Jump to content

 

 

Rangers First board election: Gersnet's voting poll...


Gersnet voting for the new Rangers First board.  

210 members have voted

  1. 1. Gersnet voting for the new Rangers First board.

    • Candidate 1 : Peter Ewart
      7
    • Candidate 2 : Alan Harris
      6
    • Candidate 3 : Ronnie Johnston
      4
    • Candidate 4 : Brian Bowman
      4
    • Candidate 5 : Derek Miller
      6
    • Candidate 6 : Graham Campbell
      4
    • Candidate 7 : Ricki Neill
      24
    • Candidate 8 : Chris Smith
      5
    • Candidate 9 : Brian Donohoe exMP
      18
    • Candidate 10 : Iain Martin
      8
    • Candidate 11 : Andy McLintock (WITHDRAWN)
      5
    • Candidate 12 : Richard Scott BA
      5
    • Candidate 13 : James Blair
      19
    • Candidate 14 : Greg Marshall
      22
    • Candidate 15 : Kelly Johnstone
      17
    • Candidate 16 : Adam Campbell
      0
    • Candidate 17 : Ryan Thomson
      3
    • Candidate 18 : Stuart MacQuarrie
      21
    • Candidate 19 : Marc Alexander
      9
    • Candidate 20 : Graeme Henderson
      3
    • Candidate 21 : Richard Gough
      17
    • Candidate 22 : Darren Thomson
      2
    • Candidate 23 : Calvin Campbell
      1


Recommended Posts

I've never met Rab but although I'm sure his heart is in the right place he's certainly clumsy at times in the way he addresses some issues.

 

Fair comment IMO but it's the hidden and more Machiavellian agenda of others that is the real issue here................ some of whom who are developing a habit of controversially moving onto to new pastures when one group doesn't suit, not being timely and up-front about telling who they should about their new visions for what appears to be 'themselves'.

 

The irony being one of them, Graham Campbell (seconded by Ronnie Johnston) standing on a 'consultation and transparency ticket' in the recent election.

 

#Toxic

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted on FF by Marshall1873

 

I would like Graham Campbell, Ronnie Johnston and all the others to come to the Louden and have a no holds barred discussion about all your behaviour towards RF, RST, James Blair, Richard Gough and the Rangers support in General, This invitation is open to you all anytime it suits you ( not a matchday or TV game ) Let's get this put to bed once and for all

 

Didn't take long, did it ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Calling that playground bullshit 'clumsy' is extending a level of generosity beyond me, frankie. Coming after an election which sees people with financial acumen overlooked in favour of not just thoelogians, but theologians who worked with the previous board, leaves the idea of fan ownership looking like amateur hour.

 

Who is the theologian that they were overlooked for ?

 

If you mean Rev McQuarrie, then you are incorrect as he wasn't successful in his attempt to make the Board either.

 

The Board consists of :

 

Richard Gough

Ricki Neill

James Blair

Greg Marshall

Brian Donohoe

Kelly Johnstone

Peter Ewart

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is the theologian that they were overlooked for ?

 

If you mean Rev McQuarrie, then you are incorrect as he wasn't successful in his attempt to make the Board either.

 

The Board consists of :

 

Richard Gough

Ricki Neill

James Blair

Greg Marshall

Brian Donohoe

Kelly Johnstone

Peter Ewart

 

Would it be too kind to call that a 'schoolboy error' ?

 

:)

...:seal:

Edited by buster.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Calling that playground bullshit 'clumsy' is extending a level of generosity beyond me, frankie. Coming after an election which sees people with financial acumen overlooked in favour of not just thoelogians, but theologians who worked with the previous board, leaves the idea of fan ownership looking like amateur hour.

 

I tend to try and think the best of people. Perhaps a flaw, perhaps not but I guess when you're close to the action you may become more emotional than logical at times - resulting in comments like Rab's.

 

This is the problem with online elections: people tend to vote for folk they know - or worse people they think they know just by conversing with them online. That can be fine but I don't think it's ideal and when people are being overlooked because they perhaps don't have a persona online presence then that can be worrying if their CV is otherwise impressive.

 

RF is still in its infancy so we'll find out soon enough if the folk voted on are competent or not. Soon in this case being a year or two but that's as fast as such stuff works.

 

Just wait until we have the official single fan group elections. I can't wait to book another holiday for that voting period... ;)

Edited by Frankie
Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is the theologian that they were overlooked for ?

 

If you mean Rev McQuarrie, then you are incorrect as he wasn't successful in his attempt to make the Board either.

 

The Board consists of :

 

Richard Gough

Ricki Neill

James Blair

Greg Marshall

Brian Donohoe

Kelly Johnstone

Peter Ewart

 

To a layman like myself that looks an impressive enough selection of people to me.

 

Yes, perhaps one could argue a few people have conflicts of interests but what they also bring is expertise and contacts therein. This means a balance has to be found and it should be easy enough to hold anyone to account should any problem arise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is the theologian that they were overlooked for ?

 

If you mean Rev McQuarrie, then you are incorrect as he wasn't successful in his attempt to make the Board either.

 

The Board consists of :

 

Richard Gough

Ricki Neill

James Blair

Greg Marshall

Brian Donohoe

Kelly Johnstone

Peter Ewart

 

I was taking the figures from the Gersnet poll, I didn't know the vote proper had been held.

Edited by Germinal
Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to try and think the best of people. Perhaps a flaw, perhaps not but I guess when you're close to the action you may become more emotional than logical at times - resulting in comments like Rab's.

 

This is the problem with online elections: people tend to vote for folk they know - or worse people they think they know just by conversing with them online. That can be fine but I don't think it's ideal and when people are being overlooked because they perhaps don't have a persona online presence then that can be worrying if their CV is otherwise impressive.

 

RF is still in its infancy so we'll find out soon enough if the folk voted on are competent or not. Soon in this case being a year or two but that's as fast as such stuff works.

 

Just wait until we have the official single fan group elections. I can't wait to book another holiday for that voting period... ;)

 

Reality was that if relatively unknown candidates (however impressive their CV) thought they would get elected on a profile page and not a lot else then they were being extremely optimistic, you could even say naive.

 

Had they wanted to win then they obviously had to make more of an effort at communicating X and Y.

 

 

However many good candidates simply won't want to go near what they might perceive as a 'no mans land' of Rangers fans politics.

We need whatever comes of any proposals to end up with something that enourages 'honest quality' to come forward and take the place of the 'politically toxic'.

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.