lraC

I think there is a very simple solution here, but perhaps, I am missing something. Release both sets of minutes and put a caveat in, to state who does and who does not agree with each version. Given that the club have struck a line through certain parts that they don’t agree with, or don’t want releasing, highlight those bits as being rejected, by the club and ask them to comment on why they want it removing. If they won’t give a reason, simply say, the club refused to comment on why they rejected XXX but the fans attending, consider these minutes to be fair and accurate. Rather than asking anyone to resign, go down the route of a no confidence vote again and get it out in the press. It’s pretty clear now, that these meetings have been a pointless exercise, so again, either a coalition statement, or a FF statement, ensuring that it’s made perfectly clear, who is making the vote of no confidence and who isn’t.

Well said.

I know we can make it bigger and better on here than the stooges at the club ever will. The clock is taking, but with the merchandise idea and perhaps a few more other people making suggestions, can put the clubs version to shame,. I have touted an unofficial fans takeover day and wonder if there would be an appetite for that.

Thanks great to hear Ian. I love my retro shirt that I bought off here and will definitely be interested in any anniversary merchandise.

Did that bit about his response to you, go in the original minutes? Hopefully it did, as it is typical of the attitude of some. The seem to forget that we know about certain things and how he can suggest you get your facts right on this, shows what he really thinks.

From what I understand, Pasha took exception at Glen having direct contact with the owners, but perhaps he can clarify that. Why Pasha would do that is open to debate I guess. These original minutes contained lies, according to Glen’s posts, so why is that and is it a one off to save embarrassment, or normal procedure, to keep relationships intact?

Read what Glen has posted which is pretty damning. Either this is a one off and has been called out, due to people attending, who will challenge those not acting in the best interests of the club, or it’s the norm. Fine for you to leave it there, but fortunately some won’t, as doing nothing, is not an option.

I guess it is now down to the people who were present at the meeting. It seems that we have two versions of the minutes. One version that the club were happy with, but several attendees weren’t and another version, that the club, have now rejected. Perhaps the club, now need to explain, their reasons for rejecting the second version, as the fans, are still in the dark. I haven’t seen either version, but of course the club, do have a responsibility, to meet with the fans and certain things need to be dealt with in order for them to comply with their responsibilities. It appears to me, they they are falling well short of this, but whether they are held to account or not, remains to be seen.

The great reset. One per season, which put another way, we messed the last one up, so let’s wipe the slate clean and start again.

Well given what we have now learned from Glen Mullan, perhaps you need to show me and a few other people a bit more respect, It appears I am correct to say, what I have, or of course, you could carry on defending, someone, who despite good intentions, may have been letting the club off the hook.

Thank goodness you are calling this out. They were once again, getting away with this and for those who were happy to let them do so, by omitting things from the minutes and adding things that were lies, please have a serious look at yourselves. This time, they are not getting away with it, but perhaps they have in the past and as we have just seen with my reply to one supporter, people were convinced, fans were doing a good job on these meetings, yet it appears that they were letting the club, cover some serious issues up.

Sadly, he has been allowing the club we love, to get away without being properly held to account. I am hopeful we will see exactly this, very soon, as we have had a club friendly version of the minutes and a non club friendly version this time and given they haven’t been challenged in the past, they have done more harm than good in my opinion.

Imagine that. A chorus of Venky’s out, during the next one.

There you go again. You bet your life it was.

I think we may have a couple of dogs with a bit more fight in them now.

I certainly think a deadline should be given, as surely it cannot take a couple of weeks to read and agree a set of minutes.

Thanks. Sounds like they could have had them for a couple of weeks then. Maybe they don't like the edited version, but I wonder why?

I firmly believe it is Pasha getting rattled easily that has caused this situation with the minutes being delayed and edited. He will not want an official version of events to be out in the public domain, if it paints him a bad light.

it is a good idea. Sounds like Glen and Duncan Miller are ready to do that anyway.

Agreed, so for balance, we will hopefully see both versions.

The same seems to have been the case at Morecambe too and it appears that the complaints came a little too late. We can sit back and hope that the custodians have the very best intentions for BRFC or we can challenge things, that do not seem that way. I know what I am inclined to do.

That's exactly why we are where we are now. Read the post by GM above, as you will see that a version was sent to the club and according to Glen (who I have believe completely on the matter) an edited version was sent as "Some things missed, some things needed more detail, some things misrepresented or incorrect". Now that seems to me, that the first version could have been club friendly and although I don't yet know, how long the club have had the current version, they may not like them and are perhaps delaying releasing them. Given that there were some attendees, who went to the FF meeting for the first time, they were not around to question previous meetings, so the past minutes, would indeed need to involve collusion, between every member, so maybe there were fair and accurate and it is just a coincidence that the latest one has been challenged.

That's all well and good, but if things are deliberately being left out to paint a prettier picture, that's a different matter. Hopefully that is not the case, but I think we are about to find out.

Sorry Glen, just one other question. What date did you send the edited version to the club and was every attendee in agreement with the content, or did you meet some resistance?

Thanks Glen. This is exactly what I thought, but as you will have read, some people still want to disguise this and my comment that the fans have been taken for mugs, who are led to believe the minutes are fair and accurate, now has more weight now. I sincerely hope this is a one off and all other recorded and posted minutes were indeed fair an accurate and nit diluted to suit the clubs agenda. If there weren't then I genuinely despair.