I'm still registered on the CTWD forum. The bit I'm in has over 2000 replies and is still active, but not used.
Ordinary, proper, are words that try to be meaningful and aren't. Is it that he wanted to support Hull City in his way, so he thinks the folk who drive the Trust, along with it's membership, should conform to that? It does seem that way. That is not what I meant by silence. What you have described there could be viewed as a part of the club's marketing and PR policy, as it is in other clubs, but with more clearly drawn lines. The things you have listed are fine, but I will discuss them on another occasion. I'll happily do it on your forum, if you have one. You can see my thoughts on the FWG in my response to Dutch. The whole point of the Trust's formation and nature is to be supportive, inclusive, yet independent; there will always be compromise and there will always be cooperation, but there should never be the moral ownership the club holds over the OSC - the clue is in the name. A simple positioning statement might better serve the aim of helping others understand what is happening. Is your group going to shed its official status?
Back to ideas. What about a periodic review and summary of where trust campaigns are up to, and pursuing more ideas and involvement? There are currently 36 campaigns listed, so it would be quite a task to do them all, so perhaps leave the feedback to external ones to the relevant groups and just focus on the City related ones? Currently they are the name change, Anlaby Rd football ground, and a campaign to improve the kc atmosphere.
You can say that again, especially when it comes to the presentation the corrupt leadership team submitted to the FA on behalf of the OSC's members but subsequently, despite a commitment to do so, refuse to let the members, they represent, see what they submitted.
Hull City supporters fighting? Anyone injured? If a few people booing each other puts him off going to games the delicate little thing would be better taking up needlework or flower arranging to occupy his Saturday's.
Isn't this what you are speaking of? This is the HCST website; the linked page is the one I would imagine you might have used, for others, go to categories and click on Campaigns - it usefully indicates there are 36 listed. These are a compilation of internal and external campaigns, some current, some not but still informative to folk browsing for information and a flavour for the Trust's activities and interests. I personally believe that this central resource is excellent and will only improve with time and experience on both sides, that of the publishers and the readers. I don't see any indication or inference that the Trust has any notion to develop these 36 campaigns, some they will (their own), some they will in a supportive and interactive manner with the main campaign initiator and others they will simply support by publicising them for their members and others to be informed so they can make their own decisions. I think that if someone takes the trouble to read what they have taken the trouble to create, all of this is really quite clear. It is an excellent central resource available to anyone who can be bothered to read it. I honestly wonder if TOM's acquaintance (from his diving) has ever looked at it to add to the opinion he gave? I really do doubt it, just as I believe many more who TOM claimed this supporter was representative of, wouldn't have either. This will change with time, the development time I keep speaking of; it is essential to all good, sustainable growth and I am confident it will be a real asset to supporter involvement, as it opens up other avenues, not just the Trust.
I could talk about the articles, but it was used as a discussion forum, just like this and any other, which all have strengths and weaknesses. However, that's not really the issue, the fact is, it did/does exist. You've posted on it.
Yep, you've linked to the correct page. Which backs up my suggestion that a review and feedback on the local issues could prompt more involvement, as some, such as the atmosphere issue, appear to have stalled. It should be an opportunity for more people to be involved.
Fair enough. Point is, contrary to what you said, there was a ctwd forum. I've never really understood why the trust don't utilise an existing one, such as an extra page on CI as a temporary measure. It'd free up resources for other matters and reduce the risk of admin bias.
I think this conversation has brought out (for me at least) a need to get folk to explore the HCST website and do more than a quick scan. Perhaps a competition(s) that is designed to find embedded clues in the various elements - maybe something that can be done at school (pupil/teacher) or at home (child /parent); maybe aimed at different age groups - these clues are a journey that takes in the websites various sections and their content, it could include finding certain phrases or keywords to complete something bigger and finishing with a self-penned strapline or phrase that would best promote the Trust's ambitions - this would be the judged tie-breaker. It would be wonderful if the Trust were supported in this by a prize(s) that are associated with the club, the team, the children's heroes, although it would seem to be more the realm of the OSC, although I would be delighted to discover it to be otherwise! Encouraging supporters to work together, getting children to do the necessary research and, hopefully, getting them to do it in a fun way (tricks of confirmation might add to this), might change some perspective that has formed from that damned name-change debacle.
Our Facebook page could be described as a forum, but it's not really a forum in the sense that I meant, I'm sure it will all come flooding back when you post the link later. Our own website should have it's own forum, people shouldn't have to leave our website to discuss the issues posted on it. Something that we will resolve shortly.
How the hell does me posting a link back up anything you said was needed? Instead of stalled, might it be just as likely that we are in the start of a new season, with some changes having taken place, so folk are in a suck it and see stage before making further comments or suggestions? Might it also be possible that updates are pending, but everything has an order in strained resources? There has been precedent for HCST up-dates, so I expect more, when they are able. One thing I do believe worth pointing out is that initiatives (such as 'Get The KC Rocking) that still include the contact links of CTWD (a defunct group) should, if considered relevant to be published as a campaign, be amended to contact details that are up-to-date; although the Trust contact details are very easily found for folk with questions.
There aren't actually 36 campaigns, there are just 36 articles in the campaign section, some of them are nothing more than reporting on a single event, like the Liverpool boycott over ticket prices last season. Many of them are no longer of any real relevance, the Get The KC Rocking thing never took off, we got together a group of volunteers, held a meeting and set up a dedicated forum, but it never really went anywhere. It's probably something better suited to the FWG anyway.
Bloody hell guys, I Googled CTWD Forum and came up with this - can we move on from the forum of a defunct group?
The one in question is labelled as a forum. Its extent or better alternatives is pretty much a side issue. I mentioned it because you said there wasn't one, I'm simply pointing out that there was. The KC rocking campaign stalled awaiting actions from the committee member that volunteered to carry them out and progress them. If the trust has dropped it, it would have been polite to tell the others involved and it's probably as well to remove it from being one of the campaigns listed on the trust website.
