Club 1872 - Board election timetable and info

[rbr 1,247]

 

https://www.change.org/p/the-board-of-rangers-first-2014-cic-owe-a-duty-of-care-to-its-members-to-proceed-if-club1872-is-to-succeed-it-requires-social-cohesion-we-re-not-ready

 

And just what exactly was wrong with what he was asking , the RF members , of which you weren't one , were being asked to vote on something that the RF board couldn't give them answers to , we were asked to vote on something that was against their own articles of association , less than 25% of the membership voted on that , it was rushed and it was flawed , we are now seeing that coming home to roost .

 

This could have been so great for the club , instead it's a shambles and no one will convince me otherwise , there are more questions still unanswered than answered , but all you get told is ," move on , we need to move on , the pasts the past ," my Arse .

[Frankie 8,136]

it seems certain people are getting questioned on their pasts whilst others are getting a free ride on their chequered history , that's why Iain Leiper ,aka D,artagnan , will be so important to get elected , no baggage , no interest in personal gain , only the Rangers

 

As far as I know all candidates have to attend hustings to answer questions on their application. Most, if not all, the candidates have also made themselves available via social media as well to be contacted. Thus, if you, I or anyone else has any issues, then it's up to us to raise them.

 

I'd agree there are aspects of one or two candidate's past that concern me to a degree but not enough to be overly worried about their performance should they be elected by an open vote. Most of them I don't know so I'll only be able to judge after the fact.

 

In that sense, I've no doubt D'art and the rest are interested in improving the organisation going forward. Members will have the opportunity to remove them if that doesn't prove to be the case.

[rbr 1,247]

As far as I know all candidates have to attend hustings to answer questions on their application. Most, if not all, the candidates have also made themselves available via social media as well to be contacted. Thus, if you, I or anyone else has any issues, then it's up to us to raise them.

 

I'd agree there are aspects of one or two candidate's past that concern me to a degree but not enough to be overly worried about their performance should they be elected by an open vote. Most of them I don't know so I'll only be able to judge after the fact.

 

In that sense, I've no doubt D'art and the rest are interested in improving the organisation going forward. Members will have the opportunity to remove them if that doesn't prove to be the case.

 

 

The problem is two fold , firstly the support is totally apathetic to all this electioneering , out of 8 guys in my work who I managed to get to join RF , 4 have already chucked it and the other 4 don't do social media or forums such as these , they simply aren't interested , that is a snap shot of the support , we have discussed at length in the past the % of fans that are online easily below 10% .

 

Secondly your correct , everyone was to make themselves available " in person " at the hustings , not vis Skype or any other type of dial in , yet these rules are already getting bent/broken .

 

Lastly the way certain people are getting promoted is very worrying , it's far too coincidental that the exact same list keeps appearing online and in print , I would be less sceptical if it coincided with the order they were listed on the club1872 site but they don't .

[Frankie 8,136]

The problem is two fold , firstly the support is totally apathetic to all this electioneering , out of 8 guys in my work who I managed to get to join RF , 4 have already chucked it and the other 4 don't do social media or forums such as these , they simply aren't interested , that is a snap shot of the support , we have discussed at length in the past the % of fans that are online easily below 10% .

 

Secondly your correct , everyone was to make themselves available " in person " at the hustings , not vis Skype or any other type of dial in , yet these rules are already getting bent/broken .

 

Lastly the way certain people are getting promoted is very worrying , it's far too coincidental that the exact same list keeps appearing online and in print , I would be less sceptical if it coincided with the order they were listed on the club1872 site but they don't .

 

It's up to the organisation and these candidates to address the apathy and improve engagement. That's been a challenge for almost 15 years now and it's only club threatening issues that seem to focus the minds of the 'non-political' fans.

 

I don't think it's reasonable to ask non-UK based fans to attend the hustings in person. Skype or another instrument is perfectly fine for allowing people to 'attend' meetings from thousands of miles away. If Apple, Google and countries governments can do this, then so can a wee fans organisation. Perhaps the rules were written before they received an application from the USA which is an oversight but let's be sensible and consider technology instead of paying the guy's air fare to speak in front of less than 30 people.

 

Unfortunately, I think people are always going to vote for people they know or names familiar to them instead of passing judgement on each candidate's actual application. Nevertheless, it's an open vote and conducted by a neutral organisation so I'm not sure how else we're supposed to undertake it.

 

Now, I'm all for constructive criticism and wholeheartedly agree that every candidate should be questioned openly and fairly. The opportunity is there to do that - before and after the elections. We can either make excuses or complain about the minutiae or we can work positively towards an outcome that favours us all.

Edited September 7, 2016 by Frankie

[rbr 1,247]

You should have stood

 

 

[BEARGER 1,829]

There will always be people who are anti, who go against the tide. Best leave them to it. As far as a "list" doing the rounds or a FF list is concerned I know nothing about that. I made my descisions based on who I knew and whom others I respected knew about, don't see anything wrong with that.

[rbr 1,247]

And regards the Skype issue ,potential candidates were told 1 week prior to the deadline that they had to appear in person at the hustings

 

 

[Frankie 8,136]

You should have stood

 

Haha - a few folk have suggested as much but unfortunately I couldn't commit properly at this time. Appreciate the support but there's an argument that those involved with groups before shouldn't be standing so I also took that into consideration. I also don't think I've got the patience to do the rounds on forums nowadays.

 

Maybe in the future after D'Art and the others have done all the hard work...

Edited September 7, 2016 by Frankie

[Frankie 8,136]

And regards the Skype issue ,potential candidates were told 1 week prior to the deadline that they had to appear in person at the hustings

 

I don't know the facts of who was told what and when but it's really a non-issue. Skype is a perfectly reasonable and workable solution which makes complete sense. To complain about it just detracts from any other valid point you may have.

 

Should the organisation pay upwards of £1000 to fly Shane over for a couple of days to speak in front of a few dozen people? Shane can be a mischief-maker at times (and I don't know him all that well) but he's a clever guy with a positive CV so I don't think we need to be in his presence to judge what his contribution could be.

 

FWIW, I'd say the same for anyone else who couldn't make it - even if they just lived along the road. It's not perfect but it is what it is. Let's concentrate on the important stuff.

[rbr 1,247]

That's not the point though , I have no issue with using technology , I use it for trustee meetings all the time, my issue is certain people being allowed to use it whilst others are told they must turn up in person , if you can't get basic information right at the start it doesn't bode well .