What a shock... the trust "speak up" (2 Viewers)

Nick · Jan 14, 2020

shmmeee said:
Sorry mate I disagree. No matter how objective you think you can be it’s just human nature that if you only hear from one group of people you become biased towards their POV. That’s what happened with the Trust. They didn’t wake up one morning and go “oh well be biased towards Wasps” and equally despite how fun it is to say they aren’t especially stupid or gullible. They’re humans and that’s what happens with humans fed a diet of biased info. Garbage in garbage out.

Erm, they were biased towards Wasps as soon as they moved and did a press release saying how great the event was?

It's simple, don't let the council bullshit constantly and believe it. I have no interest in going to meet Joy or Tim because they would probably try to bullshit me. I have no interest in letting them make me feel important and fill my head with bullshit spin.

Johnson did a massive article saying the council were not to blame and had people helping him. Maybe if the Trust didn't have ex council people involved they wouldn't be as biased?

SkyBlueCRJ · Jan 14, 2020

shmmeee said:
See above reply to Nick. You’re misunderstanding my point, either intentionally or not.

I understand your point perfectly I just don't agree with it.

shmmeee · Jan 14, 2020

Nick said:
Erm, they were biased towards Wasps as soon as they moved and did a press release saying how great the event was?

It's simple, don't let the council bullshit constantly and believe it. I have no interest in going to meet Joy or Tim because they would probably try to bullshit me. I have no interest in letting them make me feel important and fill my head with bullshit spin.

Johnson did a massive article saying the council were not to blame and had people helping him. Maybe if the Trust didn't have ex council people involved they wouldn't be as biased?

If you have no intention of meeting anyone how do you propose to influence two sides that refuse to talk to the media and have an NDA in place?

If it’s just press releases and the like fair enough but I don’t see is getting any further forward.

shmmeee · Jan 14, 2020

SkyBlueCRJ said:
I understand your point perfectly I just don't agree with it.

If you understood it you’ve misrepresented it because what you posted I was saying wasn’t what I was saying.

Information bias is a fairly well studied and well accepted psychological phenomenon.

Grendel · Jan 14, 2020

shmmeee said:
Sorry mate I disagree. No matter how objective you think you can be it’s just human nature that if you only hear from one group of people you become biased towards their POV. That’s what happened with the Trust. They didn’t wake up one morning and go “oh well be biased towards Wasps” and equally despite how fun it is to say they aren’t especially stupid or gullible. They’re humans and that’s what happens with humans fed a diet of biased info. Garbage in garbage out.

The trust stance was set a long time ago but actually the majority of its members probably don’t agree with it or don’t actually care. People reading it has 2,700 members will think they are all active. Literally 99% of them are not active at all. It’s actually a board of “directors” and a small group of followers who have a view and have used the trust badge to operate that way

Nick · Jan 14, 2020

shmmeee said:
If you have no intention of meeting anyone how do you propose to influence two sides that refuse to talk to the media and have an NDA in place?

If it’s just press releases and the like fair enough but I don’t see is getting any further forward.

Why would I want to go and have my picture taken shaking hands with Fisher for example? Like the Trust did with Duggins?

It's all well and good saying the bias is only because SISU and the club won't talk to them but it's probably more to do with the people involved who are heavily involved with the council.

How do the Trust plan to influence by meeting certain sides in secret and then putting out multiple versions of what happened to fit the narrative that day?

Grendel · Jan 14, 2020

shmmeee said:
If you understood it you’ve misrepresented it because what you posted I was saying wasn’t what I was saying.

Information bias is a fairly well studied and well accepted psychological phenomenon.

It’s not media bias that’s being proposed - it’s a fans forum expressing a view among other things that the media is misrepresenting information and that information is being influenced by a very small group of people controlling the agenda

That is the key. This is a trust that is really a few people. The PSB group seems to be a person as was the Jimmy Hill Way. These are not representing anyone other then themselves. It’s legitimate to point that out.

The PSB group gets media attention but is one person who blocks any dissenting voices and when you look at what they put out there hand the time is blatant untruths.

There is no compromise with this form of behaviour

Nick · Jan 14, 2020

Grendel said:
It’s not media bias that’s being proposed - it’s a fans forum expressing a view among other things that the media is misrepresenting information and that information is being influenced by a very small group of people controlling the agenda

That is the key. This is a trust that is really a few people. The PSB group seems to be a person as was the Jimmy Hill Way. These are not representing anyone other then themselves. It’s legitimate to point that out.

The PSB group gets media attention but is one person who blocks any dissenting voices and when you look at what they put out there hand the time is blatant untruths.

There is no compromise with this form of behaviour

PSB Group is a good example. Throw some tea and biscuits at them and they will repeat whatever you say.

How about the Trust consult every one of their members with a poll and every member on here can be invited to do a poll?

SkyBlueCRJ · Jan 14, 2020

shmmeee said:
If you understood it you’ve misrepresented it because what you posted I was saying wasn’t what I was saying.

Right I'll reply to your response to Nick in detail as maybe I myself wasn't clear enough.

Your belief that SISU would use the 'New Trust' agains the current SBT wouldn't happen. There's no arguing that. SISU cannot be trusted so the idea of Joy influencing a fans group is frankly impossible given her popularity within the club's community. The same applies to the Wasps and CCC. The whole idea of why the SBT has taken the stance it has is because of its blind hate for SISU, rather than your argument of them receiving one sided information from Wasps or CCC. I think this is where you're confusing things as you're forgetting this crucial aspect - or not mentioning it within your responses. Claiming "'it’s just human nature that if you only hear from one group of people you become biased towards their POV" is painting everyone with the same brush and IMO I don't think that's necessarily true - as Grendel rightly said it's only a small proportion of the SBT and their board members that actually blindly follow their own views. No one else really shares the same view - not anyone that I've spoken to anyway. Like I said in my previous post everyone has had the same information by large and have come to the conclusion that all parties are at fault. Why is it the SBT that still pushes SISU as the only antagonist in this absolute mess? Rather than speak to the right people they've only conversed with the likes of Wasps and CCC who have played on their weakness - which is hating SISU to the extent of believing anything that's said against them.

As I have previously stated their opinion on Wasps has resulted from sheer manipulation rather them actually necessarily agreeing with their stance. Again, like i said that either qualifies them as idiots or easily manipulated I don't know which as I don't personally know any of the Trust's board. This is also why I keep on using the phrase 'blind hate' with regards to to SISU and the Trust. SISU is seen as the boogy man to the Trust due to past tensions. This blind hate has clouded their vision and they have allowed themselves to believe anything that Wasps tell them because they'll agree with anything and anyone that paints SISU in a bad light. The SBT board believe what fits with their original agenda that SISU are bad and everyone else are good. However, over the years this has become outdated and I think most fans have come to realise that just one party isn't at fault. It's the fault of SISU, Wasps and CCC. But whilst most fans have been open to accept this notion, that SISU are not the only ones to blame, the views of the SBT have remained the same. So no, they didn't just wake up one morning and decide to love Wasps but the how's and why's are irrelevant because the fact of the matter is, their view that SISU is the only bad guy is outdated and as a result they cannot best represent the fanbase IMO as this hatred is resulting in extremely poor decision making on their behalf. The fans want the best for the club. Why would they be manipulated by a one sided rhetoric from CCC or Wasps or anyone when they've seen it happen first hand with the SBT?

So again going back to IF a New Trust was formed. Would it be used as an anti-trust weapon or would fans view it as a reliable body that could better represent the views of the club's fanbase? As I said in my previous post there would be no need to meet with Wasps or SISU for that matter as I'd like to think that the majority of the CCFC fanbase realises when they're being manipulated as realistically they've heard and seen it all before. So no, I don't agree with your point as simply saying that’s what happens with humans fed a diet of biased info in itself isn't correct as you're suggesting people (like the SBT) are incapable of change or learning from past mistakes.

Apologies for the lengthy post. Read it or don't read it but those are my thoughts on the matter.

Nick · Jan 14, 2020

It isn't just blind hatred, it's desperation for individuals to get a seat at the table at the club. When you have people like Hoffman offering this to them and Wasps telling David Johnson a Phoenix Club can play at the Ricoh it is going to be in their head isn't it?

The humans don't have to eat the diet of biased info.

SkyBlueCRJ · Jan 14, 2020

Nick said:
It isn't just blind hatred, it's desperation for individuals to get a seat at the table at the club. When you have people like Hoffman offering this to them and Wasps telling David Johnson a Phoenix Club can play at the Ricoh it is going to be in their head isn't it?

The humans don't have to eat the diet of biased info.

Yeah very true egos definitely have a part to play too.

This is the thing that I was trying to explain. People are capable of questioning information given to them - if they don't there's reasoning behind that.

Nick · Jan 14, 2020

SkyBlueCRJ said:
Yeah very true egos definitely have a part to play too.

This is the thing that I was trying to explain. People are capable of questioning information given to them - if they don't there's reasoning behind that.

Exactly

When you have people who claim to have no bias writing things like this - How Sisu Have Made the Sky Blues Homeless (Probably): Joy, Tim and Friends – Condemned By Their Own Words - with ex council leaders then what do you expect?

If I was teaming up with Onwe Igwe to write articles than how would that go down?

Did the Trust ever mention why that fella was kicked off the board?

SkyBlueCRJ · Jan 14, 2020

Nick said:
Exactly

When you have people who claim to have no bias writing things like this - How Sisu Have Made the Sky Blues Homeless (Probably): Joy, Tim and Friends – Condemned By Their Own Words - with ex council leaders then what do you expect?

If I was teaming up with Onwe Igwe to write articles than how would that go down?

Did the Trust ever mention why that fella was kicked off the board?

Literally - and if you don't have the same bias you can't be part of the club. It's embarrassing. They're just a giant contradiction.

chiefdave · Jan 14, 2020

Nick said:
Did the Trust ever mention why that fella was kicked off the board?

Don't think they've ever actually confirmed it. CJ put a post on here but that was it. The who is on the board section of their website is well out of date and there's no meeting minutes posted.

Nick · Jan 14, 2020

chiefdave said:
Don't think they've ever actually confirmed it. CJ put a post on here but that was it. The who is on the board section of their website is well out of date and there's no meeting minutes posted.

Strange how they are shouting about transparency, isn't it?

Grendel · Jan 14, 2020

chiefdave said:
Don't think they've ever actually confirmed it. CJ put a post on here but that was it. The who is on the board section of their website is well out of date and there's no meeting minutes posted.

He’s now tweeted in for him fairly sensible style pushing the trust and it’s agenda

shmmeee · Jan 14, 2020

SkyBlueCRJ said:
Right I'll reply to your response to Nick in detail as maybe I myself wasn't clear enough.

Your belief that SISU would use the 'New Trust' agains the current SBT wouldn't happen. There's no arguing that. SISU cannot be trusted so the idea of Joy influencing a fans group is frankly impossible given her popularity within the club's community. The same applies to the Wasps and CCC. The whole idea of why the SBT has taken the stance it has is because of its blind hate for SISU, rather than your argument of them receiving one sided information from Wasps or CCC. I think this is where you're confusing things as you're forgetting this crucial aspect - or not mentioning it within your responses. Claiming "'it’s just human nature that if you only hear from one group of people you become biased towards their POV" is painting everyone with the same brush and IMO I don't think that's necessarily true - as Grendel rightly said it's only a small proportion of the SBT and their board members that actually blindly follow their own views. No one else really shares the same view - not anyone that I've spoken to anyway. Like I said in my previous post everyone has had the same information by large and have come to the conclusion that all parties are at fault. Why is it the SBT that still pushes SISU as the only antagonist in this absolute mess? Rather than speak to the right people they've only conversed with the likes of Wasps and CCC who have played on their weakness - which is hating SISU to the extent of believing anything that's said against them.

As I have previously stated their opinion on Wasps has resulted from sheer manipulation rather them actually necessarily agreeing with their stance. Again, like i said that either qualifies them as idiots or easily manipulated I don't know which as I don't personally know any of the Trust's board. This is also why I keep on using the phrase 'blind hate' with regards to to SISU and the Trust. SISU is seen as the boogy man to the Trust due to past tensions. This blind hate has clouded their vision and they have allowed themselves to believe anything that Wasps tell them because they'll agree with anything and anyone that paints SISU in a bad light. The SBT board believe what fits with their original agenda that SISU are bad and everyone else are good. However, over the years this has become outdated and I think most fans have come to realise that just one party isn't at fault. It's the fault of SISU, Wasps and CCC. But whilst most fans have been open to accept this notion, that SISU are not the only ones to blame, the views of the SBT have remained the same. So no, they didn't just wake up one morning and decide to love Wasps but the how's and why's are irrelevant because the fact of the matter is, their view that SISU is the only bad guy is outdated and as a result they cannot best represent the fanbase IMO as this hatred is resulting in extremely poor decision making on their behalf. The fans want the best for the club. Why would they be manipulated by a one sided rhetoric from CCC or Wasps or anyone when they've seen it happen first hand with the SBT?

So again going back to IF a New Trust was formed. Would it be used as an anti-trust weapon or would fans view it as a reliable body that could better represent the views of the club's fanbase? As I said in my previous post there would be no need to meet with Wasps or SISU for that matter as I'd like to think that the majority of the CCFC fanbase realises when they're being manipulated as realistically they've heard and seen it all before. So no, I don't agree with your point as simply saying that’s what happens with humans fed a diet of biased info in itself isn't correct as you're suggesting people (like the SBT) are incapable of change or learning from past mistakes.

Apologies for the lengthy post. Read it or don't read it but those are my thoughts on the matter.

Fair enough. Appreciate the detailed reply even if I don’t fully agree

rob9872 · Jan 14, 2020

For point of clarity can we all refer to the two places as Trust or Forum. SBT is misleading and sometimes difficult to follow. Have to read the whole argument twice sometimes before deciding the viewpoint.

Ta

Irish Sky Blue · Jan 14, 2020

SkyBlueCRJ said:
I'm sure it was. SISU don't play well with others that's not exactly news. Their blind hate of SISU has clouded their vision with Wasps though and like I said that either makes them idiots or easily manipulated.

But this is what I'm getting at with my point. If the board members of the Trust don't have the intelligence/initiative to separate SISU from the club and continue to paint them with the same brush then there has to be a massive change or a new group has to be established. As in their current form they don't/can't represent the best interests or views on the fans due to their entrenched biases and agendas.

Does it matter if we engage with Wasps? What purpose would it serve to the situation in its current form? Even if in an ideal world the Sky Blue Trust was disbanded and a new group arose, Wasps would try and employ the exact same manipulation tactics as they did with the Trust. There wouldn't be a need for a new group to engage with Wasps unless by some miracle relations are repaired. Instead time and resources would be better spent by leaving the club to deal with Wasps and use the group to unite and more importantly educate the fanbase to support the club rather than work against it. This is all hypothetical anyway and is what the current Trust should be doing so it's pointless discussing it.

I would think that the idea is that the Trust should engage with all parties while still holding them to account for anything that has a negative impact on the club. This is a difficult line to tread but if you don’t communicate with one or more of the parties the chances of influencing them or of being a broker is greatly reduced. The current Trust don’t communicate with Sisu (or the club it seems). If a new board were to come about, a new Trust, I would hope that they would be able to represent fan views to all of the parties concerned.

rob9872 · Jan 14, 2020

The main issue with the trust (imo) is that they wrongly believe they have a stake in the game. This version or any new one, should be there to keep the club on an even keel, be ready to pick up the pieces if required, but otherwise shrink in the background and not become politicised or take any involvement on either side. Sadly egos won't allow that.

The trust differ to supporters groups, who by their very nature are exactly that - groups of people who support.

The trust should help fans get to games (similar to what we did on here pre-season) facilitate a communication between the club and the fans, but only when they've taken counsel or held a public vote on a particular subject should they be representative of it to the club and back that stance even if they agree with it personally or not - similar to a union leader or if you will, Teresa May when she was trying to deliver Brexit. Nothing more, nothing less.

Deleted member 5849 · Jan 14, 2020

olderskyblue said:
I will probably attend the next one to voice my opinion again. (and to vote for grendel to be on the board...) Anyone else?

A yearly attendance and a vote for Grendel is always worthwhile.

SkyBlueCRJ · Jan 14, 2020

Irish Sky Blue said:
I would think that the idea is that the Trust should engage with all parties while still holding them to account for anything that has a negative impact on the club. This is a difficult line to tread but if you don’t communicate with one or more of the parties the chances of influencing them or of being a broker is greatly reduced. The current Trust don’t communicate with Sisu (or the club it seems). If a new board were to come about, a new Trust, I would hope that they would be able to represent fan views to all of the parties concerned.

You probably have a point - but this would be far easier said than done.

For instance, would SISU want to be engaged with by another Trust after years of protest and vitriol from the SBT? My guess would be no - even if an olive branch was offered. Equally what purpose would this have? Even if Joy was willing to meet with a new trust would she just tell them what they want to hear? Time and resource would surely be better spent building the relationship back with the club and working with them rather than with SISU.

Then there's the issue with CCC. They change the goalposts and refuse to accept criticism. So holding them to account and building a rapport with them would be difficult to say the least. Like you said there's a fine line. We wouldn't want to be put in a position where we physically can't hold CCC account for any past or future wrongdoings otherwise it negates a key purpose of a new trust.

A relationship with Wasps would have to be a given - assuming we are able to sign a long term agreement at the Ricoh.

eastwoodsdustman · Jan 14, 2020

I think the club would embrace a supportive group but really don’t think that the trust is or could be that group. It’d take way too long to get any real influence on their board so would say that it’s best to start afresh.
Just as a side note I know of another clubs support who put all profits from independent coach travel back to the club, sponsor players, sponsor the end of season awards and even helped with wages when the were in financial difficulties. Could anyone see our trust doing that?

CCFCSteve · Jan 14, 2020

I don’t really have an issue with the trusts request. We’ve heard nothing of substance recently, only rumours of a potential return, which appear to be unsubstantiated. Gives the club/SISU the chance to state how they currently see things ie ‘we want to a deal but wasps refuse to remove indemnity which could potentially bankrupt club’ (if that’s still the case ! if so, this refocusses attention on wasps and their apparent unreasonableness)

SBAndy · Jan 14, 2020

Nick said:
If I was teaming up with Onwe Igwe to write articles than how would that go down?

Onye, it’s a fucking elephant.

HuckerbyDublinWhelan · Jan 14, 2020

PSB_Group the ultimate deflector... any questions - just revert back to the past...

Nick · Jan 14, 2020

CCFCSteve said:
I don’t really have an issue with the trusts request. We’ve heard nothing of substance recently, only rumours of a potential return, which appear to be unsubstantiated. Gives the club/SISU the chance to state how they currently see things ie ‘we want to a deal but wasps refuse to remove indemnity which could potentially bankrupt club’ (if that’s still the case ! if so, this refocusses attention on wasps and their apparent unreasonableness)

Who started the rumours of a return?

The club have said they want to return?

tisza · Jan 14, 2020

CCFCSteve said:
I don’t really have an issue with the trusts request. We’ve heard nothing of substance recently, only rumours of a potential return, which appear to be unsubstantiated. Gives the club/SISU the chance to state how they currently see things ie ‘we want to a deal but wasps refuse to remove indemnity which could potentially bankrupt club’ (if that’s still the case ! if so, this refocusses attention on wasps and their apparent unreasonableness)

What can the club say? Just going to hide a lot behind NDAs & confidentiality much the same as the other 3 stakeholders they name have.
There's nothing new or substantive from the other 3 stakeholders.
Going round in circles as usual as the blame gets moved from one to the other depending on where people stand on the issue.

tisza · Jan 14, 2020

eastwoodsdustman said:
I think the club would embrace a supportive group but really don’t think that the trust is or could be that group. It’d take way too long to get any real influence on their board so would say that it’s best to start afresh.

Of course the club would so it could have a balance to the Trust with a group to push its own agenda.
Think the club is going to sit down and be completely open with a supporters group?
Even the Trust can't be naive enough to think that Wasps & CCC are completely open & honest with them.
All sides looking to use supporters as pawns to satisfy their own purposes.

Grendel · Jan 14, 2020

HuckerbyDublinWhelan said:
PSB_Group the ultimate deflector... any questions - just revert back to the past...

Incredible one bloke can get airtime and media credibility by calling himself a group - he’s a complete clown

HuckerbyDublinWhelan · Jan 14, 2020

CCFCSteve said:
I don’t really have an issue with the trusts request. We’ve heard nothing of substance recently, only rumours of a potential return, which appear to be unsubstantiated. Gives the club/SISU the chance to state how they currently see things ie ‘we want to a deal but wasps refuse to remove indemnity which could potentially bankrupt club’ (if that’s still the case ! if so, this refocusses attention on wasps and their apparent unreasonableness)

The indemnity clause has always been the case, the club have said numerous times “nothing’s changed”

HuckerbyDublinWhelan · Jan 14, 2020

I’ve also noticed PSB_Group and Chris West don’t seem to have a response to the indemnity clause.

it’s all “yeah well there shouldn’t be a complaint”

Nick · Jan 14, 2020

HuckerbyDublinWhelan said:
I’ve also noticed PSB_Group and Chris West don’t seem to have a response to the indemnity clause.

it’s all “yeah well there shouldn’t be a complaint”

They won't

shmmeee · Jan 15, 2020

There shouldn’t be a complaint but that’s spilt milk. Focus has to be on dropping the indemnity, it’s indefensible and once it’s dropped focus can be put on Sisu to commit to no more legal action while we need the Ricoh and for plans for a ground. Both of which they say they’re up for. So we can hold them to that.

Skyblueweeman · Jan 15, 2020

shmmeee said:
There shouldn’t be a complaint but that’s spilt milk. Focus has to be on dropping the indemnity, it’s indefensible and once it’s dropped focus can be put on Sisu to commit to no more legal action while we need the Ricoh and for plans for a ground. Both of which they say they’re up for. So we can hold them to that.

Sisu have already committed to no more legal action though?

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

What a shock... the trust "speak up" (2 Viewers)

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Attachments

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency