associated merchandise. Fling in a members doo at Ibrox each year as well. Pretty sure there will be a few St holders who would be able and willing to run the buses and account for members behaviour who would do so for nothing.

 

Obviously someone would need to do the numbers and see what demand would be like and try and get one of the bus companies on board.

 

Don't think it will make vast amounts of money but every little bit helps. Its main income for the club would be through the closer relationship with fans that it would produce and encourage. Opens many pr possibilities also, with players who are not playing or club staff traveling at select times through the year on buses that can be pre screened and selected.

 

Could be the first step towards a rangers village/pre_ game venue at Ibrox.

The others who have asked Easdale to be their front man are unlikely to be fools. Easdale comes across as, at best, an average business man and someone with below average communication skills. I don't know the answer but am curious why the "others" have lined up Sandy Easdale to represent their interests.

the easdales dont do as they are told and answer to nobody. they wouldnt even pretend to care. They would see that as weakness.when they want they take. If they were offered the proxy it was either through ignorance of who they are or they felt it unwise to say no.