Open Supporters Meeting 14th Jan

Hi All

Please follow the link below.

I am busy with work today but will hopefully get on tonight to pick up any questions etc.

In the meantime I am sure somebody from one of the supporters groups will be able to pick up on this before I can.

Chris

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I'm sending my people to represent.

They may or may not be wearing clothes.

A good move by the club, and at least JB is sticking to his manifesto. Can it be held in a large pub with drinks on James?

I've probably said this before, but that won't stop me saying it again. Why is the owner talking about 'fan engagement' when there's already a Supporters' Trust? It's like an employer recognising an independent trade union but also setting up an internal staff consultation committee, so he or she can ignore whichever one doesn't toe the line.

A Supporters' Trust is meant to be THE independent voice of the supporters, bringing together (without duplicating or taking over) all the existing groups and as many as possible of the individual supporters. It speaks volumes that this meeting's going to take place in the middle of the Trust elections. Indeed, if I were a cynic, I'd suggest the meeting's designed to neutralise the Trust.

Peggy, I suspect, but don't know that there may be a conflict of interest now that Chris was the Trust Chairman and is now club President. Perhaps they feel that there might be an agenda?

Now, Chris, before you get all angst ridden, it was an honest question without a barb to it, okay?

Peggy wrote:

I've probably said this before, but that won't stop me saying it again. Why is the owner talking about 'fan engagement' when there's already a Supporters' Trust? It's like an employer recognising an independent trade union but also setting up an internal staff consultation committee, so he or she can ignore whichever one doesn't toe the line.

A Supporters' Trust is meant to be THE independent voice of the supporters, bringing together (without duplicating or taking over) all the existing groups and as many as possible of the individual supporters. It speaks volumes that this meeting's going to take place in the middle of the Trust elections. Indeed, if I were a cynic, I'd suggest the meeting's designed to neutralise the Trust.

Speaking as one who tends to the cock-up, as opposed the conspiracy, view of things - I'd agree with you except for the intention bit of it in your final sentence. But then, old as I am, I have managed to retain my youthful idealism Brent really does appear to be trying to engage with the supporters. I would really like the Trust to be an influentially strong body with support both from the club and the fans. But I fear that it will not get past the pasoti/Trust politics. We'll see.

"A meeting of the Contingency Plan Committee has also been held to gain views on how best to engage with Argyle supporters on a wider basis."

Anyone know what was suggested?



Some interesting comments on here, lots of lines to be read between (defensive positions being fortified?)!

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

John_Vaughan wrote:

"A meeting of the Contingency Plan Committee has also been held to gain views on how best to engage with Argyle supporters on a wider basis."

Anyone know what was suggested?

I've asked several times...

As you might guess, nobody has answered.

See my tagline.

John_Vaughan wrote:

"A meeting of the Contingency Plan Committee has also been held to gain views on how best to engage with Argyle supporters on a wider basis."

Anyone know what was suggested?



Some interesting comments on here, lots of lines to be read between (defensive positions being fortified?)!

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I thought some of the comments were way over the top, especially from the ex-Trust board member. I'm guessing that its a bit of jealousy.

Well done Chris

Recycling the fans alliance / contingency group / in a different way!!!!!!!

Timed to perfection in the middle of the trust elections. Just when there is no Trust board to oppose him in his megalomaniac cause of becoming all that is fan based.

Non-elected President getting his old mates on a non elected board as reps for fans and totally undermining the Fans Trust

I expect you will get

Chris as Alliance leader
IJN as PASOTI rep
Lee Jameson as Fans Branch rep
Mark for GT’s
Graham Clark as representing something or other
Plus any body else Chief Lord El Pres hasn’t fallen out with
And maybe token representative of the trust if you lucky

The position of President is and always been an Honorary one perhaps it should stay that way, rather that trying to turn it into leader of the fan base.

James Brent wake up and smell the coffee! Or are you behind the destabilisation of the trust.

PS Chris are you still a member of the Trust or have you resigned as you are now a representative of the club.

Don’t expect Ill get a Xmas card now!!

Gort, what did you do to save the club...etc etc Seriously I feel for Gareth N, I was one who urged him to stand for the original aborted Trust election as an intelligent voice of reason and now he's looking like the whipping boy with Lee J going off on one and even the arch cynic Loyal having a go describing an articulate post as pompous and going over the head of the Pasoti masses, unless he was being disingenuous and I've been whooshed. I hope Gareth has big enough balls to stand up to the bullying and leads the Trust to true independence, I for one will be with him.

What a depressing turn of events. But this will play itself out quickly. Either we will be shown up as crazy conspiracy theorists or there will be civil war between pasoti and the trust.

Delicious irony in LJ considerably out pompousifying GN for pomposity. Not that I thought GN was being pompous. However, upsetting the nice people by using all those long words - Gareth, how very dare you?

I wouldn't read too much into Loyal's response. We've chatted over a PM and found some common ground. I actually think that was some good feedback - if we can't communicate in plain English to reach as many people as possible something is wrong. Thing is I love words so I like to use a lot of them.

You'll understand if I don't comment on my balls. The size of them and what I do with them is between me and my webcam any companion I may have. It's not about personality, it should be about substance and what the Trust can offer. I believe passionately in the Trust and what it can be because it's a members' body and is accountable to those members, not on the basis of who is the temporary custodian. It's entirely right that we should try and influence any mechanism of engagement and we will keep trying to do that.

Peggy wrote:

I've probably said this before, but that won't stop me saying it again. Why is the owner talking about 'fan engagement' when there's already a Supporters' Trust? It's like an employer recognising an independent trade union but also setting up an internal staff consultation committee, so he or she can ignore whichever one doesn't toe the line.

A Supporters' Trust is meant to be THE independent voice of the supporters, bringing together (without duplicating or taking over) all the existing groups and as many as possible of the individual supporters. It speaks volumes that this meeting's going to take place in the middle of the Trust elections. Indeed, if I were a cynic, I'd suggest the meeting's designed to neutralise the Trust.

Peggy

Unbelievable that after what this Club has been through that you can find an issue with the Owner wanting to speak to fans.

How do you know that he isn't going to stand up and say exactly what you have posteed (the Trust are the lead)?

The results of the Trust elections are in February. James Brent is trying to grasp the moment and get on with engaging. The role of the Trust will be no different whoever is elected so what is the issue? Both Gareth and Warren have met James Brent and were fully aware that this meeting was being planned. You may have noted that they are not being as cynical as yourself.

Sometimes Peggy, people do things for the right reasons.

gort2 wrote:

Well done Chris

Recycling the fans alliance / contingency group / in a different way!!!!!!!

Timed to perfection in the middle of the trust elections. Just when there is no Trust board to oppose him in his megalomaniac cause of becoming all that is fan based.

Non-elected President getting his old mates on a non elected board as reps for fans and totally undermining the Fans Trust

I expect you will get

Chris as Alliance leader
IJN as PASOTI rep
Lee Jameson as Fans Branch rep
Mark for GT’s
Graham Clark as representing something or other
Plus any body else Chief Lord El Pres hasn’t fallen out with
And maybe token representative of the trust if you lucky

The position of President is and always been an Honorary one perhaps it should stay that way, rather that trying to turn it into leader of the fan base.

James Brent wake up and smell the coffee! Or are you behind the destabilisation of the trust.

PS Chris are you still a member of the Trust or have you resigned as you are now a representative of the club.

Don’t expect Ill get a Xmas card now!!

Gort is back. Blimey.

Well you've just sat there, having no knowledge of any meeting that James Brent has had with the various groups and come up with that complete fabrication all on your own haven't you.

I am a member of the Trust and a very supportive one at that.

Sorry to shatter your little 'theory'.

[quote="Chemical Ali"]A good move by the club, and at least JB is sticking to his manifesto. Can it be held in a large pub with drinks on James?[/quote]

Sounds good to me

Chris Webb wrote:

Well you've just sat there, having no knowledge of any meeting that James Brent has had with the various groups and come up with that complete fabrication all on your own haven't you.

Err... And whose fault is that?

Why don't you back up about 5 or 6 posts and answer my and John Vaughns posts?

Rickler wrote:

Chris Webb wrote:

Well you've just sat there, having no knowledge of any meeting that James Brent has had with the various groups and come up with that complete fabrication all on your own haven't you.

Err... And whose fault is that?

Why don't you back up about 5 or 6 posts and answer my and John Vaughns posts?

Because Rickler it is not my role to report back from those meetings as there are people better placed than me to do so.

I will leave that to Gareth and Wozzer who I am sure will oblidge.

....So if you don't know you just make it up?

Chris Webb wrote:

....

Because Rickler it is not my role to report back from those meetings as there are people better placed than me to do so.

I will leave that to Gareth and Wozzer who I am sure will oblidge.

....So if you don't know you just make it up?

Chris, I respect your line of leaving it to the elected Trust members. Time and stances like you have just taken will show the difference between your evolving role and the developing role of The Trust. Thanks!

Chris Webb wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Chris Webb wrote:

Well you've just sat there, having no knowledge of any meeting that James Brent has had with the various groups and come up with that complete fabrication all on your own haven't you.

Err... And whose fault is that?

Why don't you back up about 5 or 6 posts and answer my and John Vaughns posts?

Because Rickler it is not my role to report back from those meetings as there are people better placed than me to do so.

I will leave that to Gareth and Wozzer who I am sure will oblidge.

Better placed than you? Really, Who?

Thank you for your suggestion of Wozzer, but he wasn't even at the meeting if I remember correctly? Brent was so anxious to have the meetin, he couldn't wait for the chair of the trust and Gareth stood in.

No.. You threw yourself on everybody as man of the people, you took all the goodies that went with it, and now you have relieved yourself of any of that responsibility.

You took it upon yourself to talk for us - the least thing you can do is tell us what you said.

...and what is your 'role' exactly? Surely you can answer that one!

Rickler wrote:

Chris Webb wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Chris Webb wrote:

Well you've just sat there, having no knowledge of any meeting that James Brent has had with the various groups and come up with that complete fabrication all on your own haven't you.

Err... And whose fault is that?

Why don't you back up about 5 or 6 posts and answer my and John Vaughns posts?

Because Rickler it is not my role to report back from those meetings as there are people better placed than me to do so.

I will leave that to Gareth and Wozzer who I am sure will oblidge.

Better placed than you? Really, Who?

Thank you for your suggestion of Wozzer, but he wasn't even at the meeting if I remember correctly? Brent was so anxious to have the meetin, he couldn't wait for the chair of the trust and Gareth stood in.

No.. You threw yourself on everybody as man of the people, you took all the goodies that went with it, and now you have relieved yourself of any of that responsibility.

You took it upon yourself to talk for us - the least thing you can do is tell us what you said.

...and what is your 'role' exactly? Surely you can answer that one!

No Wozzer wasn't at the meeting (hence the reason that I suggested Gareth may also be able to help) but Wozzer has subsequently met with James Brent so he will also be up to date with the Clubs thinking.

I am relaying information that has been given to me Rickler. Something I pledged to do and the majority of supporters have no issue with.

Chris Webb wrote:

I am relaying information that has been given to me Rickler. Something I pledged to do and the majority of supporters have no issue with.

So you make statements?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

But you don't take questions!

I got it Mr. Patsy.

I'm sorry... I meant Mr. President.

Sir....

Rickler wrote:

Chris Webb wrote:

I am relaying information that has been given to me Rickler. Something I pledged to do and the majority of supporters have no issue with.

So you make statements?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

But you don't take questions!

I got it Mr. Patsy.

I'm sorry... I meant Mr. President.

Sir....

Very sad Rickler. Very sad.

Chris Webb wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Chris Webb wrote:

I am relaying information that has been given to me Rickler. Something I pledged to do and the majority of supporters have no issue with.

So you make statements?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

But you don't take questions!

I got it Mr. Patsy.

I'm sorry... I meant Mr. President.

Sir....

Very sad Rickler. Very sad.

So what this time?

The PM telling me to "behave", or the one inviting me to talk via skype?