Statement by NARSA on RFFF

[the gunslinger 3,366]

No RFFF didn't put it to a vote of contributors.

 

ok they proposed a wider vote at least.

 

however you want to cut up the semantics or whatever they didnt just sit in a room and make a decision the way narsa have done. who knows how much of narsa agree with it's executive. certainly not the narsa executive and certainly not 100%.

[Frankie 8,151]

As much as I find the RFFF's decision curious, there's no doubt NARSA's statement seems hypocritical and, IMO, OTT.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

As much as I find the RFFF's decision curious, there's no doubt NARSA's statement seems hypocritical and, IMO, OTT.

 

as ever you put my thoughts far more succinctly than me.

[Bluedell 5,342]

ok they proposed a wider vote at least.

 

however you want to cut up the semantics or whatever they didnt just sit in a room and make a decision the way narsa have done. who knows how much of narsa agree with it's executive. certainly not the narsa executive and certainly not 100%.

So what? The RST didn't canvas its members when it set up BuyRangers. 100% of its members don't agree with every decision that it makes.

 

It can't possibly get 100% buy in.

 

However if the RST board suggested that the RST should not be involved with fan involvement or fan ownership anymore then I'd call for their resignation as it's such a big turnaround from its original purpose. That's the point.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

So what? The RST didn't canvas its members when it set up BuyRangers. 100% of its members don't agree with every decision that it makes.

 

It can't possibly get 100% buy in.

 

However if the RST board suggested that the RST should not be involved with fan involvement or fan ownership anymore then I'd call for their resignation as it's such a big turnaround from its original purpose. That's the point.

 

and what if they decided to put it to members that they weren't so they could decide.

 

what you are describing is what narsa did not the rfff

[Bluedell 5,342]

and what if they decided to put it to members that they weren't so they could decide.

 

what you are describing is what narsa did not the rfff

 

Err, no it's not, and I guess you've missed the point.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Err, no it's not, and I guess you've missed the point.

 

something needs to be done with the money and a vote needs to be taken on what it is. the original purpose is gone now it may well be best to find some cause closest to it. or the majority may want it to go to fighting the fans enemies or to charity.

 

but the rfff board certainly can't decide and present it as a fait accompli

 

imho thats what narsa have done and not what te rfff have done.

 

if they had i would be in total agreement with you.

 

you think its a bad thing they put this proposal out to wider vote. i think its a good sign. i was with you on the dunfermline cash. we mostly disagree i suspect because we would vote different ways on this proposal.

 

frankly i would rather see it go to the charity foundation than to prop up the current board which is essentially what the dunfermline money did but thats far removed from the origional purpose.

[barca72 440]

and what if they decided to put it to members that they weren't so they could decide.

 

what you are describing is what narsa did not the rfff

 

 

I was going to let this pass but you keep making stuff up.

How the RFFF committee was formed I'm not sure, whether it was by invite, acclimation or what. They don't issue many statements so we can't ask them.

Narsa executive on the other hand were democratically elected by representatives of each RSC. Each representative knows the mood and instructions of his/her own RSC and vote accordingly. As in any organization the executive are then expected to deal with and annunciate on a given situation without taking a vote of the entire membership. If the membership do not like what the executive have done they are free to vote them out at the next AGM. This ensures that the executive attempt to perform their duties with a degree of responsibility.

There are regular updates issued to the membership as regards the goings on.

I have never, ever heard of any members being threatened or coerced in any way. In the greatest majority of cases the actions taken by the executive are mutually beneficial to both Rangers and the membership.

In this case of the RFFF, I believe the executive moved on their own because of time restraints.

As many posters have stated, the motion proposed by the RFFF committee to assist Mr. Houston was in itself wrong. Further, I sense that the general feeling is that the RFFF committee would have a hard time contacting the original contributors to the fund, ergo they would end up making the decision on their own proposal by themselves. This second action would be unacceptable to the NARSA executive and if the forums are any indication, to the Rangers' support in general.

[Frankie 8,151]

IIRC, the RFFF committee was formed after an initial open fan meeting which asked for volunteers from those present.

[Hildy 0]

IIRC, the RFFF committee was formed after an initial open fan meeting which asked for volunteers from those present.

 

Where did the idea for the RFFF come from?

 

What individual or organisation proposed it?