Zappa 0 Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 I was merely trying to highlight the hypocrisy in some of the posts.If you want to defend MD then feel free. But I will refuse to trust the RST again unless they sort this mess out. Their silence is disgusting and treats the fans that have invested money with utter contempt. You've raised your points and concerns from the standpoint of an RST member, but are you really a member or do you just like to slag them off on Rangers forums? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgacus 8 Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 I was merely trying to highlight the hypocrisy in some of the posts.If you want to defend MD then feel free. But I will refuse to trust the RST again unless they sort this mess out. Their silence is disgusting and treats the fans that have invested money with utter contempt. What on earth has the RST got to do with this..it is a thread about weird emails between our Directors - that is my concern, not the RST. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stfu Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 You've raised your points and concerns from the standpoint of an RST member, but are you really a member or do you just like to slag them off on Rangers forums? Zappa I have been a member of the RST for years as I have stated why do you keep changing the subject? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgacus 8 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Zappa I have been a member of the RST for years as I have stated why do you keep changing the subject? Maybe because the RST isn't the subject of this thread? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plgsarmy 111 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Positive there was an email, trying to find it. There was an e-mail but granted we haven't followed that up but there is little to say really. There was an accusation of hacking and it was made to look like it came from a certain source. The person 'under suspicion' subsequently resigned and reported the matter to the police. A few others resigned due to legal advice but remain RST members that we are still working with. They don't want their names plastered over the Internet and we will respect their privacy. It is now a matter for Police Scotland and not the RST. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,329 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 There was an e-mail but granted we haven't followed that up but there is little to say really. There was an accusation of hacking and it was made to look like it came from a certain source. The person 'under suspicion' subsequently resigned and reported the matter to the police. A few others resigned due to legal advice but remain RST members that we are still working with. They don't want their names plastered over the Internet and we will respect their privacy. It is now a matter for Police Scotland and not the RST. Surely if there was an issue that required investigation then it should still be investigated if the person is still an RST member? Surely if they were found guilty then they would require to be expelled from the RST and not remain a member with the ability to vote andinfluence matters? Why can't RST members be given the names of the current board? Why is that basic information being withheld? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stimpy 0 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Surely if there was an issue that required investigation then it should still be investigated if the person is still an RST member? Surely if they were found guilty then they would require to be expelled from the RST and not remain a member with the ability to vote andinfluence matters? Why can't RST members be given the names of the current board? Why is that basic information being withheld? If it was to be investigated by the board then the most likely conclusion would be not guilty IMO. I've seen the evidence and why an individual thinks Mark hacked in. It is not convincing and the allegation of where he obtained the password is impossible. So that leaves hiring an expert: the RST is in rude health financially and I wouldn't want my fee wasted when 1. MD is involving the police, 2. I'd expect the board to be exploring marketing and CIC opportunity which is where members' money needs invested in. Let the authorities deal with it, and let the RST move forward with the concerned parties no longer involved. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,329 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Seems fair enough. Thanks for the reply, SRB 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Zappa I have been a member of the RST for years as I have stated why do you keep changing the subject? I didn't mean to change the subject. Shorerdbear questioned whether or not you were a member and I hadn't seen a response, but might have missed it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
j1mgg 0 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 I am not a twitter user and don't follow the accounts on there, but what I have always wondered is why you would slip in some fakes if you have the real deal. I would if thought it would be all or nothing, possibly the odd bunch of real followed up by a constant stream of fakes. 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.