RF resignation letters

[pete 2,494]

Pete , from the very start ,it was pointed out that they should take a breather get all these issues sorted prior to any vote being put to the members of both schemes , it would have been discussed and agreed by elected members of those schemes not unelected guys who in many cases we still don't know who they are , why the rush when we are now in a situation that they are having to sort these things with no comeback from members .

 

As for my other point , CG appears every now and then doesn't answer questions directly but makes general statements telling everyone they are wrong and disappears , CS I have on my phone so can get in contact with easily , but again rarely posts now , on other forums the guys who championed this nearly 24/7 have disappeared , never to be seen , it's pathetic .

 

As for a membership scheme being around for years , your absolutely correct , I myself sent an ideal to Martin Bain nearly 20 years ago , but the scheme I am talking about was club1872 , which Martin Stenhouse has admitted was their idea , hardly independent , and this only works if it's independent , we don't none of us know the future and who will be our board in 5 , 10 years never mind 5, 10 months time.

 

 

And just one other point , just where in all the discussions around this merger was an unelected wp mentioned .

 

As I said before the boards of the RF\RST have the right to elect a WP. Expecting them to be open for general election is crazy(Sorry it is) The WP also has no responsibility on keeping members informed of what they are doing. The WP has a responsibility to keep the boards of the RF\RST up to date on all they are doing and it is both boards of the separate organisations to keep their members up to date. Once all has been amalgamated and seen to be up and running then the boards of the RF\RST will become redundant and elections should take place. Don't forget 90+% of members gave the green light for the wheels to be put in motion so I don't really see where you think it is all so wrong.

[rbr 1,247]

As I said before the boards of the RF\RST have the right to elect a WP. Expecting them to be open for general election is crazy(Sorry it is) The WP also has no responsibility on keeping members informed of what they are doing. The WP has a responsibility to keep the boards of the RF\RST up to date on all they are doing and it is both boards of the separate organisations to keep their members up to date. Once all has been amalgamated and seen to be up and running then the boards of the RF\RST will become redundant and elections should take place. Don't forget 90+% of members gave the green light for the wheels to be put in motion so I don't really see where you think it is all so wrong.

 

Pete sorry but your completely wrong , the RF board was voted in to do exactly what the wp are doing now , there was no mention anywhere about a wp of unelected people from out with the two schemes deciding on what the Club1872 scheme looked like .

 

90% of people did not vote for unelected people to decide on their vote , how you come to that conclusion is just baffling to me .

[pete 2,494]

Pete sorry but your completely wrong , the RF board was voted in to do exactly what the wp are doing now , there was no mention anywhere about a wp of unelected people from out with the two schemes deciding on what the Club1872 scheme looked like .

 

90% of people did not vote for unelected people to decide on their vote , how you come to that conclusion is just baffling to me .

 

Boards are elected to make decisions. I guess both boards together decided to take the route of a working party. They have the right to make that decision without putting it to a members vote. Maybe they should also put it to the members who has to set the coffee before the meetings start.

 

90+% of members from both organisations(IIRR) gave the green light for to go further in setting up an amalgamated supporters group. Maybe you misunderstood what the vote was about.

If you feel aggrieved that you had no say in electing a working party then you should have put yourself up for election to get on the board. Then you would have had your say. I will say it once more the boards of the RF\RST had the right to make a decision on choosing a working party of people they thought were capable. It would have been crazy to put that up for open election as people who have no experience could have been chosen. I will bow out now as I need to do some work and I feel I am hitting my head against a brick wall.

[Bluedell 5,329]

Pete sorry but your completely wrong , the RF board was voted in to do exactly what the wp are doing now , there was no mention anywhere about a wp of unelected people from out with the two schemes deciding on what the Club1872 scheme looked like .

 

90% of people did not vote for unelected people to decide on their vote , how you come to that conclusion is just baffling to me .

 

Is the WP made up up of non-directors of RST and RF?

[rbr 1,247]

Don't know , but why Craig Houston is on it is anyone's guess

 

 

[rbr 1,247]

Sorry bluebell what I meant to say was no I don't think so

 

 

[rbr 1,247]

Boards are elected to make decisions. I guess both boards together decided to take the route of a working party. They have the right to make that decision without putting it to a members vote. Maybe they should also put it to the members who has to set the coffee before the meetings start.

 

90+% of members from both organisations(IIRR) gave the green light for to go further in setting up an amalgamated supporters group. Maybe you misunderstood what the vote was about.

If you feel aggrieved that you had no say in electing a working party then you should have put yourself up for election to get on the board. Then you would have had your say. I will say it once more the boards of the RF\RST had the right to make a decision on choosing a working party of people they thought were capable. It would have been crazy to put that up for open election as people who have no experience could have been chosen. I will bow out now as I need to do some work and I feel I am hitting my head against a brick wall.

Utter rubbish, in that case why did they bother standing for election if they were going to hand over all power to an unelected wp, it's you who has missed the point not me Pete

 

 

[the gunslinger 3,366]

How many people are on the rf board or were?

[Bluedell 5,329]

Is Craig Houston on the WP? I know he's spokeman for C1872 but that's not necessarily the same thing.

 

It's a little strange that he has been made spokeman given he's not on the board of RST or RF but it's a position that many wouldn't like and if the have seconded someone in to do a specific role then fair enough (not withstanding the issues in respect of his tweet).

 

I'd expect that the WP was made up of a majority of RF and RST board members. Again if they have bring in one or two experts or helpers for specific roles then again fair enough but I wouldn't expect a majority of the WP to be non-board members.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

7 board members it seems.

 

1 left a while back and 1 has never been to a meeting.

 

That means these 3 could have decided anything they want and put it in place with a majority.

 

Or am I missing something?