PLT wasn't one that mentioned it to me. It's immaterial really, this whole thing has been dragged out unnecessarily, it just needed a message passing to a group. In the event, some members of the group read the board, so if they've managed to stay awake through the obfuscation, will realise that some were missed off, and I reckon will be only too happy to include them in future. Why anyone would try to change a simple question into a saga is anyone's guess. It should be seen as the positive it clearly is.
There wouldn't be any of this bollocks if you'd simply PM'd me with details of who was missed off in the first place.
Why do I need to do that? All it needed was a simple message to the FWG. It's dragged on long enough, the group are, or will be aware. Your involvement isn't needed ta. Hopefully, they've more of a 'can do' attitude and are a bit more receptive to the involvement of other group members.
As has been presented in various places, the published scheme was discussed, as was a series of alternative ones that are published. Which shows the FWG sub-group never got each other to sign an NDA. Irrespective of who wasn't there that perhaps should have been, as one of the largest single groups, I'd expect the board rep from not606 to be involved, and in a two way dialogue so the views on here could be raised, either before or after the meeting and responses returned. The current message is for clear and more inclusive consultation, so it should be a reasonably straight forward conduit.
If you mean PLT, he's not the Not606 rep. He put himself forward & agreed to pass on any concerns or questions from this board. That doesn't make him a rep. What "sub group" are you referring to? You're just making things up so you have something to whinge about, it's what you do. You're again coming across as a bit of a **** stirring tit making up issues & problems that don't exist anywhere else but your own bitter mind.
I already said it wasn't PLT. Are you sure you're reading the same pages as everyone else? Fans talking and consulting with each other is a good thing and is being promoted by fans groups. I have no idea why you see them as whinging, but fortunately others seem to be more enlightened and positive. All I did was ask for a message to be passed on. It was a simple yes or no issue, but it took a while for some peculiar reason, but the message was passed. T'is done. It looks like you're just letting your tongue flap in the wind in the hope it makes a word like sound, it's dull and extremely pointless but for you it seems to fill a day. Anyway, before the pointless diversion onwards with consultation and healthy, open discussion.
It does to me. I've been reading this thread all afternoon and I would like to know the difference between the FWG and the FWG sub-group.
You referred to the Not606 rep, who you have previously said is PLT. He isn't. You're now trying to divert attention away from all the **** you've spouted. Who's on the "sub group"? What's it a sub group of? What's their agenda? Why do you think that a group of people who have attended a meeting shouldn't have private email discussions amongst themselves? I await your next diversion.
Here's a bone of contention re. the FWG if anyone wants to pick it up and chew on it. Who is the West stand rep, how did he get the role, how does he know what all those in the stand think, does he hold meetings, has he got the e-mail address of those in the west stand.
Hopefully this will clear things up... Consider the group of order 16 with the following presentation: please log in to view this image . This group has three subgroups of order 8: please log in to view this image , please log in to view this image , and please log in to view this image . Every proper subgroup is contained in one of these three. Fill in the subgroup lattice of please log in to view this image , exhibiting each subgroup with at most two generators. The subgroup lattice of please log in to view this image is as follows. please log in to view this image
I previously said PLT was the rep because that's what I thought I'd seen when he asked for questions and points to be raised at the FWG on behalf of this board, and gave some feedback, but I was told he wasn't, so it's a stretch to then claim I'm saying he is. No diversion, I leave that to you. My initial question all that time ago, was can a message be passed to the group. As it wasn't a full group, I assumed it was a sub-group. If it isn't, so be it, I've no problem in saying I called it the wrong name. I don't think people shouldn't be allowed to have a private discussion between themselves. I've never claimed they should. It was a simple enough point to raise that some members of the group didn't know about it, but for some peculiar reason, that seems to bother a couple of people. All it takes is for that group and them to be back in contact. I have no idea why some seem intent on making a mountain out of such a simple, positive point. Surely, more people involved is better, particularly if they're normally a part of the group?
Fair enough, I assumed it was a sub-group, because it wasn't a full group. It's taken some teasing out, but it seems it was a simple clerical error that some have tried to blow out of all proportion. It seems I called it a sub-group in error, so I apologise.
You asked a question, it was answered clearly. You obviously didn't understand the answer. You've twisted & turned every angle in order for it to look like there have been underhand meetings & discussions. You continually twist anything you can in an effort to make it look like there are issues when there are none. It's been said before that you are quick to criticse others who are making an effort. If people were concerned that they were missed off a distribution list then they have all the information needed to contact the relevant people to address it, if it does indeed need addressing.. They don't need you on here spouting **** on their anonymous behalf. Who are the members of the FWG? If you know members have been missed off then you must know who makes up the group, so fire away.
