maineflyer 0 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 The following fanzines/sites/people were invited to the Q&A via their contribution to STS (in alphabetical order): Do the Bouncy/Vital Football GersForum Gersnet No1 Fanzine RangersMedia STS Report Contributors Vanguard Bears Follow Follow was invited to join the project previously and didn't reply. That is disappointing but their decision. But which of the sites that were invited actually turned up and participated? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norris Cole 0 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 (edited) I know VB had a couple of guys at the Q&A. Edited September 2, 2009 by Super_Ally 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 (edited) Good to see that another site is taking an active interest then. Sure Frankie or one of the other attendees will be along to confirm who else was in attendance. Edited September 2, 2009 by Super_Ally 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Anyway, back on topic, the reason for my question was that if certain sites were invited but didn't actually turn up then I'd like to try to find out why or perhaps make a suggestion that they should do so in future. I've expressed little hope for a successful outcome in the past - not because the project isn't worthwhile or wasn't well constructed but because I've never believed the club would ultimately take it seriously. Recent changes might signal at least some room for hope in this respect. I'd have even more confidence if the current squabbles between the RST and the Assembly, and the apparently isolationist policy adopted by FF in most supporter affairs, didn't show that deep-rooted divisions persist in the Rangers community. It will be very interesting to see if anything tangible comes of this project. Creating some unity amongst the various supporter groups would be perhaps the biggest bonus. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Anyway, back on topic, the reason for my question was that if certain sites were invited but didn't actually turn up then I'd like to try to find out why or perhaps make a suggestion that they should do so in future. I've expressed little hope for a successful outcome in the past - not because the project isn't worthwhile or wasn't well constructed but because I've never believed the club would ultimately take it seriously. Recent changes might signal at least some room for hope in this respect. I'd have even more confidence if the current squabbles between the RST and the Assembly, and the apparently isolationist policy adopted by FF in most supporter affairs, didn't show that deep-rooted divisions persist in the Rangers community. It will be very interesting to see if anything tangible comes of this project. Creating some unity amongst the various supporter groups would be perhaps the biggest bonus. I had assumed that was you reason for asking who was in attendance and hopefully Frankie or another will be able to confirm that all or at least most the groups mentioned were in attendance as, as you say, it would be a positive sign for any potential success of the project. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon 0 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 That I can relate too and agree with. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 I had assumed that was you reason for asking who was in attendance and hopefully Frankie or another will be able to confirm that all or at least most the groups mentioned were in attendance as, as you say, it would be a positive sign for any potential success of the project. With one obvious exception, I've noticed that other sites have become increasingly willing to maintain open dialogue between them, sharing petitions and other information. That seems a brilliant idea to me and face-to-face discussion on important issues gives everyone a wider sense of activism while maintaining their own site identity. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 I don't understand why there needs to be any division between the fans websites. I (sort of) understand what the main underlying problems are, but what I don't understand is why the problem/s choose to alienate from the rest of the support. This seems to me like another instance of the 'you're either with us or against us' BS which is never going to bring the support together. It shouldn't matter what your political views are if you're a Rangers fan. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,195 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 Personally I only frequent Gersnet but it seems to me that although every other site wants to retain its own identity they truly do want what is right for the club. The impression I get of FF is that there seems to be a superiority complex and that there should be some divine right to be spearheading anything Rangers simply because they have the largest online community. I do NOT want this thread to become a bashing thread on other Gers fans websites though so will say not much else on that subject and also request others to tread carefully with responses which speak of other fellow Gers online communities. Now I am not for a minute suggesting that there are not capable people on FF as I am sure there are and I am sure there are very capable people on the other sites, as there are here - I mean, we are a small online community but we have plenty of folks with plenty of ideas on improving the club. Here we go : Frankie - CEO (couldnt do worse than Bain, has slightly more hair) BD - Finance Director - has plenty of experience Cammy - Matketing & Communications director Maineflyer - owns his own business so therefore makes a great Business Development Director/Straegic Director Gribz - head of Asian Operations bmck - chief literary contact and publishing director Gazza8 - chief of security pete - Chief scout Super_Ally - Chief of Sports Sciences In all seriousness though - all the above would have something to offer as would others such as Norris, Jon, and plenty others. But as far as I can see the other online communities aside from FF seem to have taken STS on board and, for the most part, agreed with the sentiments if not with the entirety of the content. But that is, for me, the beauty of it. The ST report was ut together by volunteers with nothing but the club's best interests at heart and I am sure each and every contributor would be more than willing to admit if they were wrong or erroneous with anything in their reports if someone suggested it. I am also sure that they would be VERY HAPPY if other online Gers communites made alternative suggestions because, to me, that is what the STS is about - generating open debate on how best to drive the club forward. I think MF is right though, there has always been a healthy skepticism in trying to get the club to agree to take any of this onboard. BUT..... if we didnt at least make the effort then we KNOW nothing would be taken on board, listend to or acted upon. One small or large depending on your viewpoint) step forward has already been achieved because the club have accepted the report and agreed to review it. That in itself is a small level of success. The key aim now is to ensure that it is not the ONLY success with the report. And it seems that thos involved - contributors, online communities and the Assembly are trying to do that. Only time will tell what success is gained. But you know what they say - "if you dont try you dont get" and "nothing ventured nothing gained". No-one can say that the contributors have not at least tried to assist the club ! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 Personally I only frequent Gersnet but it seems to me that although every other site wants to retain its own identity they truly do want what is right for the club. The impression I get of FF is that there seems to be a superiority complex and that there should be some divine right to be spearheading anything Rangers simply because they have the largest online community. I do NOT want this thread to become a bashing thread on other Gers fans websites though so will say not much else on that subject and also request others to tread carefully with responses which speak of other fellow Gers online communities. Now I am not for a minute suggesting that there are not capable people on FF as I am sure there are and I am sure there are very capable people on the other sites, as there are here - I mean, we are a small online community but we have plenty of folks with plenty of ideas on improving the club. Here we go : Frankie - CEO (couldnt do worse than Bain, has slightly more hair) BD - Finance Director - has plenty of experience Cammy - Matketing & Communications director Maineflyer - owns his own business so therefore makes a great Business Development Director/Straegic Director Gribz - head of Asian Operations bmck - chief literary contact and publishing director Gazza8 - chief of security pete - Chief scout Super_Ally - Chief of Sports Sciences In all seriousness though - all the above would have something to offer as would others such as Norris, Jon, and plenty others. But as far as I can see the other online communities aside from FF seem to have taken STS on board and, for the most part, agreed with the sentiments if not with the entirety of the content. But that is, for me, the beauty of it. The ST report was ut together by volunteers with nothing but the club's best interests at heart and I am sure each and every contributor would be more than willing to admit if they were wrong or erroneous with anything in their reports if someone suggested it. I am also sure that they would be VERY HAPPY if other online Gers communites made alternative suggestions because, to me, that is what the STS is about - generating open debate on how best to drive the club forward. I think MF is right though, there has always been a healthy skepticism in trying to get the club to agree to take any of this onboard. BUT..... if we didnt at least make the effort then we KNOW nothing would be taken on board, listend to or acted upon. One small or large depending on your viewpoint) step forward has already been achieved because the club have accepted the report and agreed to review it. That in itself is a small level of success. The key aim now is to ensure that it is not the ONLY success with the report. And it seems that thos involved - contributors, online communities and the Assembly are trying to do that. Only time will tell what success is gained. But you know what they say - "if you dont try you dont get" and "nothing ventured nothing gained". No-one can say that the contributors have not at least tried to assist the club ! Chief Scout! Would that make me Running Bear? My main task these days would probably making a deal with the Pawnee. I'll get my coat. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.