Ah cool, you've given up discussing and gone for your usual dismissal of differing opinions. That's quite good timing actually cos I've got quite a bit of work to do today so once I've summarised my point I will leave you to get on with your day in your little bubble where everybody holds the same opinions adn priorities as you.
My opinion is that most of the 15,000

who turn up every week don't really give a **** about the Allams or what they've done. Count up everybody who's commented on Twitter/Facebook/forums and it won't come to nearly that figure. It is sad but apathy rules and most people just want a 'positive matchday experience'
Going back to my original point for posting, the number of apathetic fans should be represented at meetings by similar people in order to have the issues that will bother them like leaking roofs, dodgy tannoys and mirrors in loos brought up. The one loudest voice, the one against the Allams should also be represented, such as the Trust and the protestors (but who are the protestors?) but surely a cross section of supporters from each stand would include a majority of anti-Allam obsessives since everybody hates them and wants them gone? So yeah, these people and their issues should be represented as much as anybody else and they should be dismissed on Facebook as pathetic people only interested in leaky roofs because they don't spend all their time chairing committees or building up internet personas. It's unfair and selfish. The anti-Allam voice should be heard, but they can't just intrude and exclude.
NB. I am not pro-allam, I got them told off by Advertising Standards and the Independent Football Ombudsman. I'm just open minded about the opinions others may hold.