RST AGM - Secretary's statement

[ascender 352]

As well as invitations to be co-opted onto the board this morning.

 

Really??????

[Frankie 8,186]

No, I'm trying to establish his version of what was said to him at the AGM. I heard him say that he wished to say why he resigned as secretary and GD say that the section of the meeting was for specific questions on the Secretary's and Teasurer's reports and that he could speak at the Q&A session. I didn't hear AH say anything further than that other than okay and he sat down. I'm simply trying to establish what AH thought was said to him.

 

I believe he has detailed it on here previously.

 

No matter, why did the Trust board not raise the issue themselves openly and in full?

[Frankie 8,186]

Really??????

 

Yes, Mark Dingwall made such a post within the statement thread.

[Guest TheWorthyEd]

FF is now the only site that gets Trust news posted with comment from a variety of board members.

 

As well as invitations to be co-opted onto the board this morning.

 

FF was/is the only paper version of Rangers fanzine that gets this type of information also.

 

I tried - and failed - to get them to alter that mode of operating some years ago.

 

I gave up trying after many false promises.

[Frankie 8,186]

Yes, Mark Dingwall made such a post within the statement thread.

 

Post 202....:

 

 

If you have skills and ideas you'd like to place at the disposal of the Trust then please do so. Also, there are a few spots on the Trust Board available for co-option and there are smaller Teams working on aspects of our operations - please drop the Secretary a line if you can help.

 

[ascender 352]

Thanks Frankie. I just despair. What's the point?

 

I didn't sign up for this. Why don't they just rename it as the FF Rangers Supporters Trust?

Edited September 29, 2010 by ascender

[Bluedell 5,356]

No, I'm trying to establish his version of what was said to him at the AGM. I heard him say that he wished to say why he resigned as secretary and GD say that the section of the meeting was for specific questions on the Secretary's and Teasurer's reports and that he could speak at the Q&A session. I didn't hear AH say anything further than that other than okay and he sat down. I'm simply trying to establish what AH thought was said to him.

 

I didn't hear the bit in bold but otherwise it was as you have said. I still fail to see why he was prevented from raising it at this point though.

[plgsarmy 111]

I didn't hear the bit in bold but otherwise it was as you have said. I still fail to see why he was prevented from raising it at this point though.

 

 

Perhaps because he failed to indicate that it was connected. As far as we were concerned it was regarding breaches of rules that had occurred outwith the accounting period.

[Frankie 8,186]

Perhaps because he failed to indicate that it was connected. As far as we were concerned it was regarding breaches of rules that had occurred outwith the accounting period.

 

I'll try again shall I? Irrespective of Harris' intentions why did the Trust board not raise the issue themselves openly and in full?

[boss 0]

Perhaps because he failed to indicate that it was connected. As far as we were concerned it was regarding breaches of rules that had occurred outwith the accounting period.

 

This is perhaps the most disingenuous (thanks Bluedell!) comment I've read from a board member for, oh, at least a few hours.