I agree in a way but the trust will be what people make of it , what I don't understand is people who don't join and then complain about the actions of the trust , get involved if you want a say
I can understand that some folk might not agree with the actions and/or principles of the Trust, so joining would compromise their own beliefs - change can be brought to bear both from within and from without. You really shouldn't have to go to a meeting, join a club/Trust/group, or spend money simply to hold and express a point of view (edit: the internet age has changed so much) - I think those who say you should are in danger of being viewed as something that, perhaps, they are not. I had my doubts about the Trust but decided that I would join and be a part as it grows - but that was my own personal choice.
I am not aware that people would have been stopped from joining. I do not believed that protest voting in any situation is viable as it can distort the poll. I replied to the post, it's as simple as that. My opinion on the post. Fez points out that it can later become a negative and that is my point. I, please note I, would like to see supporters join the trust in order to deal with the issues thrown up by the club and to play a part in supporter base involvement and parciptation. I would also like supporters to join OSC to be socially linked with the club and each other. Do new members have different rights, no of course not, but it should never be as the post suggested that you had to pay for a vote. It should always be that you paid the join the organisation, whatever motivates you to join is a completely different subject.
In the Trusts case there is no doubt that there will be little difference. The narrow vote last time out on the OSC may be impacted by the sudden surge in membership. I do not even know the figures from either side. My point is that you should join a trust or supporters group, because of the overall benefits of membership. I simply do not believe that joining just to have a vote is viable.
Just for the record, I have never supported the name change, have never said I would, but, I may at some point support a name change, but not this one. For me the key word is City and I support Hull City. It does not bother me who knows this and I would not want to be involved in anything that was subject to the condition that I supported Hull Tigers.
Actually I've typed the complete wrong thing there. I didn't mean stopped from joining at all, apologies. I meant stopped from voting after joining and posting online about their intention to vote. Joining just to vote is perfectly fine. Even though it isn't the primary purpose of the OSC they have become involved in the consultation process and chose to do so. Having made that choice it'd have been very wrong to stop certain members from voting.
I am merely suggesting the vote can be rigged for as little as £5 per vote, IF people were so inclined.
Or something that could be said after a vote goes against someone. But as OLM says the numbers are low.
