Going back to this one as you've evidently edited it with further information. Which meeting? I check the minutes on-line. Was a meeting with Joy - perhaps touched upon in a meeting - not worth minuting for the balance of us not in attendance to read about?
According to the constitution of the Sky Blue Trust, the meeting between the Trust and Joy Seppala should have been minuted, so allowing the members to know the details of discussions during the meeting.
The Trust board are representatives of the members and as such should disclose all information to the people they represent and not keep information private.
The AGM.
As I said, it was a nothing statement. Maybe it should have been put down, but all that was said was along the lines of 'I have also met Joy Seppala'. Maybe it should have been minuted, but it said nothing about nothing, and certainly wasn't actively hidden as conspiracy would like to think, as the information was actively volunteered, not asked for!
I'm sorry, I didn't start on this one with the ambition of knocking the SBT as I think they're doing a job many of are unable to do; BUT, when you enter what was minuted in the June minutes - that being quite categorically that a meeting with JS was being sought (and therefore raising expectation in that regard), and then it's not minuted again but it transpires that a meeting has taken place; then yes - something does need to be minuted subsequently. Even if it's to state that they are confident meeting JS is feasible, but that confidentiality should prevail. Thus acting as information to those of us who do subscribe, or do contribute and read the minutes and follow them as an evolving and accurate narrative.
Again; this is how conspiracy theories begin to grow. And they shouldn't. Or worse still, people feel left out and relinquish their membership. Which is - with respect - even worse. Everything I have seen of Jan and Moz, in the public arena and at the march has been very helpful to the cause, and it wouldn't be great if people lost faith in the cause due to events such as this
Hey, I don't think I was being ranty or shouty.
I meant if the Trust goes ranty and shouty as it's approach, not that you were being ranty and shouty on this thread...
TBH, I think they are not ranty & shouty enough..
There should be a protest at Highfield Road, at the Houses, to commemorate where it all started. If we could fix football we could rebuild HF and I think the Trust could do this if we got some exposure on Sky etc.
Does that apply to meetings with 'other interested parties' too, then?
It's a slippery slope...
The rule in the constitution applies to all meetings where the society is represented as this becomes a "society meeting". If they had met as private individuals then it would have been fine and no rules apply.
How do you define when they meet as individuals, and when as representatives? Surely, in fact, the above statement actually means there was no reason to even volunteer the information of a meeting, full-stop?
Why go anywhere near Sixfields? Another protest at the Ricoh would make a bigger impact IMO. On the Cardiff date of course.
I hope this game is a killer for SISU. The less fans the better.
We have one opportunity to make a statement.
With all 20 of you.... vote with your feet I am afraid, Sky would make a bigger deal of no one in the ground than 20 people on a hill holding pieces of paper.
Now if 5,000 turned up with all kinds of flags and causing havoc outside, it would be a different story.
We certainly need to protest at the injustice of not playing in Cov but as 90 % of Cov fans have never and will never go to Sixfields this seems a bit of an odd venue for a protest. Unless, of course, it prevents the match from happening - ?
It is high time the tiny minority of Sixfueld attendees boycotted a match. This should have happened by now in order to attract further media attention.
Far more notice would be paid if all the people that won't go to Sixfields turned up at the Ricoh at the same time. Organise it properly...let some people in the media know.
If 5000 (maybe even 10000) turned up to the Ricoh in one go that would make one hell of a statement.
Far more notice would be paid if all the people that won't go to Sixfields turned up at the Ricoh at the same time. Organise it properly...let some people in the media know.
If 5000 (maybe even 10000) turned up to the Ricoh in one go that would make one hell of a statement.
Ian
What would that proove and who would be interested in covering it?
The whole issue in all this is that most people have given up the fight.
At least on the hill you can watch the fame.
Far more notice would be paid if all the people that won't go to Sixfields turned up at the Ricoh at the same time. Organise it properly...let some people in the media know.
If 5000 (maybe even 10000) turned up to the Ricoh in one go that would make one hell of a statement.
In my opinion a lot of people attending Sixfields have nothing else major going on in their life.
The sense of belonging is too great to break so they need to attend. Not knocking it but sometimes people need to look at the bigger picture.
Sisu seem to be happy that some people are their attending and it seems to also make it okay for the FL.
Far more notice would be paid if all the people that won't go to Sixfields turned up at the Ricoh at the same time. Organise it properly...let some people in the media know.
If 5000 (maybe even 10000) turned up to the Ricoh in one go that would make one hell of a statement.
Would it not be well noticed if 5-10k protested opposite the TV cameras outside the demolished East stand for the CC v CC CC game? NOPM but all on telly.
I would have thought it a fantastic one-off opportunity but it looks like it might end up 50 folk on the hill again.
Anyway, I have a practical question.
Not because I'm NOPM like, more because I'm tight fisted but... does anybody notice if you park in the food outlets car parks etc for free?
It helped last time didn't it?
Bullshit.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?