chilledbear 16 Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 I would very much hope' date=' and expect, they release a minute of that prior to the AGM CB[/quote'] In the name of openness do it yourself, why would they keep it a secret for so long? Write a Blog asking them to give the Supporters as much info as possible. ( or even condemning their secrecy) 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,170 Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 I don't think it's fair or realistic to expect D'Art to demand anyone releases details of what was clearly a private meeting. Sure you could argue that VB (or indeed Rangers) not realising details to other fans is somewhat disappointing but that's entirely their prerogative. However, I would say it looked a bit strange at the time that the club met with one website but has since failed to engage with the wider fanbase over a variety of issues. Thus, if such issues were discussed the other week, I'd have though it was in everyone's interests to find out more. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 Frankie I'm not saying he demand anything, just suggest to a certain Forum that their secrecy is detrimental to the fans who are voting at the AGM. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,170 Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 Frankie I'm not saying he demand anything, just suggest to a certain Forum that their secrecy is detrimental to the fans who are voting at the AGM. Demand was the wrong word... Just saying you'd be better asking VB themselves rather than just one member. FWIW, I'd imagine VB would rather enjoy people's frustration at not knowing the content rather than share the content. But like I say, RFC are jointly responsible. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stimpy 0 Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 Demand was the wrong word... Just saying you'd be better asking VB themselves rather than just one member. FWIW, I'd imagine VB would rather enjoy people's frustration at not knowing the content rather than share the content. But like I say, RFC are jointly responsible. Which speaks volumes.... Find it hard to believe you're putting up a defence of VB given their behaviour online, especially towards two of your colleagues from TRS. Nobody is perfect but take a minute to consider the what if we had no protagonists in our support line. Thought you were better than that, mate. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stimpy 0 Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 http://www.therst.co.uk/poll/agm-voting/ Im talking about individual members expressing a view which ran contrary to admin's position Admins position? What? That's the type of line that puts me off reading your blogs. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 Demand was the wrong word... Just saying you'd be better asking VB themselves rather than just one member. FWIW, I'd imagine VB would rather enjoy people's frustration at not knowing the content rather than share the content. But like I say, RFC are jointly responsible. My problem is D'Art criticises others, but not all. Yet says he is neutral. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,170 Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 Which speaks volumes.... Find it hard to believe you're putting up a defence of VB given their behaviour online, especially towards two of your colleagues from TRS. Nobody is perfect but take a minute to consider the what if we had no protagonists in our support line. Thought you were better than that, mate. I'm not defending them mate - far from it. Like I said earlier, a few of their members' behaviour is inexcusable and it's a shame that D'Art hasn't conceded this in his article. I'm just wary of generalising about whole websites as sometimes that can be very unfair. I've seen myself and this place criticised without any merit on other forums so if we're to moan about such stuff we have to be very careful. In fact giving people the attention they clearly crave is perhaps more counter-productive even if it's very difficult to ignore the disgraceful behaviour we've seen from a few people from most sides if we're fair. EDIT: Also, meant to say I don't know enough about VB generally to comment on their site admin. I've never used their forum and don't know who runs their site. I can only comment from conversing with a few folk on Twitter and, previously, on RM before that site become unusable for me. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,170 Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 My problem is D'Art criticises others, but not all. Yet says he is neutral. I think D'Art is pretty fair but would agree that, with respect, this article lacked a bit of balance which I've tried to criticise constructively. But, again, we're in danger of stressing into personality discussions which isn't as helpful as debating the actual message. That's a fine line I suppose but I just want folk to agree/disagree politely.. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stimpy 0 Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 Fair enough, mate. Personally I've first hand experience of their behaviour, none of which was warranted, and my mind is made up on them, which they influenced...... 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.