You've managed to concentrate your normal post content into one word. You must try your best in maintaining this wonderful effort. Excellent work, well done.
I've done my best to answer, but the questions seem more linked to some peculiar version of events trapped in your mind, than based on the reality of the simple question I asked. You seem hell bent on proving some other point over and above if Tom, Dick or Harry got an email, and it wasn't even you that I asked or could answer. You're doing well to drag this ****e out, and not too bad at trying to make out it's me that's being argumentative for asking a very simple and straightforward question, that a couple of others seemed to find problematic. I imagine everyone else is bored and stopped reading pages back. Ultimately, I like the idea of open consultation. The fans groups are making a good noise about inclusive discussions. It just seems to be the last few on here that are struggling to get with the programme.
Anyone know if there are any email groups set up anywhere? I'd quite like to join one, but I don't know if such a thing even exists, because I've never heard anyone mention any? Thanks in anticipation
If you'd just messaged me people who you thought should be contacted in future, I could have easily taken care of it without any of this bollocks.
Inclusive discussions The club know the details of all those who had attended the previous FWG meetings. For the membership scheme presentation meeting the club chose not to invite some of those who had been before. If you have any problems with who was invited you best take that up with your contacts at the club. Can you imagine if one of those who had been invited brought along one of those who the club had decided they didn't want there.
If you'd just answered instead of getting touchy, it would have been resolved in one reply. You don't need to know their details, it was a simple issue to raise the point with the group. It didn't need any more from you. For all I know/knew, there could be some good reason why the group was limited in numbers. The bollocks were all yours. Surely it's a simple enough question, and one the group would probably want to address.
They got the invite from the club. It was the later meetings and conversations outside of that that they missed out on. I'm struggling to see why people wouldn't want wider involvement.
Such as? My only real question was, why didn't some people get an email. The answer was that it was a clerical error. Which bit's bollocks?
Send me your email by PM, and I'll join you in to several. You maybe wouldn't want your wife to see some of them though.
Me to group - There's other people we should have invited to Wednesday's meeting. Random person from group to me - Which other people? Me to group - No idea.
You have a lower opinion of the group than I have. They've also already seen this thread, so can see the question anyway.
Well it wasn't deliberate was it. **** me, how a very simple question can get blown out of all proportion by some. It's pretty much resolved anyway,
It's interesting to see that trust numbers seemingly dropped despite all the goings on last year, but now seem to be picking up, but I digress. It's good that Geoff wants to encourage more consultation and fan involvement. I think that's to be applauded and supported.
