3P Promises

[Hollywood Jesus]

I can't turn up to vote because it's my mother's birthday on 5th.

I oppose the change.

Should I STFU?

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

To be honest, if 3P don't run our club into the ground, I will be surprised.

Amen to that.

 

[mickdo]

I can't turn up to vote because it's my mother's birthday on 5th.

I oppose the change.

Should I STFU?

I'll make an exception in your case HJ, provided you buy your mum something nice...

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

Bloody hell. I was always of the opinion that getting to see me was the best present she could get. Now I have to buy her something?

Well, she does like Lolly Gobble Bliss Bombs...

 

[parra pete]

'What ye sow, so shall ye reap'

 

[Stagger eel]

'What ye sow, so shall ye reap'

yes Pete and that's exactly what Dennis has done.

 

[cv8z]

Why would they be embarrassed? I understood that clause was in the constitution since the club started in '59. Everyone should've known that when they stood for election!

Because 3p were overwhelmingly (77% according to reports) voted in to effect change and to rid the club of the encumbents and DF. Most members who voted were not aware of the constitution stating the 3 FC directors move to the LC. Like it or not the majority have spoken and they have the chance again to speak at the AGM.

 

[fish eel]

Is it true you dont need to be a 3 year financial member to vote at the AGM?

 

[Goleel]

Is it true you dont need to be a 3 year financial member to vote at the AGM?

I believe that is true, yes.

 

[bartman]

Because 3p were overwhelmingly (77% according to reports) voted in to effect change and to rid the club of the encumbents and DF. Most members who voted were not aware of the constitution stating the 3 FC directors move to the LC. Like it or not the majority have spoken and they have the chance again to speak at the AGM.

Because neither side went to the effort to inform the membership of this...

It's a bit rich imo to not take the opportunity to do this (eg by running just 5 candidates with the chance to get on) and then turn around and demand that the deception then requires the contitution to be changed retrospcectively to allow 7 candidates to be appointed. It beggars belief really...

 

[fish eel]

Because neither side went to the effort to inform the membership of this...

It's a bit rich imo to not take the opportunity to do this (eg by running just 5 candidates with the chance to get on) and then turn around and demand that the deception then requires the contitution to be changed retrospcectively to allow 7 candidates to be appointed. It beggars belief really...

But Bart, whether you agree or not with the proposed change, they havent turned around after the fact, they said they would do this before the election, sevens IIRC mentioned it several times in the old thread prior to the elections. Given they previously said it was their intention, how can you now say they 'turn around'?

 

[Stagger eel]

Because neither side went to the effort to inform the membership of this...

It's a bit rich imo to not take the opportunity to do this (eg by running just 5 candidates with the chance to get on) and then turn around and demand that the deception then requires the contitution to be changed retrospcectively to allow 7 candidates to be appointed. It beggars belief really...

interesting you say that, amongst the euphoria of the result in level 3 the other night came the confusion of why Hilditch and Gerard have been elected ahead of Saad and Sasson despite them finishing ahead on the poll.

I'm sure I noticed 3 different conversations trying to explain it punters were noticebly confused.

 

[parra-matters]

Can they do it at this AGM or will they need to call a EGM?

 

[born an eel]

This is exactly what some people were concerned about when they were elected. It appears they are trying to operate outside the law.

Wait to they try and install a naming rights sponsor of the stadium and find out the LC doesn't control the Stadium.

 

[fish eel]

This is exactly what some people were concerned about when they were elected. It appears they are trying to operate outside the law.

Wait to they try and install a naming rights sponsor of the stadium and find out the LC doesn't control the Stadium.

they can negotiate a deal with the trust.

they previous board had negotiated deals, re advertising signage. it was in the trust annual report

 

[born an eel]

yes, I fully understand that.
They can also get the constitution changed but there is a proper way to go about things., not to mention legal

 

[mickdo]

This is exactly what some people were concerned about when they were elected. It appears they are trying to operate outside the law.

Wait to they try and install a naming rights sponsor of the stadium and find out the LC doesn't control the Stadium.

Wtf? :crazy:

 

[fish eel]

yes, I fully understand that.
They can also get the constitution changed but there is a proper way to go about things., not to mention legal

so why have a shot at them about wanting to get a naming rights sponsor for the stadium if you knew they could do a deal with the trust and knew the previous board had done a deal :crazy:

 

[born an eel]

well you would have thought they would know what procedures need to be followed to change the constitution but they are looking for a short cut there.

 

[mickdo]

Why not just accuse them of causing the GFC as well, or world famine? FMD, they aren't even in yet :crazy: