Now we go back to an old chestnut that you weren't around for; this very important point would have held total credibility if those remarks had been correctly recorded in minutes of that meeting - a simple, honest and transparent reference point that time and inaction has diminished.
The HDM claim they are charging us the same as they charged the Allam's, so I suppose it's fair enough. We put out an appeal on Twitter for funding and got about a grand in 24 hours, our members really have been fantastic throughout this whole campaign. The meeting minutes have been subject to several votes within the committee already, all of which were split. It's not really practical for a full members vote, as they don't know what's in them and woukd simply vote yes to find out.
If the default of a split vote is not to publish the minutes, the the same default should hold good for not using this argument in your PR. Publish and be damned; speak the truth and shame the devil. This should have been done months ago.
We have a very active email group, the Allam meeting minutes were discussed and decided upon there. For obvious reasons, a detailed discussion of the minutes wasn't minuted and published - that would not keep the Allam minutes confidential! I don't think I'm breaking any confidences by saying that the full notes of the Allam meeting (there weren't exactly "minutes", the discussion was far to rambling and vitriolic to set it out in minute form) were submitted to the FA for their consideration. So while the notes haven't been made public, they have formed part of the decision that will be made on 9th April. I've some personal sympathy with the comments about publishing/not publishing the notes of the Allam meeting - but I'm ultimately happy to go along with the majority in the group. That's also perhaps because I didn't personally attend the meeting as I was overseas that day.
The distrust has now gone that far that some people are disinclined to vote in case it is held against them when they apply for tickets. A sad state of affairs, if you ask me.
CTWD has had the proof that the name change is a personal vendetta against the council yet chose not to publish the minutes (minus the redacted personal stuff). I can understand their reluctance to print if they had a working relationship with the Allams but they don't. Each party holds the other in contempt. CTWD has nothing to lose by publishing an edited version, especially seeing they have shared that information with a third party, after the 9th April. Go on, go on.
No To Hull Tigers - YOUR CLUB NEEDS YOU! HELP US ENSURE A NO TO HULL TIGERS VOTE Do you have a friend, family member or work colleague who is wavering regarding how to vote in the club's ballot? Then you can help us to secure a No To Hull Tigers vote. Over the months, we have talked to countless City supporters and found that, when presented with the evidence of the reasons against the name change, many people are open-minded enough to change their opinion. Misinformation and unfounded fears can often be overcome by taking the time to have a calm, civil conversation. So, if you know someone who's uncertain how to vote, ask them to consider reading one of the following first: The full page advert which we're placing in the Hull Daily Mail on Tuesday: https://www.dropbox.com/s/en14oxycog0q20r/CTWD ACT NOW with amends v2.pdf Our FAQ, which counters arguments commonly made in favour of a name change: http://www.citytillwedie.com/faq Our submission to the FA (including a video and a 21-page PDF): http://www.citytillwedie.com/fa-consultation/ They also might be interested in hearing the views of City legend Garreth Roberts: http://notohulltigers.tumblr.com/post/76511155663/hull-city-legend-says-no-to-hull-tigers Please don't get involved in angry arguments or insults. People who are in favour of the name change have a right to their opinion. All we want is reasoned debate. please log in to view this image
Here's something odd, upon seeing OLM's post with the poster, I remembered the piss take photo I made up where I pasted Assem Allams head onto Adolf Hitlers body. That was up for a long time because a couple of weeks after I posted it, I copied it off the same thread onto another. The post is still there with one of the two images but the Hitllamer photo is gone, without trace. There's no edit note at the bottom of the post and the (img)link(/img) part of the post is gone. Strange. How could that have happened?
Anyway, mine was better OLM, feel free to use it. please log in to view this image please log in to view this image
Interesting statement there. So you did NOT publish all of your submission to the FA online, openly and honestly as you've previously claimed? You included bits, like the "minutes" you claim you weren't allowed to publish for the FA to read? Then not mentioned it? Jesus Christ. How can anyone trust you lot? So you lied about being open and having published your submission to the FA. You also lied about not being able to share them, because clearly you have shared them. Cheers for the heads up on that though, makes things a lot clearer. Anyhoo, 2.5 hour drive now, see you at the game, I just need to remember not to turn my back on anyone with a CTWD badge on.
Our FA written submission was published in full, it did not contain the minutes from the meeting with AA. We were subsequently asked to provide them, by the FA and we did so.
Says the man who blindly supports every bit of obvious bullshit that our owner spouts. You really couldn't make it up.
One thing that has shone through in the whole of this saga and that is that CTWD have acted in a very professional manner. They have sought solicitors advice on what they have done and the legality of it all. It has been an absolute embarrassment to see the way Allam and the club have acted and put along side the professional approach of the CTWD it has made the club local totally unprofessional. Allam is supposed to be a professional businessman but the way he has fought his campaign you would think he had never been in business. It really is embarrassing. Well done to all the CTWD Committee indeed.
As olm said a couple of weeks ago, and I totally agree with him, how the ****ing hell they have made their money is one of life's great mysteries. Piss up and brewery come to mind. They continue to act like a couple of spoilt children, who can't get their own way, so they are going to take their ball home or run home and tell their dad of us.
Your submission was published in full...but didn't contain the minutes? You're not seeing the contradiction here? Sure, you sent it in afterwards, but never felt any need to mention that anywhere? So the submission didn't contain the minutes, or any mention of them, but you obviously added that in somehow, no doubt forced at gunpoint to admit you had something so damaging to the owners you weren't allowed to release it, but ok, if the FA accidentally heard about them and now want a set, you'll email them right over to them. No problemo. The people funding you, backing you, and following what you put out, they wanted them too, but no, you weren't allowed to publish them. How come it was alright to share it with the FA then? How come there was no announcement you'd been asked to share them and that you had? (Apologies if you did this, I might have missed it, and if indeed you did post something online for everyone to see that states this, I will apologise). Smoke and mirrors seems a common theme just recently from you, and that is being extremely kind. Deceit and bullshit and dirty tricks would work too. Really? You seem to be making up quite a lot at the moment. I feel sorry for anyone blindly supporting CTWD, you're really not what you seem to be at all. Not even a hint of embarrassment from CTWD, nor regret for the deceit. Sad really. I will say again, I do not want anyone at all from CTWD anywhere near the running of my club, they're all less trustworthy than anyone I can think of.
Our written submission was published in full. We were then invited to Wembley to meet representatives of the FA, that meeting was subject to complete condfidentiality and nothing that was discussed at the meeting has been made public. Ehab and the OSC also met with the FA and their meetings were subject to the same confidentiality agreement. Following that meeting, we were asked to supply our notes of the meeting with AA and did so. To be honest, I'm surprised AIRawdah has mentioned it, but there is no contradiction, we agreed to keep the conversations of that meeting confidential and have done so. The invitation from the FA was dependant on us agreeing to not making public what was discussed and I'm sure our members are perfectly happy with that.
Be lovely if you can provide the email or the name of the person who requested that. It would have been even better if you had put the request on the CTWD website and why you could for them but not your members.
