The ballot...
- Thread starter originallambrettaman
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
By not voting for them and using another channel to say so. An alternative to a spoiled ballot paper.
Not voting doesn't reject anything. That's not how votes work.
Once the vote has taken place the majority vote will represent the majority view. No votes will count for nothing.
By not voting you're simply reinforcing the Allam's view that people don't care about the lack of concessions.
Get concessions back, that's a change brought about by consultation. From there you move forward with further consultation.
If people don't vote for the change there may well be a result that supports no concessions. There will then be no further consultation as the Allam's will just go with the majority view & have a majority mandate that they can refer to.
A "don't vote" is a waste of an opportunity to influence positive change.
Nicely summed up by Amber Nectar this morning - The prospect of giving Ehab Allam a chance to gloat that fans were consulted and voted against concessions is ghastly, and once the principle is re-established that certain groups ought to receive discounts, we can set to work on improving them in the future. We’d therefore vote, with little enthusiasm, to accept these proposals. Then continue to pressure the club to do it properly.
" Once the vote has taken place the majority vote will represent the majority view. No votes will count for nothing." Unless it is a referendum which doesn't go the way you think it should of course.
Don't know what the **** you're whinging & sniding at now but if it's an obscure reference to the Euro Referendum I think you'll find the majority view is being upheld. Which means you're talking bollocks.
Also you missed out a complete word in you haste to slap your keyboard as fast as you can so that you could post your bollocks quicker. Slacking.
It also has no relevance to the thread, now trot off & have a swift one off the wrist thinking about Norwich.
Your first paragraph is incorrect. Your second paragraph is partially correct and partially incorrect. The remainder is opinion.
A deliberate no-vote, a spoiled ballot paper, is as much a statement as the other options; the fact it seems to be unpopular is neither here nor there.
http://www.votenone.org.uk/protest_votes_count.html
This is just a random link, quickly done on the phone; Google for something better. A no-vote or spoiled vote (in the way I advocate is a protest vote- something you and your likers should understand and appreciate).
Disagree with me by all means, it’s all about opinion, but don’t lecture me based on nonsense.
Brilliant, now explain how you submit a spoiled ballot paper in an online vote with just two options?
It’s easy.
I just tried it.
I spat at my monitor.
It’s properly spoiled now.
**** you Allams!
I am in exactly the same position as you Casual and have voted the same. I also said I would not be in the least surprised if the majority vote was for no change.
That's all opinion and wrong about me. The nonsense was your out-of-hand dismissal of the spoiled vote principle.
My lead is, and always has been, don't be a part of the games the club play with supporters. It's my opinion; I respect different and opposing opinion from others, just as I listen to them and respond with polite questions or statements, which you do not, as you clearly prefer to make everything personal.
Brilliant, someone is open for ideas, even though done sarcastically. I think it best we don't follow Happy's advice as it seems messy. Funny how it is always the usual suspects that turn an opinion based discussion into a personal slagging.
Since this topic arose, I have, on a couple of occasions, explained in outline, possible options for achieving something meaningful in the recording of spoiled papers. For instance, the Trust, OSC or the club might have facilitated an email address that could receive emails from the 16500 who would give their details or UIN to show that their lack of voting through the mainstream option was not apathy, but a conscious and thought through decision. This would have been accountable, reportable and easily offset against the transparency of the clubs figures. I'm sure others could see other ways. Not perfect, but neither is the clubs option. To be fair, I now consider it academic as time has passed and the level of advice given to supporters (even though that isn't the intent, apparently) is now insurmountable and doesn't offer those who have followed that advice, and already voted, a third option - a third option that the early conversations on this thread thought necessary.
I'll get back in the box with you now, OLM, as thinking outside of it is clearly not to be encouraged.
Anyone who thinks that this proposal from these tossers is a stepping stone to further dialogue and more concessions are deluding themselves in my opinion. We are being led into a trap as far as I can see. I would like the official line from us to have been along the lines of don’t give legitimacy to this proposal and therefore don’t vote. Continue the protests and let our feelings be known. Is voting for their proposal whereby they continue beating us with a stick for the sake of a couple of pounds here and there really worth it?
I have not voted
Right or wrong.
I just can't vote for something I find so ****ty that's not really concessions
Right or wrong.
I just can't vote for something I find so ****ty that's not really concessions
Brilliant, someone is open for ideas, even though done sarcastically. I think it best we don't follow Happy's advice as it seems messy. Funny how it is always the usual suspects that turn an opinion based discussion into a personal slagging.
Since this topic arose, I have, on a couple of occasions, explained in outline, possible options for achieving something meaningful in the recording of spoiled papers. For instance, the Trust, OSC or the club might have facilitated an email address that could receive emails from the 16500 who would give their details or UIN to show that their lack of voting through the mainstream option was not apathy, but a conscious and thought through decision. This would have been accountable, reportable and easily offset against the transparency of the clubs figures. I'm sure others could see other ways. Not perfect, but neither is the clubs option. To be fair, I now consider it academic as time has passed and the level of advice given to supporters (even though that isn't the intent, apparently) is now insurmountable and doesn't offer those who have followed that advice, and already voted, a third option - a third option that the early conversations on this thread thought necessary.
I'll get back in the box with you now, OLM, as thinking outside of it is clearly not to be encouraged.
I think Happy's comment should be considered humour, rather than a personal slagging.
What you suggest isn't now, and never was, realistic. People are too lazy, it's hard enough to get them to vote, never mind emailing people with details of why they're not voting, you'd be lucky to get more than a couple of dozen emails.
Supporting the reintroduction of concessions was always the only realistic route to change.
Everyone should do what they see fit, but not voting will be considered a vote to keep things as they are, whatever the intention.
Brilliant, someone is open for ideas, even though done sarcastically. I think it best we don't follow Happy's advice as it seems messy. Funny how it is always the usual suspects that turn an opinion based discussion into a personal slagging.
Since this topic arose, I have, on a couple of occasions, explained in outline, possible options for achieving something meaningful in the recording of spoiled papers. For instance, the Trust, OSC or the club might have facilitated an email address that could receive emails from the 16500 who would give their details or UIN to show that their lack of voting through the mainstream option was not apathy, but a conscious and thought through decision. This would have been accountable, reportable and easily offset against the transparency of the clubs figures. I'm sure others could see other ways. Not perfect, but neither is the clubs option. To be fair, I now consider it academic as time has passed and the level of advice given to supporters (even though that isn't the intent, apparently) is now insurmountable and doesn't offer those who have followed that advice, and already voted, a third option - a third option that the early conversations on this thread thought necessary.
I'll get back in the box with you now, OLM, as thinking outside of it is clearly not to be encouraged.
I don't agree with everything you say but I'm glad people with different ideas and thoughts actually post here
The HCST should establish their own online poll to canvass those who have not voted out of principal.
It happens too often and is always in the same vein, so I disagree.
Another opinion, but it certainly was possible and realistic. You asked for an idea, I gave you one. Who knows what the response will be and who should be the judge of that.