RunDAMC

Just to play Devils Advocate, while we can all agree that there's certain folk it would be most pleasurable to subject to a day in court (Phil, JJ etc), once the pandora's box of litigation by the club is opened, what's to stop them silencing Rangers fan blogs with concerns about the running of the club?

Fair point, certainly were there is stuff in mainstream media the club should have a mechanism to challenge it, ultimately with litigation if necessary. In that example though, I think eventually we need a fans mechanism to do that. The Club will always be nervous about challenging things not directly under their control, in case something embarrassing comes out that a fan has somehow misbehaved. If the Fan Ownership organisations and Community Interest groups ever sort themselves out, then it should provide a way of doing that.

Hi, followed Frankie on Twitter for a while and always respected the Gersnet output, so thought I'd sign up and use the forum! I'm also RunDAMC on Twitter for anyone who may have stumbled across me on there.

Paterson and Nicholson worth consideration from Hearts, the boy Schalk at Ross County has been in the goals but don't know much more about him, other than that they're out of contract for a reason!

I think unfortunately we've witnessed the perfect storm of the explosion of social media and blogging, the collapse of the Murray empire and all of the effects that had on Rangers, and even things like Indyref which gave a voice to every anti British conspiracy theorist out there. As said above, the club would need to devote considerable funds to litigate every damaging story out there, rather it's the Rangers support ourselves that need to 'carry the fight' by sensibly arguing against the fallacies created where applicable and making sure that our message is getting the mainstream exposure that some of the unhinged 'Celtic' bloggers seem to get.