WATP_Greg

Who's that?

Hope to see a few of you along tonight!

Aye I do get that there could maybe be something done - my first instinct is to allow the transfer one life membership to a family member or friend so that the vote still exists but thats just a very on the face of it thought - I think it does deserve a discussion but until the membership lists are allowed to be looked at together I'm not sure how many it effects. I think Chris' point was valid that the your life membership still allows a vote in the org and that your money went to its stated goal but I understand that we maybe need to look at something a bit more - what that is I'm not too sure but one thing about our support is that someone will have a good idea somewhere And yes RM is mental - I do enjoy it at times but a few of the new members are I think only there as their accounts on twitter got suspended... But there are many good bears on there too and its my go to place for an argument, I mean debate And twitter is what it is - block the abusive and try and talk to the rest - though its been properly time consuming!

Thanks for posting mate and I appreciate you coming and asking Qs "What is the purpose of the CIC club 1872....this is just a holding company to bring the RF and the RST CIC,s under , it would also be the company that would hold the licences for any website or anythin else required for the new company" That's close - but club 1872 is a ltd not a cic - there are two CIC's in club 1872 - one for Shares (which is RF) and one for projects (which is RST's cic) - Club 1872 ltd is also not sitting 'above' the cic's, its a flat structure with the same elected members serving on the board of each org and all the members of club 1872 having voting rights for all the orgs in OMOV. I think the rest of it is good and I'm sure everyone on here appreciates you taking the effort - I'll hopefully be able expand on some of it later

25.1% isn't a limit - its a goal. Members would decide what the upper limit is - One member one vote

We'll know at the end of the week when the squads are announced

I think we can win the league next year with the correct signings and a bit of luck. The premiership will be harder but from what I see they aren't better footballers generally than the championship just a bit more physical

In your opinion of course - my dad has his own (even quite often far from my own). Its how he deals with things and I can understand him trying to shine a light on what so far has been whispers in the back ground. Some of these lads have spent 50+ hours in The Louden talking RF so I don't see what difference another couple will do except maybe make their position clearer as My dad can't see where they are coming from. Again though its his opinion I just wanted to make clear his intentions are good even if his methods aren't to everyones tastes

Well I wasn't a rep at the time and I stand by what I said to AH. Misinformation is the enemy in my experience online. Ghost stories become facts within a few posts. If I see deliberate (imo) misinformation about myself or something I'm involved with I tend to challenge it (though some people are better ignored in my experience as they aren't interested in the correct info). So I take issue with you having issue with me

I don't have an issue with anyone not agreeing with what my dad says - He's very brash at times. The only issue I would have is if people questioned his intentions. Anyone who knows him will tell you he doesn't care about anything but what is the best for the club and the support.

Well not for me to explain the actions of my dad when he has a bee in his bonnet but he's always been upfront about people with issues should talk about them. We have as the pub in the past try to facilitate communication to various degrees of success - Tbh though all the people he has invited have been happy enough to attend the louden at various points in the past so I don't see why they would refuse now.

Who is the RF representative on here that you have issue with?

To be fair in principle I agree - I know initially due to the ad hoc way RF was set up it required manual checks which is why the ticker was used iirc. With the size of the org now I think we could do a better job of sorting that kind of thing (I say that with no knowledge of what has been investigated or not by the current board)

Where have you been for the last year and a half? The number has always only counted upward and was often spoken about online etc and from what I can see was never hidden (it was a quick fix implemented to help give an indication of membership interest that has remained in place longer than anticipated imo). Writing in caps and adding an "ing" to contributors doesn't change that you read it wrong, although I can see why you did. I can't answer why it doesn't say 9k or whatever as I have never been involved with the set up of the website - Personally I favour going with the numbers as is rather than the total number that has contributed as its more relevant to RF going forward. The website needs an overhaul anyways so maybe in the future we can have a number that represents current membership numbers

It says registered contributors actually as it has always done - the misinformation is from you, again.

I would like to thank everyone to who voted for me in The Rangers First Election. I am pleased to have been voted on and I look forward to the hard work ahead in helping Rangers First achieve its aims. Thank you Greg Marshall

I don't know him directly and I think a lack of exposure may have been a reason for the low score in the poll on here - he owns 0.8% of shares iirc and you can't argue with someone putting their money where their mouth is. Hopefully if he doesn't get on he'll look to get involved

Well the voting is now closed and thanks for everyone who voted for me. Whether I am elected or not I sincerely hope we can progress Rangers First and help improve Rangers and The Rangers Community as per RF's aims.

I voted for myself

Its your statement I had issue with - you stated something which was incorrect as fact (that people did not disclose their forum names) with the obvious connotations being that such individuals were being dishonest. I think that's unfair and I assume you withdraw your initial point. If you posted your twitter name to SDS I'm sure it would have taken precedence over your forum one.

I don't know who changed the heading but the email that was sent out from RM had "The Louden Votes on RF" which is different from telling people how they should vote - I also question who chose to change it and for what purpose.

I wouldn't worry about the time bud - think its suits what you guys are aiming for - its very "mates down the pub" and I think its a strong selling point. As I said to Baz and Paul when I saw them getting the pod out asap after the game will always help your listens imo but its much easier said than done and real lives are hard to get around.

I like WWTC pod and think the more Rangers related content the better - It is chaos and a bit mental but they are all Rangers fans that show passion for the club and complements some of the other podcasts that are/were out there (Heart & Hand, CROpod, WATP pod, Aye Ready). I think there is a gap in the market for a shorter more timely game by game pod and if anyone wants to put one together it would be great . A consistent weekly pod would get a fair amount of listens imo

Cheers for the votes so far

Thats not true - I marked that I was either "The Louden Tavern" or "WATP_Greg" on Rangers forums - I assume as they are the same as my twitter names they were left off the list. Misinformation doesn't help anyone here