Fan board elections now closed as of Saturday 20 September

[Rangersitis 0]

I was going to post the same.... but I think in Billy's case they had no option as they would otherwise have nobody in that category - I THINK that he was the only one standing for election.

 

There was one other.

[forlanssister 3,050]

I was going to post the same.... but I think in Billy's case they had no option as they would otherwise have nobody in that category - I THINK that he was the only one standing for election.

 

The Chairman of the Rangers Disabled Supports Club who's also the Treasurer of the Assembly was the other candidate in the disabled category.

[craig 5,199]

I spoke to Rev McQuarrie in his capacity as the Chair of the Nominations Committee because a number of people on here raised doubts about the election process and questions were directed at me specifcially that I couldn't answer e.g. at #242 Bearger questioned if the process was democratic and shoredbear and others raised questions in a number of posts about those whose names had gone forward. I wanted to be sure of the facts before I answered. You have quoted the answers.

 

I have spoken to Rev McQuarrie again just now. He has asked me to say that if anyone has any suggestion of impropriety or discrimination in the election or any other concern about the process, he will be happy to clarify or investigate as required.

 

In the circumstances I will not be making any further comment about the election process.

 

Really what you SHOULD have done was abstain from any comment on the impropriety or otherwise of the Nominations Committee - it really wasn't your job to play journalistic investigator simply because people on a forum ask questions about the process. Your response should have been "I don't know, you would need to ask the Nominations Committee that".

 

Sometimes it is wise to think through all potential consequences of your actions, no matter how innocent they may be. You should know this better than anyone BH given previous incidents.

 

If people have questions to ask of the NC then let the NC respond - at the time you were only a nominee, you were not at liberty to answer the questions being put forward, and nor, in my opinion, should you have sought them out. You had already determined that it was a properly constituted democratic process by putting yourself forward for a position - let the rest fall out from there.

[craig 5,199]

The Chairman of the Rangers Disabled Supports Club who's also the Treasurer of the Assembly was the other candidate in the disabled category.

 

That suggests to me that the process was democratic then. Of any of the candidates you would be the one who the Club would be at most pains to ensure wasn't elected given how you made them squirm, on our behalf, already

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

That suggests to me that the process was democratic then. Of any of the candidates you would be the one who the Club would be at most pains to ensure wasn't elected given how you made them squirm, on our behalf, already

This is the club that forgets about youth players contracts running out. They quite possibly got their Billy's and William's muddled up .

 

The guy with the questionable literacy made the contestants so I'm not sure what sort of process went on here.

 

I look forward to hearing how Billy gets on though.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Really what you SHOULD have done was abstain from any comment on the impropriety or otherwise of the Nominations Committee - it really wasn't your job to play journalistic investigator simply because people on a forum ask questions about the process. Your response should have been "I don't know, you would need to ask the Nominations Committee that".

 

Sometimes it is wise to think through all potential consequences of your actions, no matter how innocent they may be. You should know this better than anyone BH given previous incidents.

 

If people have questions to ask of the NC then let the NC respond - at the time you were only a nominee, you were not at liberty to answer the questions being put forward, and nor, in my opinion, should you have sought them out. You had already determined that it was a properly constituted democratic process by putting yourself forward for a position - let the rest fall out from there.

 

You are correct that I do tend to feel obliged to answer questions that folk ask and I always try to get the facts before I do so.

 

Zappa did say that perhaps his comments should not have been framed as questions to me, since I was not responsible for the process.

 

Some others may have posed questions for different reasons.

 

However, one correction if I may.

 

I was already elected before I spoke to Rev McQuarrie and he will confirm that if necessary.

[forlanssister 3,050]

That suggests to me that the process was democratic then.

 

As far as I'm aware that is correct.

[forlanssister 3,050]

 

I was already elected before I spoke to Rev McQuarrie and he will confirm that if necessary.

 

Perhaps but given that he's chairing the meeting at which the Office Bearers will be appointed (I'm not standing for any of the positions) would it not have been the wiser option to refrain till after that event in case it could be perceived as potentially gaining an advantage by other prospective candidates.

[Stimpy 0]

You are correct that I do tend to feel obliged to answer questions that folk ask and I always try to get the facts before I do so.

 

Zappa did say that perhaps his comments should not have been framed as questions to me, since I was not responsible for the process.

 

Some others may have posed questions for different reasons.

 

However, one correction if I may.

 

I was already elected before I spoke to Rev McQuarrie and he will confirm that if necessary.

 

You know how to get in contact with club's CEO and chairman of the nominations committee, but don't know how to enage face to face with the people you want to represent at games. Hmm.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Perhaps but given that he's chairing the meeting at which the Office Bearers will be appointed (I'm not standing for any of the positions) would it not have been the wiser option to refrain till after that event in case it could be perceived as potentially gaining an advantage by other prospective candidates.

 

FS, I am not going to get into a public slanging match with a fellow Board member.

 

So I will make some points in relation to your question and won't respond further, particularly as your question is based on a premise that I am not prepared to confirm or deny at this point. As you know all members of the RFB have been sent all member's CV's and asked to consider whether they wish to stand for a position or support anyone else for a position.

 

1. There is no "perhaps" about it. If you do not believe me, then please ask Rev McQuarrie yourself; then perhaps you would be good enough to post his reply.
   
2. I am told that he has a reputation for being scrupulously fair which is why he was invited to take the role and has held similar positions in the past.
   
3. He does not have a vote in the elections for Office Bearers.
   
4. However, if you think that the fact that I spoke to him for the reason stated post the election renders him unsuitable to chair the first meeting because he might be in some way biased when it comes to the conduct of the office bearers election should there be one (though it's not clear to me how he might exercise such bias) then I suggest you ask him to stand down when the agenda is considered.
   

 

So far as I am concerned the whole process has been open, transparent in and in your view "democratic".

 

I have been equally open and answered all questions truthfully to the best of my ability.

 

I would respectfully suggest that we now get on with the job that we have been elected to do on behalf of the fans.

 

However, if you continue to have concerns please direct them to Rev McQuarrie.

Edited September 26, 2014 by BrahimHemdani