Jump to content

 

 

Recommended Posts

I have made it clear that I invested in BuyRangers. I have also made it clear that this new scheme holds no appeal for me. The circumstances of its birth are troubling, but even if the RST had been running both schemes, I would have stayed with BuyRangers and steered clear of this new idea.

 

With respect it seems even more like an over-reaction then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but I don't understand as, not knowing your interest in this debate, I'm not sure of your intentions.

 

To me it looks as if you're involved with BR scheme (or the RST) somehow and are upset at the way the CIC scheme developed. I can understand that as the background to this issue is still open to debate.

 

However, without knowing the full facts, it's very difficult for anyone to form an opinion either way. Mark and Rab throwing tomatoes at each other on FF doesn't really count for worthwhile debate on that front.

 

Ergo, when we do see what appears to be a desperate attempt to find offence/fault with the CIC scheme administrators it just looks like more handbags.

 

It would be a massive understand to say the rest of the RFC support is merely disappointed with such.

 

 

 

To be fair to my dad (Rab) - I think his patience was severly tested and broken on that thread over there. There was little intention to debate Rangers First from some on there IMO

 

Which I continue to believe since the thread title still doesn't include 'Rangers First'. But that is an aside.

 

I agree with your point that it seems like some individuals are scouring for something with which to use against RF - I would ask that any of us in The Rangers Community try and enter into debate in an honest manner - we all want the same thing after all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A personal opinion is nothing more than a personal opinion though and as far as I know BH represents neither RangersFirst or Gersnet in any official capacity. If someone wants to go to certain meetings and post reports here, then that's their prerogative. It might be an idea if meeting attendees were asked to keep information as brief as possible until such time as official minutes of the meetings are released to the public, but that's another matter.

 

As transparency is one of the key tenets of RF I think allowing the minutes to be posted before the 'official' minutes is not a great concern. However, the fact that the posting of this minutes has granted the individual some perceived authority is mildly concerning. As long as it is made clear that any views are personal and not representative of RF then we should be fine and I believe we have now gotten to that point

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair to my dad (Rab) - I think his patience was severly tested and broken on that thread over there. There was little intention to debate Rangers First from some on there IMO

 

Which I continue to believe since the thread title still doesn't include 'Rangers First'. But that is an aside.

 

I agree with your point that it seems like some individuals are scouring for something with which to use against RF - I would ask that any of us in The Rangers Community try and enter into debate in an honest manner - we all want the same thing after all.

 

I've followed the debate on FF and I actually think Rab has done well not to rise to the bait. Mark's attitude seems very poor but, as said above, without the full facts it's difficult for us to appreciate his annoyance on this issue. But as someone who knows MD can play fast and loose with the facts, then you have my sympathy.

 

No matter, as longas CIC continue to work towards their goals as they have done, I think most nay-sayers will be left behind. We will see.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can quote his opinion as much as you like, but it is still his opinion and not representative of Rangers First.

 

I know what has been said at the meetings because I have been to them all.

 

I have countered his assertions that someone else in the room had the same thoughts - I didn't hear that. Please read the posts I have made if you seek elaboration on that topic.

 

I can't be clearer

 

I responded to what was written by someone who was present at the meeting.

 

From what was said in the contentious post, he thought that someone else in the room felt as he did.

 

You may not have heard it, or maybe he misheard it, but in the post in question, which provoked a direct response from me, it is startlingly clear:

 

"In any event, as was suggested last night, the RST/BR will soon have to consider whether they shouldn't transfer their holdings to the CIC for the greater good."

 

That contribution fully merited the response that it got. I'll leave it to you and others to decide what was and wasn't said, but this was how one person believed it to be, and when he posted his view here, it needed to be highlighted.

 

And it has been.

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

I responded to what was written by someone who was present at the meeting.

 

From what was said in the contentious post, he thought that someone else in the room felt as he did.

 

You may not have heard it, or maybe he misheard it, but in the post in question, which provoked a direct response from me, it is startlingly clear:

 

"In any event, as was suggested last night, the RST/BR will soon have to consider whether they shouldn't transfer their holdings to the CIC for the greater good."

 

That contribution fully merited the response that it got. I'll leave it to you and others to decide what was and wasn't said, but this was how one person believed it to be, and when he posted his view here, it needed to be highlighted.

 

And it has been.

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

I appreciate the timing of your response - I have no real issue with you reacting like that.

 

My only concern is that I make it clear that the views you reacted to do not represent the views of Rangers First or any BuyRangers members that will work with RF.

 

I think I have done that - I would hope that you ensure that the individuals you reported this information too will have the full facts at their disposal now as we do not need misinformation spread about RF or anyone else. We are all in this together in my eyes

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be a much better world of Rangers fans spent their time worrying about Rangers FC and not their particular fan group and concentrated on real people not virtual identities whose forum beliefs must never be allowed to waver.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I responded to what was written by someone who was present at the meeting.

 

From what was said in the contentious post, he thought that someone else in the room felt as he did.

 

You may not have heard it, or maybe he misheard it, but in the post in question, which provoked a direct response from me, it is startlingly clear:

 

"In any event, as was suggested last night, the RST/BR will soon have to consider whether they shouldn't transfer their holdings to the CIC for the greater good."

 

That contribution fully merited the response that it got. I'll leave it to you and others to decide what was and wasn't said, but this was how one person believed it to be, and when he posted his view here, it needed to be highlighted.

 

And it has been.

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

Hasn't it just. Any chance of moving on, now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be a much better world of Rangers fans spent their time worrying about Rangers FC and not their particular fan group and concentrated on real people not virtual identities whose forum beliefs must never be allowed to waver.

 

Ultimately, this is what people do worry about.

 

What do parents argue about the most? Their children, the people they care about most in the whole world. They care passionately about their wellbeing but fall out over what is best for them.

 

Because people genuinely care, they sometimes disagree.

 

I care about what is best for Rangers, and that's why I fully support BuyRangers. Others who care equally for the club, though, may not, and that's why there is tension and heated discussion.

 

When there are no passionate discussions and an absence of heated debate - that's when you should really be worried.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Summing up after 10 pages, 3 people who had made it pretty clear they weren't interested anyway are now even less interested.

 

I won't join in the booting of BH here, though. Either he imagined or made up the suggestion that BR will be swallowed by RF or someone said it. If its the former, he needs to get more sleep. If it's the latter, it would be a good move to use the reaction here as a warning to everyone else involved to be careful about stepping on other peoples' toes. Certainly the people making the most noise about this are the ones who wouldn't have joined anyway - but if it happened again that would maybe leave people questioning the professionalism and attitude of RF.

 

Could be a hard lesson learnt, but a worthwhile one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.