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

[26th of foot 5,832]

Twenty-three candidates, and only one female. I find that hugely disappointing.

[Zappa 0]

Apologies folks and apologies to Candidate 23 who is Calvin Campbell. He's now added to the poll, so please read his info and statement and consider him in your voting. If anyone decides they'd like to change one of their entered votes to Calvin please send me a PM and we'll sort it out for you.

[Zappa 0]

Twenty-three candidates, and only one female. I find that hugely disappointing.

 

Not only is it disappointing mate, but it's actually quite strange considering the amount of women who go to watch our games. I'd say some sections of Ibrox regularly have around and even over a 1 in 5 ratio of women to men.

[buster. 4,808]

Not only is it disappointing mate, but it's actually quite strange considering the amount of women who go to watch our games. I'd say some sections of Ibrox regularly have around and even over a 1 in 5 ratio of women to men.

 

Perhaps the women feel in their water that violence is less probable at a match rather than at a fans meeting

[ian1964 10,413]

Andrew McLintock has withdrawn from the election process

[Zappa 0]

Perhaps the women feel in their water that violence is less probable at a match rather than at a fans meeting

 

Or the other way around!

 

BTW, does anyone know when the RF board election's email voting process actually ends/closes ???

[ian1964 10,413]

Or the other way around!

 

BTW, does anyone know when the RF board election's email voting process actually ends/closes ???

 

17th Feb mate, @ 14:00

Edited February 16, 2016 by ian1964

[buster. 4,808]

Or the other way around!

 

BTW, does anyone know when the RF board election's email voting process actually ends/closes ???

 

If there had been 22 women and one man then I'm sure electioneering may have have taken on a different slant with members preferring portfolios to profiles.

 

...

[Tannochsidebear 2,312]

When the list came out I had a very quick scan read of the candidates profiles and statements and thought I would go back to it later in the process when more was known.

 

What has happened since has been very very sad indeed. Are some candidates there on behalf of the club? Are some there to push through a merger with RST/RSA? Are some there to push for not merging with RST/RSA?

 

Is anyone actually standing as a Rangers supporter who believes in the concept of RF, a share purchase vehicle to get as many shares into the hands of ordinary bears as possible, to protect our club from ever again being at the mercy of mercenary owners?

 

I am a member of both RST (have been since the start in 2003) and pay into the £11.25pm Share purchase plan, and RF on the £18.72 monthly contribution. It is my belief that I want as many shares in the hands of ordinary Bears as possible. I really dont want the RST to merge with RF as I think there is a place for both to do quite separate things on behalf of their members, and also there may be times when it is good to keep them apart. As both have several thousand paying members, I am sure there are a large number of bears that are members of both. Merging this will probably mean less money going into buying shares as what would be the point of me continuing to pay both £11.25 and £18.72 per month to the same organisation?

 

I am also struggling with casting a vote in favour of what I see as "Club men" like Gough and McQuarrie. On one hand it would give RF some clout to say they have these names on the board and would be easy to get media attention. However the whole point of RF was to stay away from the more confrontational and controversial issues of the day and just be a share purchase vehicle, so it shouldnt need to attract media attention other than to try to persuade more Bears to join with them and help build the fans shareholding. On the other hand the RST has always been more active, vocal, controversial, and unafraid to criticise the board of the day or the footballing authorities without the need to have "celebrity bears" to get their message out. Long may that continue, but the polarising nature of their work has meant that for some fans the RST will not be an option to contribute to, so are we going to lose those contributions to RF if a merger goes through.

 

I haven't got a clue who to vote for. I know some I wont vote for. That list has got gradually longer as the process has gone on. I will probably end up not voting at all. Its all very sad.

[Blue Moon 1,113]

You have just put into words exactly how I feel TB. It took me a long time to decide who to vote for and I was swithering about not voting at all. I am in agreement that Rangers First should remain as it is, although I will look at the merger plans. I am concerned that a merger will lose many who contribute to Rangers First. I have been critical in the past of the number of fans groups but Rangers First isn't another fans group, it is a share buying group, set up for that purpose specifically. I see no reason why it should need to merge, but I would be happy as an individual to join a new fans group too and contribute to that. In the end I voted for those who are thinking the same way as I am and tried to forget all the other shenanigans.