Ah the same person who insinuated Ehab was above us when he never said that at all but now you are saying the same about ctwd make your mind up idiot. Just incase you forgot what you wrote you hypocrite Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Hat View Post So Ehab doesn't consider himself part of the general public, and thinks he's above us, the snobby arrogant c**t.
Completely different situations idiot. CTWD aren't claiming to be above the general public, they've just above people like you in the art of fandom and level of importance to the football club. Try again sunshine.
Rubbish. You don't support CTWD in any shape or form, so why would you expect them to ask your permission to start an account? The extra account is a great idea, it gives members a chance to field questions and answer as a group, not as individuals. People are going to have questions and I'd have thought this was the easiest way of doing it on here. If you feel that strongly about it, then create an account that represents those people that support Allams nonsense rantings and have people discuss stuff through that.
The reality is you don't like people who disagree with you , you're quest for self importance is a joke.
I have no quest for self importance, I think you'll find that's your own personal agenda, hence your resentment of CTWD for being far ahead of you in that respect.
The account has been set up so the organisation can answer questions from City fans, if you don't want to ask any questions, I'd be grateful if you'd just ignore the thread. There are many people who do have questions they'd like answered and they should be free to do so without you trying to **** it up, thanks.
I am asking questions... Unlike the 2 above having a barny. So, again, how will we know who is posting responses and from what point is this new line of communication being forced upon us? Reason for the extra question is you've responded in what looks like an official capacity but under your own name. Like Carmine said earlier, this could get confusing.
The account is a good idea, and like all anonymous communication trolls and wums would like to derail any attempt at level headed communication if ctwd are daft enough to rise to the bait. The evidence is that the ctwd committee are anything but daft. To keep Happy happy I am a member of ctwd (joined at the outset and paid again this season). I share season passes with a mate so that we take turns to take our kids to City, but the passes are in their family names. And yes, I used to go to Fer ark.
If I'm posting, it's a post from me, obviously. I do know what you mean though, sometimes I confuse your posts with those of Patty.
So when can we expect to see official responses to the questions raised so far? Will they need ratifying by committee?
It would have been a good idea if none of the committee used the site already, or if the committee members were shadowy mysterious unidentified individuals like they should have been, but I find it a little pointless now given OLM already uses this site, people will continue to address him anyway, and I doubt he'll keep switching logins to answer every little question when we know the likelihood is its just him answering most the time anyway. A better idea would be for any of the committee members who want to use the site to address CTWD matters just had their own account, but maybe put something in their signature saying who they are. Simpler and less confusing.
The only serious question has been asked by Dutch and I'm hoping that the aims of the trust, which are about to be posted, will address that in part and he's then free to seek further clarification should he so wish. The trust aims will be the start point for the discussions and we'll see where they go from there, the committee members all know exactly what is going on, we're obviously not going to have a meeting to discuss every bloody question we're asked.
We are where we are, so whatever could have or didn't happen in the past acts only as a lesson learned (hopefully). My understanding is that this situation is offered as a temporary measure until something more structured becomes available. Personally I'd like to see it remain, but I guess that depends on if/how it works. As for usernames, I like the CTWD log in, as it puts a brake on discussions. I would hope that anyone giving a definitive answer under that log in would have got other committee members to at least have a skim first if it's something with the potential to be contraversial and it should reduce the personal issues creeping in. In my view, it's important to have a clear view of the position the committee are taking and a clear opportunity to question and offer suggestions aimed at improving the group as a whole. This is just one way of doing that. There'll never be a one size fits all. One thing I would be interested to see, is if anyone has an objection to the formation of a fans group in general, and with the backing of the owner, of fans having some form of input into the running of the club. For my part, I'm very much in favour of a fans group, and think if done right, fans having some degree of input should benefit the Club.
I'm in total agreement with the principle Dutch, I'm also totally against CTWD and it's current committee being the fans representatives.
