Gidday Esoj
For the most part, I agree with you. Mosh has done a lot of good things connecting the rugby league community from the old Warriors site to NZwarriors.com. I also like debating with him various topics, he seems well informed. As I might add, I find your good self to be.
I'm not going to get into a slanging match about whose right, or whose wrong. I sit squarely in the middle on this. At the end of the day, my view is we're all just logins, with different views and as long as those views are represented and received then its a huge success.
My own perspective though is the Warriors Supporters Association that spanned nzwarriors, lu and rleague was in its infancy, yet still was effective in attaining its initial goal of putting across some points, and also developing what looked likely to be an effective communication stream. As long as the Association representatives put to the people at the top all the suggestions agreed upon from the various forums, I personally don't think it really matters who ran the show. At the end of the day, I think the only advantage they get is a handshake, and the loss of a few hours preparation and meeting. I don't have that sort of time, so I commend anyone willing to give it up.
The points I'm more keen to see explored is not the various personality clashes (and TBH, I've had discussions with a couple of members of the representatives that I wasn't too keen on from a personal stand point, but I still respect them because what drives them is success for the club and love of the game and thats plain to see), but how the meeting was perceived by the Warriors, did the meeting effectively achieve its goals, was the meeting successful in driving change - and to all those, from the minutes I read, it became quite clear the answer was yes.
I would suggest we could tidy it up a little for sure, when I do minutes for my team meetings I divide it up into a word document with columns Topic - Discussion - Initiated by - Action - By Date. And those items that are to be actioned by the next meeting are referred to in the next lot of meeting minutes. Following that, setting up key agendas, and a constitution. The constitution could have involved for the initial year following the status quo on membership, with one floating seat, and then the next year having three spots up for vote across the three forums, with perhaps 2 or 3 key people retained to retain consistency in dealing with the executives.
Finally, I'd like to reiterate, as long as the suggestions raised by the members of the three forums are broached and discussed with the Warriors, to me it doesn't really matter if Kurmet de Frog is the man with the handshake - although in its infancy in my opinion it is preferable to have the delegates be people who are perceived as being responsible, have some idea of how to run a business, and have some long term knowledge of the game of rugby league.
