I doubt very much that Dr. Allam wants to talk to people who agree with him; at least I wouldn't if I were him, what would be the point. I regularly have differences with OLM but he is a reasonable person and articulate, unlike many on this forum. So given these facts, I really cannot comprehend why anyone would object to his representation, unless they are merely playing devil's advocate.
Then let him go and represent himself alone. By your argument you wouldn't be bothered if I went as representative of this board because "It's only a football forum FFS." Even though my views are in the minority.
Come on, Craig - you call us 'you and the other sheep', but we are not the 'Yes Men' - those who agree with everything that Assem wants to do. And you, of all people. You who originated the 'Tigers' History' thread....
If you wish for your views to be represented then I suggest you write the club a personal letter outlining what your views are. I would not have objected if the club chose to invite you, or anyone for that matter.
Stan this has nothing to do with opinions, my only point is that no one can be said to represent a group unless they are elected by that group to do so.
I think you have a valid point about how the board is represented, but OLM was invited by Ash Lord to the meeting to represent not606. The invitation didn't call for the board to elect a representative otherwise that's what OLM would have done. Some of the arguments against CTWD is that having put £66m Assem Allam can call the club what he wants. I presume the same people would say he can invite which member of not606 he wants as well. Unless, of course, they think this board is more important than the name of our football club. If you want democratic accountability I suggest you look at how you might achieve that in the future. I for one prefer elected committees to one off polls so you can see how people perform over a period of time rather than a beauty contest once in a blue moon.
I think he does need reminding of it, also Hull was made a City by Royal decree and having the word City in the title is something of which we are proud. Some bigger clubs are not cities but would like to be and dropping "City" from the clubs name is just another nail in coffin of the city of Hulls future. ("Helping in its "demise".The Economist )
What's the point in sending someone who agrees with Mr Allam over the subject? He wants to hear the opposing view not someone who'll offer nothing to the debate.
Again I have no problem with anyone going who represents themselves or a group that elected them. OLM hasn't been elected by us so he can only represent himself.
Why are people who are pro name change, or apathetic about it, bothered who represents the board in a committee of people who are against it? And those who are anti, it makes sense for OLM to go for all the reasons already stated. Good luck, let's hope he can be convinced to drop it.
Then Ash Lord has been misinformed. OLM doesn't represent this board and I hope that if OLM goes he will make that clear.
I hope that those involved will make it clear that they represent a minority opinion only. It is right and fair that this minority view is represented and Mr Allam can make of it what he will and proceed as he sees fit. Please do not make the mistake of claiming to speak for the majority. You do not.
So CI will be represented by a member of their editorial team who will ask the questions submitted by posters on one of their threads. If you agree with that then we should be represented by one of our moderators who will ask the questions submitted by posters on one of our threads. Is that what you are suggesting?
If that's the case then its the silent majorities fault for not standing up and letting their opinions be heard. These people have been invited because they cared enough about an issue to do something. If your apathetic or pro name change but have done nothing to let the club know, how do you expect them to consider your opinion? There's no 'pro-name change' group, or 'let allam do what he wants' group, hence those people won't have their views fairly representing at the meeting.
Really, how do you know that Ash Lord has been misinformed? The club have invited those who they wanted to invite. Because not606 has no democratic structure and no representatives it leaves it open for third parties to invite a known individual from the board to meetings. I suspect that's what has happened here. You obviously don't like it so why not do something about it to stop the same thing happening again. I think you have a point, but as you think OLM would be the elected representative, I would say he does represent the views of the board even without a poll. If you feel as strongly as your posts suggest I expect to see some concrete proposals from you about how the board should be represented in the future.
