I think you're just guessing, because if that's true, it's odd that people like NIck Barmby and most or all of the FWG abided by it.
Yes, we'll see how much influence the OSC has when the changes, if any, are announced. I don't expect there to be any major changes so we will see that the OSC's influence is limited. You assumed that I thought the OSC would have some influence and there would be some improvements. This conversation started because I pointed out the OSC is tolerated more than the Trust because it gives its opinions in private. As you say its because of the one-sided nature of the relationship. I accept that and don't expect the OSC to be a protest group. I expect it to speak on behalf of its members to the club and that will normally be private. It may have an influence but I suspect not. What may well have a far bigger influence is the number of sponsors, or people who can bend the ear of our sponsors, with season tickets in the upper west who don't want to move. All speculation on my part, of course.
For what it's worth, there's been other times at FWG meetings where the club has asked for certain things not to be reported and people have honoured that. In fact people have almost always waited what is in my view an unreasonably long time before sharing anything online because the club ask that reps run everything past them first. I don't really understand why this one particularly needed an NDA.
It's not uncommon for NDAs to be ignored. You asked what the punishment would be for breaking the DNA, so I assumed you meant the one we are discussing and I am happy to predict there will be no punishment. ( Unless you consider being cold-shouldered a punishment, but most, in this casex, would consider it the norm). I wasn't really guessing, as you didn't ask a clear cut question, so I gave you a judgment call. We'll see, won't we.
Can everybody just be nice to each other? Thanks* *I will keep an eye on how this goes, because if it works I'm going to try it in the Middle East too
Again, how will we tell how much influence they will have had? Others are throwing advice at the club, you say club / OSC talks are better because they are private, they don't kick up a fuss. So how will we know whose advice, if any, was taken? Everyone's influence is limited, unless there is a tying business rule, a local community rule, or a law that the Allams must comply with. It's not just the OSC who have little influence. I have explained what I said, if you want to ignore it and continue with your nonsense then crack on. You make things up. This conversation started, between you and me, when I asked you a question on post #321. I've seem some very public bollocks on here from the OSC. The club have opened a can of worms and many folk, from all elements of the club, civic and broader football community are losing patience with them. This will definitely cost them money (not guessing) and that does not bode well for the club.
The question couldn't have been more clear cut. You simply don't know the answer. Those that signed it will know. Wether or not it's enforced is a different question.
The conversation started at post 224 when I answered a post by TOM. Our conversation started at post 283. If there are huge changes to the system then you will be right, it will be difficult to decide who influenced the club.
The changes to the scheme are as a result of the large number of objections the club have received from all quarters, they're obviously not down to any individual or any single group.
I don't know why you laugh, as no one ever knows the punishment that might be imposed for breaking a NDA until it goes legal and someone decides what the terms of contract are and whether or not they are reasonable (unconscionable) in terms and reasonable (unconscionable) in how they were implemented. (I think this is a key point in this case, as those involved were only informed on the night and did not have expert advice available - it might be considered they were ambushed). It is not a fixed penalty, like a speeding fine, many varying factors can and will be considered, so not predictable in the manner your question required. The answer I gave you was the only answer appropriate to a poor question, not a guess, just not as definitive as you wanted, due to the fact it could not be. Unless you have found something better, in which case let us all know how your curiosity has been satisfied; in the meantime I'll refrain from trying to assist you in your ignorance.
Fair enough, I stand corrected, ours was #283, not that it changes anything. I'm pleased that you concede the error of your posts, as it is important to understand it will be difficult to attribute credit to any one individual person or group (which might stop senseless argument later) - which is all I have ever said on that matter. Glad you finally got there.
What was odd about it. Is it odd that folk speed and get caught and some don't? People will sign something and stick to the terms for whatever reason tickles their fancy, fear of prosecution, public vilification, financial incentive. Other people will break an NDA because they feel it was an unfair mechanism imposed under duress, or they feel a public/social responsibility (whistle blowers), or, maybe the alternative is financially the worse option. Of course, they might just be thick ****s who have no idea of what they are involved in and should have stayed well away.
I hope that is the case because I have always thought that the OSC were wary of rocking the boat about anything regarding the club because it could effect the relationship they have with them, such as the access to players attending meeting etc ?
It is pleasing to know that large numbers have contacted the club directly, which may in part explain why nothing else has come out quickly. A tweak and rushed out version 2 may have been intended but the longer that is taken over this the greater the likelihood that serious considerations have been taken of objections. I know the Allams have not been known for changing their minds but they will realise that when you are not in the Premier League, a large collapse in income from loss of a large chunk of support is not something their finances can stand.
