After a lot of deliberation, I have voted for Concessions. Hobsons ****ing choice, but I do feel if we voted no change, that would be the end of any discussion.
If there are two choices, discussions on here won't end.
After a lot of deliberation, I have voted for Concessions. Hobsons ****ing choice, but I do feel if we voted no change, that would be the end of any discussion.
It will never end on here, just between the club and supportIf there are two choices, discussions on here won't end.
I really don’t understand why this argument about giving up has crept in. The situation regarding concessions is unacceptable and will still be with either result of this vote, so the campaign continues, why shouldn’t it?
Which makes it all the more remarkable that some advocate being a silently muttering minority.If there’s a vote in favour of continuing with no concessions, the job’s ****ed, we can protest all we like, they can just claim it’s a noisy minority and they’ve gone with the majority decision.
Which makes it all the more remarkable that some advocate being a silently muttering minority.
If there’s a vote in favour of continuing with no concessions, the job’s ****ed, we can protest all we like, they can just claim it’s a noisy minority and they’ve gone with the majority decision.
Superbly put Cheshire.One is an option to carry on the debate, the other kills the debate.
They are masters at it. And I guess that's why they love a badly worded ballotThere’s nothing like divide and rule is there! .
If there’s a vote in favour of continuing with no concessions, the job’s ****ed, we can protest all we like, they can just claim it’s a noisy minority and they’ve gone with the majority decision.
Which makes it all the more remarkable that some advocate being a silently muttering minority.
Exactly, I totally agree (although we both know the fight will go on in one form or another).
This is why the vote should have been rejected and discredited by the Trust, so that such a result could be declared as beyond contempt and not in the least a signal of true feeling; instead it has been given stature and legitimacy in the public eye - a serious mistake IMO.
This is why abstention is a valid protest and a valid response. The effort put into pushing for the yes vote could have been put into opposing the whole vote and offering a channel for those no-voters to be counted.
I really can’t fathom how people are seeing it any different. One is an option to carry on the debate, the other kills the debate.
If there’s a vote in favour of continuing with no concessions, the job’s ****ed, we can protest all we like, they can just claim it’s a noisy minority and they’ve gone with the majority decision.
Which makes it all the more remarkable that some advocate being a silently muttering minority.
I really can’t fathom how people are seeing it any different. One is an option to carry on the debate, the other kills the debate.

They are masters at it. And I guess that's why they love a badly worded ballot
The Trust are still only a minority of those balloted though.Exactly, I totally agree (although we both know the fight will go on in one form or another).
This is why the vote should have been rejected and discredited by the Trust, so that such a result could be declared as beyond contempt and not in the least a signal of true feeling; instead it has been given stature and legitimacy in the public eye - a serious mistake IMO.
This is why abstention is a valid protest and a valid response. The effort put into pushing for the yes vote could have been put into opposing the whole vote and offering a channel for those no-voters to be counted.
I think by suggesting we abstain or vote to keep the pricing the same, we assume this ballot is going to be a formality and so we can show our distain for the owners AND still win the ballot. Its going to be closer
We (If we had a vote) assume no such thing by abstaining, we would simply be refusing to use a vote in a deeply divisive ballot.
If there was to be a mass refusal to vote then you would have a case to make but it's never going to happen, just like the talk of a mass boycott of going to the games sending a clear message to the Allams it will always be undermind by those who support the team not the owners... to call for abstaining will only split the vote 3 ways instead of 2.
I think you will agree that the olive branch that the Allams have offered is in actual fact a stick with **** on both ends. Many have convinced themselfs that which ever way the vote goes there will be further negotiations to get better concessions, it's almost like they have never seen the Allams in action before.
And we haven't even started on the name change stuff yet.