[QUOTE="Hull City AFC (DMD), post: 9106846, member: 1000706" It was fans finding out through other means, and making their voice heard independent of the FWG or any other groups that got the scheme revised. Perhaps that is something that fans should build on to present a collective voice. Or maybe people are just weary of the lot and will vote with their feet.[/QUOTE] This is just one of the problems - a lot of the older school type ARE voting with their feet, probably never to return; even worse, if the ill-conceived membership scheme goes ahead a lot of young kids will be never get the chance to ''vote with their feet'' because they'll be priced out before their City support ever gets started.
What backlash? There have been questions asked and there have been variations on the answers, there have been opinions offered and there have been responses that are defensive and unfortunate. There has been one scheme outline offered and then been subject to an ongoing review. It was probably inevitable that continuing to reply to questions was going to lead to a mistake and argument. For my part I questioned the sense of this last week. Sometimes it has appeared that there is a drip-feed of possible amendments, it's madness, just wait and let it be discussed when they restate their intentions. As for how the owners behave and interact with well -meaning supporters, my opinion is that they behave disgracefully - what is yours?
Isnt the FWG an open invite to anyone who wants to go?? There's a few on here who really need to get down there to the next meeting. They'll sort it out no problem.
When the FWG was originally launched there was an open invite to anyone who wanted to attend, but there's just about 10/12 of us who are invited now.
I think one of the flaws with the FWG is that it's not always clear who people are representing. Some are only representing themselves, which is fair enough, but is that how it should be?
I thought it was clear who represented who. People who have attended from here have always courted issues prior to meetings & reported back afterwards. It was confirmed in the latest minutes (AN), reproduced on here, by HCST & plenty of other places. In attendance: James Mooney, marketing manager of Hull City AFC Henry Crane, catering superstar Jonathan Lee and Will Leaf, observing from Strawberry Tony Conway (Senior Tigers) Ron Black (Hull City Official Supporters Club) George Machin (Hull boys’ league coach) John Wilson (Away Direct) John Watt (West Stand) Geoff Bielby (Hull City Supporters’ Trust) Andy Dalton (Amber Nectar ne’er-do-well) Ian Waterson (City Independent) Rob Harmer (Not 606)
The elected not606 rep is PLT, but at other meetings, there are others there that represent themselves, and not all questions asked on here get raised at the meetings, sometimes they're dealt with via email. Also, it's debatable if those listed cover a representative sample of City fans. None of that is a dig at the FWG, or the people that attend.
There are a few sections of support not represented. If you look at the groups next to the names, a fair few arguably represent very few people. Before anyone starts, I know it will never be totally representative, but it's another occasion where a bit of effort could cover more bases. Another notable absentee is the fans liaison officer.
A shocking omission - as was the lack of gay, lesbian or transgender representation ............... sort it out Brucey ffs!
My understanding is that initially PLT & OLM attended & offered to take issues forward. We, as a group, agreed this to be acceptable. They weren't elected. They responded to the initial call & were invited along agreeing to take forward issues from this forum. I believe at least one other regular poster off here also put themselves forward to attend the meetings. PLT's invites have dried up therefore leaving OLM as a lone voluntary voice for this forum. If you don't think the FWG covers a representative sample of City fans go to the club & discuss it. I think they'd welcome your comments, they could invite you along. Instead of moaning, whinging & generally finding fault with how every supporter group or committee that appears (CTWD, HCST, FWG) is ran you could put yourself forward to represent others rather than being critical of those who do. Personally, I think you'd be **** at it due to your inability to see or accept any other point of view other than your own to the point that you'd rather argue pithy & irrelevant points. I think you just like moaning about what others do whilst generally saying nowt but cryptically suggesting plenty.
OLM was the trust rep at the meetings. I'm not 'moaning and whinging' I'm expressing an opinion. I've not mentioned what I've done about it off these boards, because it's irrelevant, but I guarantee it's a dam sight more than you. Your weak argumentative style, really only demonstrates that you've not really read the posts you're whining about.
