They aren't idiots Tim and as far as I'm aware dont have the right to reply on this forum, so my advice to you would be to challenge them on Twitter where they can defend themselves
Thanks for the advice but I’m not sure I owe anyone a right of reply when they spout nonsense about me
I've read it thanks
You still haven't told us who you are?
He makes a good point
Who organised this introductory meeting?
It was arranged between our sec and his PA
“He was the firm’s top boy, the top of the top brass. Blocked by eight users on avftt, he’d served time with two 24 hour bans from the politics board. He’d offered to meet and fight two users at pub of their choice on the Fylde but never showed, and to top it all, he’d flounced from both avftt and X at least three times. No body messed with him.”I think there seems to be quite a lot of grandstanding that goes on on that Twitter.
In the past, when football hooliganism was rife, these young lads might have gained the attention and acceptance of the group by being the first to run headlong into a mob of Burnley Fans… Nowadays it seems that giving the SLO or Tim a bit of stick is the new way forward.
No doubt in a few years we’ll see the release of a new Green Street, the story of a Mean Keyboard Warrior who called people names on Twitter…
I'm in two minds as to whether the content on here is actually better when we lose...
Well said, unlike these ridiculous conspiracy theorists that seem to abound on thus forum. The prime one who seems to have a massive chip on his shoulder and has exiled himself to Wales.
Currently the club will only communicate directly with BST
I've no idea - you'd have to seek clarification from the club
Sounds like very poor advice to me that Phil. Tackle a couple of people who kick off on Twitter? Really? The stuff TAM is saying makes perfect sense to me and tallies with what I've seen on Twitter. And on here. The accusations made about BST seem highly hypocritical given the way those people have sought to influence the club in the past and had secret meetings with board members allegedly. No? Seem to be no rules for them. If you try to insist on your own way and slag people off ad nauseam in public, you shouldnt be surprised if doors close and your opportunity to take part is rescinded. In my opinion. Its not hard to understand.
The SLO said the club was only currently communicating directly with BST so i find it hard to believe that you have 'no idea' and can't answer my rather simple question
Steve is a thoroughly decent, civil man who is doing a good job. However, some go out of their way to be negative and rude in any circumstance.
His social media presence is virtually nil, I think I saw him post this week once on Twitter. No away day updates or anything useful just having a go at Powley.
The SLO has made approx. 15 Facebook posts in September so he does have a social media presence. I don't check twitter but if he's posting on there and AVFTT too then that's a great social media presence for a volunteer.
I know I'm going over old ground here but if there were monthly meetings of the BST membership - even quarterly would be a start - then all of those who have concerns about what BST has been doing, can be discussed there. members could get things out of their system and - more productively - members could see ways of assisting initiatives if they felt it would help to move things on. No-one's saying, "it's my ball and you can't play" but it does require face-to-face communication if people are going to feel involved. Atm it's more, "what have they been up to" rather than, "what have we been doing lately."
So you have access to the email from the SLO and not from the Club... As Tim says, if you are looking for further clarification on the situation, then you'd need to speak with the Club themselves.
I don't know what the club's position is. It's a question for them to answer
Appears to have said?
I haven't mentioned any email I'm going off the message the SLO sent to Grimmy that was posted on Twitter
Yes because the literal reading might not be what's intended - as I said he might only have intended to reference unconstituted groups
And that's been my point all along
Email / Message it all amounts to the same thing really. (It's a communication in writing from one person to another).
But Tim was at the meeting with the club just a couple of days before
In the meeting we pressed for more engagement with the wider fanbase as I have said
Do you not think it may be a wise idea to release minutes from the meeting so the wider fanbase can be informed of what was said?
I wasn't "having a go". I was correcting some misinformation, the claim that "no further meetings will be held at all." My reply was::
You say it was an introductory meeting but you also state above that you "pressed for more fan engagement"
As has already been said, it was just an outline / introductory meeting, so there's nothing of any consequence to Minute and no particular Agenda.
Yeah I get all that and I tend to agree with you about certain groups being represented
BST lost me when they gave kids BFC shirts away to Tom Dick and Harry's which was designed to get more kids to come and watch us.
I think you're reading way more into the statement than it says.... This is kind of typical of a reactionary response though, instead of trying to treat the communication with a calm and rational head.
