Meeting with Joy Seppala & Dave Boddy - Thursday 27th February 2020 (38 Viewers)

[Nick]

Is sisu leave tomorrow I hope if Duggins ever attempts to go to a city game he get a sky blue smoke bomb rammed up his arse.

He probably pays good money for that already.

 

---

[Gibbo]

I think shouting abuse at Wasps should not be discouraged

What people say on this blog can't be controlled, as we can see!! But the key thing is that the central voices are measured - Mark, Pete, Nick, FP, OSB, even you Grendel, and the few others. If the outliers continue to rant, so be it.

 

[Nick]

Have emailed the story writer to make that point

 

[shmmeee]

Have we reached out to opposition councillors BTW? Maybe they can ask some questions/get some info that we can’t? Not sure why everything has to go to Duggins.

 

[shmmeee]

What people say on this blog can't be controlled, as we can see!! But the key thing is that the central voices are measured - Mark, Pete, Nick, FP, OSB, even you Grendel, and the few others. If the outliers continue to rant, so be it.

Ah yes. Good old measured Nick and Grendel.

In all seriousness, the reputation of this forum outside of Sisu isn’t great and we should be aware of that.

 

[Nick]

What people say on this blog can't be controlled, as we can see!! But the key thing is that the central voices are measured - Mark, Pete, Nick, FP, OSB, even you Grendel, and the few others. If the outliers continue to rant, so be it.

I don't see myself as a central voice to be honest, I think Mark and Pete have managed to say the same things most people are thinking but in a diplomatic way.

 

[shmmeee]

I don't see myself as a central voice to be honest, I think Mark and Pete have managed to say the same things most people are thinking but in a diplomatic way.

You should. You are the admin and the operator of the Twitter account. To most people you are SBT.

 

[Gibbo]

I don't see myself as a central voice to be honest, I think Mark and Pete have managed to say the same things most people are thinking but in a diplomatic way.

If you want to retain SBT's involvement you can't avoid a role. Why should JS listen to SBT if Mark and Pete are the only two being measured in their criticism?

 

[clint van damme]

Not Sisu it says he doesn’t give a toss about ccfc

That's 5he thing the arrogance seeps out of him but he isn't addressing sisu, if he was it wouldnt bother me, he's addressing the concerns of a group of supporters.

What an absolute wanker.

 

[Nick]

If you want to retain SBT's involvement you can't avoid a role. Why should JS listen to SBT if Mark and Pete are the only two being measured in their criticism?

I am happy for critisism, I am just no spokesperson.

Pete has set an example of how to do it, I don't feel I'd be able to be as composed and diplomatic as he has been!

 

[clint van damme]

Ah yes. Good old measured Nick and Grendel.

In all seriousness, the reputation of this forum outside of Sisu isn’t great and we should be aware of that.

It still represents a fair number of match attendees.
What have we got, 3 to 4000 ST holders. There's a decent number on here.

 

[shmmeee]

That's 5he thing the arrogance seeps out of him but he isn't addressing sisu, if he was it wouldnt bother me, he's addressing the concerns of a group of supporters.

What an absolute wanker.

He thinks he is addressing Sisu and we are just a bunch of internet weirdos. The view is there’s maybe 20 people on here and they’re all up Sisus arse and irrationally hate Wasps and the council. The two main people have spent years trolling councillors and the Trust on Twitter and generally being a dick.

Whether we like it or not the role of SBT is pretty solidified as the anti-Trust. Everything this forum says about the Trust replace Wasps or CCC with Sisu and you’ve got what other groups say about us. Which is what I said in my OP in this thread that triggered everyone. It’s Sisu/Observer/SBT vs Wasps/CET/other SBT now. Any meetings will be assumed to be a proxy for Sisu. Because that’s what happens when you don’t build relationships and are guided mostly by hatred of another organisation. As we saw with the Trust.

 

[shmmeee]

It still represents a fair number of match attendees.
What have we got, 3 to 4000 ST holders. There's a decent number on here.

As I said in my other post, that’s not the impression. It’s why I wanted names on the original statement. Otherwise you’re just Nick and Grendels sock puppets.

 

[Nick]

In all seriousness, the reputation of this forum outside of Sisu isn’t great and we should be aware of that.

Why's that do you think?

Do you think it has anything to do with people making things up and spreading lies about being run by SISU etc? Do you think it has anything to do with people on here seeing through the random bullshit propaganda that people put out?

I have had somebody in a pub think I work for SISU when they were telling somebody about this site, not realising I was stood there laughing at it.

It has been years of people spreading lies because they don't like what is said on here and that people see straight through the bullshit.

It was you who tried to make out that I was getting freebies from SISU and that I have links to them, wasn't it? That wasn't true in the slightest.

Funny really as the hardcore people making things up have now been shown to have Trust / Council involvement who have no interest in CCFC and have moved onto going after people on social media. Why's that?

 

[Ring Of Steel]

It still represents a fair number of match attendees.
What have we got, 3 to 4000 ST holders. There's a decent number on here.

He does have a point though- read this thread and tell me there is a balanced approach to the situation- there isn't. It started off well enough but soon disintegrated into a slanging match & people being hounded for questioning the owners, which anyone is perfectly entitled to do. Its way too extreme.

 

[mark82]

Well have to agree to disagree on this one. You call it aggressive. I call it challenge. Potato potahto. I am always doing me, I can’t do no one else.

Sorry if I’ve misunderstood but both you and Pete have said you didn’t want to question responses straight away and the main aim was setting up a meeting. Didn’t mean to misrepresent. More meant to be a mea culpa that i had got the wrong end of the stick and had incorrect expectations.

We did question & cross-question. I don't want to keep covering the same ground. We asked what we asked, in the way that we did and reported on what they said. Most of what you've said we have already asked, and we've detailed what we said (and where not in my original notes I've tried to clarify). We could've sat asking the same question for an hour, kept getting the same answer and got nowhere and had the meeting stopped. That wouldn't get us anywhere either immediately or in the future. In fairness, it was meant to last an hour, they ended up giving us just over 3 hours which I thought was quite reasonable of them. They didn't have to do that.

We might not like all the answers. I tried to record everything but I wasn't ever going to give a word for word transcript of a 3 hour + meeting.

But, yes, the intention was always that it would be an ongoing conversation and that we would try to get both parties together if at all possible (and both sides are at least making the right noises at the moment in that respect).

 

[Nick]

He does have a point though- read this thread and tell me there is a balanced approach to the situation- there isn't. It started off well enough but soon disintegrated into a slanging match & people being hounded for questioning the owners, which anyone is perfectly entitled to do. Its way too extreme.

You will probably find it was the way shmmeee lost his head early doors.

Nobody else has been "hounded" have they?

 

[Ring Of Steel]

Why's that do you think?

Do you think it has anything to do with people making things up and spreading lies about being run by SISU etc? Do you think it has anything to do with people on here seeing through the random bullshit propaganda that people put out?

I have had somebody in a pub think I work for SISU when they were telling somebody about this site, not realising I was stood there laughing at it.

It has been years of people spreading lies because they don't like what is said on here and that people see straight through bullshit.

It was you who tried to make out that I was getting freebies from SISU and that I have links to them, wasn't it? That wasn't true in the slightest.

Funny really as the hardcore people making things up have now been shown to have Trust / Council involvement who have no interest in CCFC and have moved onto going after people on social media.

What kind of freebies would SISU be handing out?

 

[clint van damme]

He does have a point though- read this thread and tell me there is a balanced approach to the situation- there isn't. It started off well enough but soon disintegrated into a slanging match & people being hounded for questioning the owners, which anyone is perfectly entitled to do. Its way too extreme.

But it still represents a good number of the support.
In the same way the Trust and the Facebook forum do, no matter what everyone else's perception of them is.

 

[Nick]

What kind of freebies would SISU be handing out?

He has tried to make out I have links to SISU and get free season tickets to discredit me and this site. Neither of those is true in the slightest.

Much the same as all of the "SISU Payroll" stuff which it turns out is heavily influenced by people who have been involved with the Council and the Trust. Sure, just a coincidence.

 

[Ring Of Steel]

You will probably find it was the way shmmeee lost his head early doors.

Nobody else has been "hounded" have they?

Call it a question of tone then if you like. It all comes across a bit 'rabid', which is exactly the approach I would have thought we would like to avoid seeing as it is utilised so much by the twitter & facebook brigade. I could imagine that from the outside looking in all people would see is two groups of nutters who are exactly alike apart from they blame different people.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Have we reached out to opposition councillors BTW? Maybe they can ask some questions/get some info that we can’t? Not sure why everything has to go to Duggins.

He always makes an effort to answer and he is the leader of the council isnt he?

 

[Ring Of Steel]

He has tried to make out I have links to them and get free season tickets to discredit me and this site. Neither of those is true in the slightest.

Why- whats the motive there?

 

[Nick]

Call it a question of tone then if you like. It all comes across a bit 'rabid', which is exactly the approach I would have thought we would like to avoid seeing as it is utilised so much by the twitter & facebook brigade. I could imagine that from the outside looking in all people would see is two groups of nutters who are exactly alike apart from they blame different people.

I am sure it only comes across as rabid because of what it was in response to and why.

 

[Ring Of Steel]

I am sure it only comes across as rabid because of what it was in response to and why.

Maybe so, however I would argue pretty strongly that in order to be heard & noticed, a balanced & measured approach- a smart approach- is best, all this rowing & arguing serves no purpose apart from to make us easier to ignore as a rabble.

We have the one thing the other fools don't have- facts. They can piss around as much as they want but it doesn't change the facts around the indemnity, and arguing against that loses them credibility.

 

[Nick]

Why- whats the motive there?

Because there's a range of people on here with different views who cut through the bullshit and don't blindly believe everything.

You have people coming on here who have tried to post bullshit and have been asked questions about it and not liked that they had been questioned.

If this site gets discredited then when bullshit from the council or Wasps is pointed out then it is just "Oh it's just because they are on SISU's payroll, they are making it up" type shit. No matter how true it is.

 

[clint van damme]

He thinks he is addressing Sisu and we are just a bunch of internet weirdos. The view is there’s maybe 20 people on here and they’re all up Sisus arse and irrationally hate Wasps and the council. The two main people have spent years trolling councillors and the Trust on Twitter and generally being a dick.

Whether we like it or not the role of SBT is pretty solidified as the anti-Trust. Everything this forum says about the Trust replace Wasps or CCC with Sisu and you’ve got what other groups say about us. Which is what I said in my OP in this thread that triggered everyone. It’s Sisu/Observer/SBT vs Wasps/CET/other SBT now. Any meetings will be assumed to be a proxy for Sisu. Because that’s what happens when you don’t build relationships and are guided mostly by hatred of another organisation. As we saw with the Trust.

This forum will need to go a long way to get as close to the owners as the trust are to wasps.
And I say that as someone who has jumped to their defence against bullshit accusations on here regularly and recently..
But their relationship with wasps is beyond cosy unfortunately.

 

[Nick]

Maybe so, however I would argue pretty strongly that in order to be heard & noticed, a balanced & measured approach- a smart approach- is best, all this rowing & arguing serves no purpose apart from to make us easier to ignore as a rabble.

I agree, thats why I have said Mark and Pete are much better than me in restraint and diplomacy as they don't get drawn into his shite

 

[mark82]

As I say I think my frustration was borne from a misunderstanding of the objectives of your group. From the initial statement I thought it was about “holding all parties to account” and read this with that eye, looking for account as it were. From a perspective of bridge building, it’s a cracking success. And as I say those of us who want to hold someone to account (anyone by the looks of it) will just have to hold tight.

There is an element of both, but as an initial meeting the main objective certainly was to open dialogue. Holding people to account is fine, what we need is people to take action. If we can influence that action in any small way then it'll achieve objective.

 

[shmmeee]

This forum will need to go a long way to get as close to the owners as the trust are to wasps.
And I say that as someone who has jumped to their defence against bullshit accusations on here regularly and recently..
But their relationship with wasps is beyond cosy unfortunately.

I should be clear here. I’m not talking about what is. Not am I talking about Mark and Pete. Just saying how the forum as a whole is seen.

Im sure Trust members would argue about being cosy with Wasps as well.

We genuinely are all just City fans trying our best. I know that’s not cool to say but it’s true.

 

[Ring Of Steel]

Because there's a range of people on here with different views who cut through the bullshit and don't blindly believe everything.

You have people coming on here who have tried to post bullshit and have been asked questions about it and not liked that they had been questioned.

If this site gets discredited then when bullshit from the council or Wasps is pointed out then it is just "Oh it's just because they are on SISU's payroll, they are making it up" type shit. No matter how true it is.

tbh I wouldn't know about discrediting sites but then I'm 500 miles away. A very strange thing to do.

You mention restraint above- I think that is absolutely critical because with a smart approach we can rise above all the nonsense and claptrap emanating from the other people and just argue the point clearly and very effectively with cold, hard facts.

 

[Nick]

This forum will need to go a long way to get as close to the owners as the trust are to wasps.
And I say that as someone who has jumped to their defence against bullshit accusations on here regularly and recently..
But their relationship with wasps is beyond cosy unfortunately.

Exactly.

The thing is though he won't have people dissing the trust for obvious reasons. The same as when I pointed out that people involved with the Trust were running shady accounts he started going on about russian bots and conspiracies.

He will try his best to say this forum is up SISU's arse and that I get free tickets and am mates with them but at the end of the day how viable is that from somebody related to an ex council leader and the person in charge of the Trust when they have schemed against the club? It is very much a "I see agendas so everybody else must have them".

 

[Ring Of Steel]

I should be clear here. I’m not talking about what is. Not am I talking about Mark and Pete. Just saying how the forum as a whole is seen.

seen by who?

 

[mark82]

I mean in the articles. It’s always the same. We always come out with more questions than answers and no further forward when we all know the follow up questions that are needed.

Reading back it seems I’ve misunderstood and this was a report on Pete’s contact? God knows. Fucking CET reporting.

Let's just say the article doesn't present the full conversation. I did follow up Pete's initial email with a quite lengthy follow up. George responded to say he'll give us answers at a meeting which is still to be set up.

 

[Nick]

tbh I wouldn't know about discrediting sites but then I'm 500 miles away. A very strange thing to do.

You mention restraint above- I think that is absolutely critical because with a smart approach we can rise above all the nonsense and claptrap emanating from the other people and just argue the point clearly and very effectively with cold, hard facts.

It is, which is why Pete and Mark and potentially any others can meet, debate and quiz people properly rather than me calling them a Fucking Twat.