I would expect that any communications that go out on the official site would have to be checked for compliance/legal/PR issues.
I know, I know.......
So, I would expect any notes from a meeting would be circulated internally and vetted before it goes out.
I think that the current omnishambles is just forcing us all to pick on every piece of comms and turn ourselves inside out with anger/frustration.
Whilst we look at Charlton as our football club, the board have a responsibility to look at it as a business and treat us as customers (light blue touch paper...) and put process around the communications. They just don't seem to be having a great time of it over the last few weeks.
The forum does seem to be agenuinely good idea, and I dont see what alternative there could be. might be a good idea to use this thread to think about that, than kicking the virtual cr@p out of each other.
I would expect that any communications that go out on the official site would have to be checked for compliance/legal/PR issues.
I know, I know.......
So, I would expect any notes from a meeting would be circulated internally and vetted before it goes out.
I think that the current omnishambles is just forcing us all to pick on every piece of comms and turn ourselves inside out with anger/frustration.
Whilst we look at Charlton as our football club, the board have a responsibility to look at it as a business and treat us as customers (light blue touch paper...) and put process around the communications. They just don't seem to be having a great time of it over the last few weeks.
The forum does seem to be agenuinely good idea, and I dont see what alternative there could be. might be a good idea to use this thread to think about that, than kicking the virtual cr@p out of each other.
I think that's a bit of an understatement. Over on another thread it is being reported that Charlton fans on twitter are petitioning the home office to have Luzon's visa application rejected!
I wonder what the Trust boards view is of this activity? @razil
I would expect that any communications that go out on the official site would have to be checked for compliance/legal/PR issues.
I know, I know.......
So, I would expect any notes from a meeting would be circulated internally and vetted before it goes out.
I think that the current omnishambles is just forcing us all to pick on every piece of comms and turn ourselves inside out with anger/frustration.
Whilst we look at Charlton as our football club, the board have a responsibility to look at it as a business and treat us as customers (light blue touch paper...) and put process around the communications. They just don't seem to be having a great time of it over the last few weeks.
The forum does seem to be agenuinely good idea, and I dont see what alternative there could be. might be a good idea to use this thread to think about that, than kicking the virtual cr@p out of each other.
I think that's a bit of an understatement. Over on another thread it is being reported that Charlton fans on twitter are petitioning the home office to have Luzon's visa application rejected!
I wonder what the Trust boards view is of this activity? @razil
The club will have a meeting and let us know their opinion in 2 weeks, the Trust will probably do likewise.
We are Fanny, but despite your defence of KM the whole saga still doesn't add up.
RD gets the games streamed to Belgium, makes the decision that enough is enough after Saturdays result and tells KM to get rid of Big Bob.
She was seen leaving the ground at 5.20 after the game, which means that she's able to get word out that CAFC have a vacancy for a manager, sort through applications, select for, then invite for interview the 'right candidates', chose the best option and hold a press conference within 72 hours.
Yet we have to wait up to two weeks to see approved minutes of a meeting where the visibility of programme sellers is a hot topic.
if AB is to be believed KM suggested some Friday evening games and the majority of learned fans suggest no and KM decided to do it anyway - wow that is a marvellous form on consultation, So what's the point the sooner we realise that RD and his acolyte will do exactly what they want and really have no interest in the fans as long as they get our money.
Of course I could be wrong and no doubt in a week or two we shall see the minutes of the meeting and know what KM wants us to know. In the meantime I thank Fanny and the other members for their efforts but with this lot in charge what is the point, unless the minutes prove otherwise.
The Trust was so close to gaining my membership for the first time. I agree with every word of the original statement.
I've then read through this thread and realised that yet again the Trust - an independent fans body - has agreed to be bound by the reporting restrictions of the club.
Perhaps the trust should remind themselves of what they have asked of the club and take a leaf out of their own book:
'The Trust aims to rekindle that relationship between the fans and the Club. We believe that mutual trust and openness will help channel the fans’ passion in a way which is positive financially for the club and emotionally for the fans. We have consistently sought dialogue with the Club, with this aim.'
If I can explain a few things here, maybe they will help, maybe not.
1. The Fans Forum was around for many years before the Trust. (unlike say at Swansea, where the Trust set up and run the Fans Forum). We had to work hard just to be accepted as legitimate participants. And not just on the Club side, it has to be said.
2. So having been accepted, we have to abide by the rules that were set up long before our existence. If we break those rules, we are out. Simple as that. Look at the argument that has broken out now between Fanny and AB to see how sensitive it all is.
3. We don't like that this is the only current way that we can have any kind of dialogue with Katrien. But we think it is better than nothing. Small gradual steps.
4. There will always be some confidentiality. If we ever have a Supporter Director again, it will be the same, because of corporate law compliance; as it was before. Ask @Henry Irving.
Hope that explains our position, which we are ourselves not very happy with. And if you think we could do things differently, we're open to suggestion. Here or privately.
But aren't the CAST people concerned that AB ( and his trusty mole) might have royally peed off Katrien with this juvenile jape ?
If the FF is disbanded then no-one ( inc the Trust rep that attends meetings) will have any face to face dialogue.
Having disgracefully being accused of giving away some unspecified confidence or other by Bradshaw during our first meeting with the new owners I am somewhat cynical, the bottom line for me is to run the Trust as professionally as possible.
Theres a difference between being ITK/cliquey, and with the problem as Prague says if you can't keep professional confidences, no one will tell you jack all. I get why that annoys some and I'm not really sure what the answer is but to keep trying to persuade them to be more open and get out to the fans more which we have been.
The Forum is supposed to be for operational matters, I can't for the life of me think of anything I've heard on that was remotely worthy of secrecy. Its also at the whim of the club, no direspect to those who attend it, and hence why we also need a Trust.
Theres nothing stopping reps speaking about it after the minutes are out as far as I'm concerned, I agree they should be out much more quickly.
I would expect that any communications that go out on the official site would have to be checked for compliance/legal/PR issues.
I know, I know.......
So, I would expect any notes from a meeting would be circulated internally and vetted before it goes out.
I think that the current omnishambles is just forcing us all to pick on every piece of comms and turn ourselves inside out with anger/frustration.
Whilst we look at Charlton as our football club, the board have a responsibility to look at it as a business and treat us as customers (light blue touch paper...) and put process around the communications. They just don't seem to be having a great time of it over the last few weeks.
The forum does seem to be agenuinely good idea, and I dont see what alternative there could be. might be a good idea to use this thread to think about that, than kicking the virtual cr@p out of each other.
I think that's a bit of an understatement. Over on another thread it is being reported that Charlton fans on twitter are petitioning the home office to have Luzon's visa application rejected!
I wonder what the Trust boards view is of this activity? @razil
I would expect that any communications that go out on the official site would have to be checked for compliance/legal/PR issues.
I know, I know.......
So, I would expect any notes from a meeting would be circulated internally and vetted before it goes out.
I think that the current omnishambles is just forcing us all to pick on every piece of comms and turn ourselves inside out with anger/frustration.
Whilst we look at Charlton as our football club, the board have a responsibility to look at it as a business and treat us as customers (light blue touch paper...) and put process around the communications. They just don't seem to be having a great time of it over the last few weeks.
The forum does seem to be agenuinely good idea, and I dont see what alternative there could be. might be a good idea to use this thread to think about that, than kicking the virtual cr@p out of each other.
I think that's a bit of an understatement. Over on another thread it is being reported that Charlton fans on twitter are petitioning the home office to have Luzon's visa application rejected!
I wonder what the Trust boards view is of this activity? @razil
What's twitter?
A social media site in which the trust has nearly 2000 followers
I would expect that any communications that go out on the official site would have to be checked for compliance/legal/PR issues.
I know, I know.......
So, I would expect any notes from a meeting would be circulated internally and vetted before it goes out.
I think that the current omnishambles is just forcing us all to pick on every piece of comms and turn ourselves inside out with anger/frustration.
Whilst we look at Charlton as our football club, the board have a responsibility to look at it as a business and treat us as customers (light blue touch paper...) and put process around the communications. They just don't seem to be having a great time of it over the last few weeks.
The forum does seem to be agenuinely good idea, and I dont see what alternative there could be. might be a good idea to use this thread to think about that, than kicking the virtual cr@p out of each other.
I think that's a bit of an understatement. Over on another thread it is being reported that Charlton fans on twitter are petitioning the home office to have Luzon's visa application rejected!
I wonder what the Trust boards view is of this activity? @razil
What's twitter?
A social media site in which the trust has nearly 2000 followers
Razil was just trying to laugh off a particularly idiotic question
I would expect that any communications that go out on the official site would have to be checked for compliance/legal/PR issues.
I know, I know.......
So, I would expect any notes from a meeting would be circulated internally and vetted before it goes out.
I think that the current omnishambles is just forcing us all to pick on every piece of comms and turn ourselves inside out with anger/frustration.
Whilst we look at Charlton as our football club, the board have a responsibility to look at it as a business and treat us as customers (light blue touch paper...) and put process around the communications. They just don't seem to be having a great time of it over the last few weeks.
The forum does seem to be agenuinely good idea, and I dont see what alternative there could be. might be a good idea to use this thread to think about that, than kicking the virtual cr@p out of each other.
I think that's a bit of an understatement. Over on another thread it is being reported that Charlton fans on twitter are petitioning the home office to have Luzon's visa application rejected!
I wonder what the Trust boards view is of this activity? @razil
What's twitter?
A social media site in which the trust has nearly 2000 followers
Razil was just trying to laugh off a particularly idiotic question
I would expect that any communications that go out on the official site would have to be checked for compliance/legal/PR issues.
I know, I know.......
So, I would expect any notes from a meeting would be circulated internally and vetted before it goes out.
I think that the current omnishambles is just forcing us all to pick on every piece of comms and turn ourselves inside out with anger/frustration.
Whilst we look at Charlton as our football club, the board have a responsibility to look at it as a business and treat us as customers (light blue touch paper...) and put process around the communications. They just don't seem to be having a great time of it over the last few weeks.
The forum does seem to be agenuinely good idea, and I dont see what alternative there could be. might be a good idea to use this thread to think about that, than kicking the virtual cr@p out of each other.
I think that's a bit of an understatement. Over on another thread it is being reported that Charlton fans on twitter are petitioning the home office to have Luzon's visa application rejected!
I wonder what the Trust boards view is of this activity? @razil
What's twitter?
A social media site in which the trust has nearly 2000 followers
Razil was just trying to laugh off a particularly idiotic question
Sorry, mine was meant to be tongue in cheek too
Sorry too then. It's getting late. I am sure this will set off another diatribe from a certain poster, but I just find the idea of a load of Charlton fans going on to twitter to tell the Home Office to refuse Luzon a permit, side-splittingly funny.
EDIT. Just been on Twitter to have a look. Some of them are absolutely hilarious. Gallows humour, I guess.
if AB is to be believed KM suggested some Friday evening games and the majority of learned fans suggest no and KM decided to do it anyway - wow that is a marvellous form on consultation, So what's the point the sooner we realise that RD and his acolyte will do exactly what they want and really have no interest in the fans as long as they get our money.
Of course I could be wrong and no doubt in a week or two we shall see the minutes of the meeting and know what KM wants us to know. In the meantime I thank Fanny and the other members for their efforts but with this lot in charge what is the point, unless the minutes prove otherwise.
So Katrien decided to do it anyway ?
Don't believe that is strictly true but that's what follows the "leaking" of information.....
We seem to be wanting to trawl over the same offence again and again. It is almost approaching Monthy Python proportions. How many times do you want to be offended?
Whatever the intent, by accident, design or disinterest events at the club in recent days have to be seen, as a minimum, as showing a significant lack of respect to a substantial body of people. People have every right to be offended but I am not entirely sure why anyone would see a long established Fan - Club Forum which has agreed strict terms of reference as the vehicle you might want to use to address such issues, even if the club wishes to use it as an occasion to explain certain actions.
In terms of any resolution there is probably little anyone can now say to remedy the situation. It rightly or wrongly has created a history all of its own. It will no doubt remain as a regular point of reference for decades to come. Further dialogue or statements will be more likely to simply attract more criticism and vitriol and incite ever more dissatisfaction.
I get it. I would be surprised if there is a person on the Internet who does not get it. Guy Luzon is probably trending worldwide. Things are not good but s**t happens. For all of the complaints what exactly do you want to happen?
You want KM to resign? That's a good idea as the only recognisable executive you have at the club, with the new head coach in limbo, the owner sitting in Sint-Truiden, halfway through a transfer window you want throw out the one person who can do anything? Really? Have we not seen enough bonehead decisions already?
In terms of the Fan-Forum process, minutes are simply a record of what was said/ discussed/ agreed at a meeting. They are created by one person and as a result are subject to one persons interpretation and accuracy.
Standard practice is for "internal minutes" to be issued to all parties represented at the meeting (and for information purposes to other "internal parties" directly impacted by the topics under discussion) within 24/48hrs. Such minutes are not usually formally agreed until the next meeting where ALL parties present can address any inaccuracies or different interpretations before formal agreement can be registered, while other informed parties can feed their input to this next meeting for it to be raised via Matters Arising.
In the event the minutes are to be published beyond those parties present or directly involved there is a natural delay because all parties need to agree they actually reflect what was said and agreed. Equally it is in all parties interests to be aware of any matters arising before the minutes are put in the "public" domain so any pertinent appendix can be added.
The minutes themselves are not usually however subject to external influence. If they are/were to any unreasonable extent then it is within the control of any of the parties to withdraw from future participation in such meetings.
As a communication tool the minutes of any meeting are probably the last media vehicle I would want to use. They are usually stodgy, over long and wordy documents (now you know where I spent a lot of my career).
I understand and to a large degree share the prevailing negativity about the events of recent days but have we not seen enough lack of respect (on which I agree there has been much excellent comment) without joining in by maligning those processes we do have, no matter the personalities involved, which seek to establish/ rebuild a worthwhile dialogue with the club?
We are all entitled to our opinions but whose interest is this obsessive flagellation of the club really serving?
You talk a lot of sense, Grapevine, but the FF largely deals with issues that in no way need to be secret and its discussions are being elevated to an unrealistic status.
Fanny decided to disclose aspects relating to KM and the events of this week. I would be very surprised if these were set out in detail in the minutes, since that would not reflect favourably on RD if I am understanding her correctly.
Otherwise you seem to be complaining about something which is characteristic of the internet as a whole rather than Charlton Life in particular, namely the tendency for discussions to feed off themselves.
The formal version of FF discussions for the record may need to be agreed, but the idea that all aspects must be kept under wraps until then and nothing can be said outside that is both recent and grossly disproportionate to the subject matter.
and verging on disrespectful to the majority of fans who do not get to attend the meeting but whose opinions and interests form the agenda, dare I suggest?
My take on all this for what its worth is, RD and KM seem to be showing disrespect (bordering on total contempt) for Charlton fans, whether they be ones who have supported the club for a great many years or just a few. KM's reported remark that we just have to accept what they do as one example. They should remember we do not have to accept anything, we can just not attend matches, no club can survive without supporters. RD may have millions, but he needs our small contributions each season to stay as owner of a profitable business, and lets not kid ourselves, he only sees us as a business opportunity. If they wish to be seen in a different light then they should be open and honest, and speak to all fans, not just a few.
I am in no way saying this to be nasty or rude to anyone who attends these meetings, and have utmost respect for someone like Fanny and Mr. F who do so much work as volunteers to help the club. RD would do nothing if there wasn't something in it for him. Please lets all stick together as fans on the same side, (that of our club) and even if we have different opinions on how things should be done, lets try not to fall out with each other as that will help RD to continue his reign of "like it or lump it".
Thanks Fanny but I was under the impression that it takes a few weeks to get a work permit for a non EEC citizen. The club would of needed to sponsor him and I can't see how all this red tape was completed on a Monday to enable him to be announced on a Tuesday.
I think there are one or two things raised here about communication that are worthy of discussion at the next FF.
Another is that of the 'secretary' and how it is selected, no biggy just think now JC has stood down it should be put to the group via nomination/vote, it seems to have been appointed by the club - but perhaps Fanny can put me straight on that. I think Craig VIP was taking the notes in the end. There was a funny moment where Mick thought I was taking the meeting, did make me chuckle. Anyway I nominate Fanny if it ever happens.
One thing from the previous meeting was around the loss leader argument for Valley Express, I think its something for debate, once the next minutes are released, based on the actual numbers/roi etc
Additionally the Friday football thing, which the Trust will be covering in depth when we publish results of the latest survey.
I think there are one or two things raised. Here about communication that are worthy of discussion at the next FF.
Another is that of the 'secretary' and how it is selected, no biggy just think now JC has stood down it should be put to the group via nomination/vote, it seems to have been appointed by the club - but perhaps Fanny can put me straight on that. I think Craig VIP was taking the notes in the end. There was a funny moment where Mick thought I was taking the meeting, did make me chuckle. Anyway I nominate Fanny if it ever happens.
One thing from the previous meeting was around the loss leader argument for Valley Express, I think its something for debate, once the next minutes are released, based on the actual numbers/roi etc
Additionally the Friday football thing, which the Trust will be covering in depth when we publish results of the latest survey.
As a member of the FF, can you confirm whether the trust was consulted about the "statement" issued in the FF's name re Valley Express at the end of November?
Problem is by the time they publish the minutes in two weeks time it will be out of date, as we'll be onto our next manager head coach by then and Jackson and Ben Haim leaving will be the hot topics on here.
You talk a lot of sense, Grapevine, but the FF largely deals with issues that in no way need to be secret and its discussions are being elevated to an unrealistic status.
Fanny decided to disclose aspects relating to KM and the events of this week. I would be very surprised if these were set out in detail in the minutes, since that would not reflect favourably on RD if I am understanding her correctly.
Otherwise you seem to be complaining about something which is characteristic of the internet as a whole rather than Charlton Life in particular, namely the tendency for discussions to feed off themselves.
The formal version of FF discussions for the record may need to be agreed, but the idea that all aspects must be kept under wraps until then and nothing can be said outside that is both recent and grossly disproportionate to the subject matter.
I believe yourself or Wendy took minutes when you were involved, AB & I THINK members were forwarded the final version within a week or so.
But at that time there was no mention or suggestion about making them available to supporters via the OS.
This was introduced last season, or may the one before at, I seem to recall my thoughts on the matter.
But that still doesn't address the issue I raised last night regarding "someone" at Thursday's meeting leaking information ahead of said agreed process.
As you are totally aware, issues of far more importance are mentioned in confidence from time to time ( you mention "largely" dealing with issues that in no way need to be secret) so please don't try to bullsh*t me.
and verging on disrespectful to the majority of fans who do not get to attend the meeting but whose opinions and interests form the agenda, dare I suggest?
"Verging on the disrespectful to the majority of fans" ? Really, Weegie ? I find that quite amazing & unlike you ...
So, you'd rather that every FF member attending a meeting immediately comes on CL & gives their version of proceedings earlier that evening.
There would be 10 differing versions of course - unless you expect us volunteers to stay behind after the meeting to pore over the notes before agreeing on the final draft , then emailing them to Katrien ( by this time it would likely be 10-10.30pm ) for her go ahead. Bear also in mind that reps travel from as far away as Hastings & Ashford and that meetings are usually on a Thursday , with most having worked for a full day and working on the Friday afterwards.
Perhaps you'd like to make your way down from Glasgow once a quarter to represent the "Scottish Addicks" , volunteer to take the notes, review them with colleagues etc etc ?
I don't believe it's the FF members that are disrespectful....
I think there are one or two things raised here about communication that are worthy of discussion at the next FF.
Another is that of the 'secretary' and how it is selected, no biggy just think now JC has stood down it should be put to the group via nomination/vote, it seems to have been appointed by the club - but perhaps Fanny can put me straight on that. I think Craig VIP was taking the notes in the end. There was a funny moment where Mick thought I was taking the meeting, did make me chuckle. Anyway I nominate Fanny if it ever happens.
One thing from the previous meeting was around the loss leader argument for Valley Express, I think its something for debate, once the next minutes are released, based on the actual numbers/roi etc
Additionally the Friday football thing, which the Trust will be covering in depth when we publish results of the latest survey.
John Commerford was asked by Steve Bradshaw to liaise with him regarding agenda, forwarding of minutes etc and it was at that time that they set up an email address for the OS in order that fans could put forward requests for items they wished discussed.
As you are aware, John decided to stand down from his involvement only last week due to health issues so no-one has had time to take this forward as yet.
Craig, VIP rep, has taken the minutes for the past couple of years, if memory serves me right - basically he probably volunteered. Simple as that.
Thanks for nominating me, Barnie but I think I do my bit already.
You talk a lot of sense, Grapevine, but the FF largely deals with issues that in no way need to be secret and its discussions are being elevated to an unrealistic status.
Fanny decided to disclose aspects relating to KM and the events of this week. I would be very surprised if these were set out in detail in the minutes, since that would not reflect favourably on RD if I am understanding her correctly.
Otherwise you seem to be complaining about something which is characteristic of the internet as a whole rather than Charlton Life in particular, namely the tendency for discussions to feed off themselves.
The formal version of FF discussions for the record may need to be agreed, but the idea that all aspects must be kept under wraps until then and nothing can be said outside that is both recent and grossly disproportionate to the subject matter.
I believe yourself or Wendy took minutes when you were involved, AB & I THINK members were forwarded the final version within a week or so.
But at that time there was no mention or suggestion about making them available to supporters via the OS.
This was introduced last season, or may the one before at, I seem to recall my thoughts on the matter.
But that still doesn't address the issue I raised last night regarding "someone" at Thursday's meeting leaking information ahead of said agreed process.
As you are totally aware, issues of far more importance are mentioned in confidence from time to time ( you mention "largely" dealing with issues that in no way need to be secret) so please don't try to bullsh*t me.
You believe wrong then. Craig Parrett took the minutes. However the meetings weren't secret either, so the minutes weren't that important. They were produced to Craig's timetable, not the club's.
If something was said in confidence that was and should be respected but the majority of discussions are not sensitive and elevating them to that status is unnecessary and somewhat self-serving, in my opinion.
Otherwise I refer you to Razil's previous comment: "The Forum is supposed to be for operational matters, I can't for the life of me think of anything I've heard on that was remotely worthy of secrecy."
It's a fans forum, you discuss catering and running out of big roll, who really cares when minutes are released or whether there is a leak before they are.
Comments
:-)
I know, I know.......
So, I would expect any notes from a meeting would be circulated internally and vetted before it goes out.
I think that the current omnishambles is just forcing us all to pick on every piece of comms and turn ourselves inside out with anger/frustration.
Whilst we look at Charlton as our football club, the board have a responsibility to look at it as a business and treat us as customers (light blue touch paper...) and put process around the communications. They just don't seem to be having a great time of it over the last few weeks.
The forum does seem to be agenuinely good idea, and I dont see what alternative there could be. might be a good idea to use this thread to think about that, than kicking the virtual cr@p out of each other.
Emotions are running high indeed but some on here are making this far too personal.
And I thought we were all on the same side....
I wonder what the Trust boards view is of this activity? @razil
RD gets the games streamed to Belgium, makes the decision that enough is enough after Saturdays result and tells KM to get rid of Big Bob.
She was seen leaving the ground at 5.20 after the game, which means that she's able to get word out that CAFC have a vacancy for a manager, sort through applications, select for, then invite for interview the 'right candidates', chose the best option and hold a press conference within 72 hours.
Yet we have to wait up to two weeks to see approved minutes of a meeting where the visibility of programme sellers is a hot topic.
Of course I could be wrong and no doubt in a week or two we shall see the minutes of the meeting and know what KM wants us to know. In the meantime I thank Fanny and the other members for their efforts but with this lot in charge what is the point, unless the minutes prove otherwise.
Theres a difference between being ITK/cliquey, and with the problem as Prague says if you can't keep professional confidences, no one will tell you jack all. I get why that annoys some and I'm not really sure what the answer is but to keep trying to persuade them to be more open and get out to the fans more which we have been.
The Forum is supposed to be for operational matters, I can't for the life of me think of anything I've heard on that was remotely worthy of secrecy. Its also at the whim of the club, no direspect to those who attend it, and hence why we also need a Trust.
Theres nothing stopping reps speaking about it after the minutes are out as far as I'm concerned, I agree they should be out much more quickly.
EDIT. Just been on Twitter to have a look. Some of them are absolutely hilarious. Gallows humour, I guess.
Don't believe that is strictly true but that's what follows the "leaking" of information.....
Whatever the intent, by accident, design or disinterest events at the club in recent days have to be seen, as a minimum, as showing a significant lack of respect to a substantial body of people. People have every right to be offended but I am not entirely sure why anyone would see a long established Fan - Club Forum which has agreed strict terms of reference as the vehicle you might want to use to address such issues, even if the club wishes to use it as an occasion to explain certain actions.
In terms of any resolution there is probably little anyone can now say to remedy the situation. It rightly or wrongly has created a history all of its own. It will no doubt remain as a regular point of reference for decades to come. Further dialogue or statements will be more likely to simply attract more criticism and vitriol and incite ever more dissatisfaction.
I get it. I would be surprised if there is a person on the Internet who does not get it. Guy Luzon is probably trending worldwide. Things are not good but s**t happens. For all of the complaints what exactly do you want to happen?
You want KM to resign? That's a good idea as the only recognisable executive you have at the club, with the new head coach in limbo, the owner sitting in Sint-Truiden, halfway through a transfer window you want throw out the one person who can do anything? Really? Have we not seen enough bonehead decisions already?
In terms of the Fan-Forum process, minutes are simply a record of what was said/ discussed/ agreed at a meeting. They are created by one person and as a result are subject to one persons interpretation and accuracy.
Standard practice is for "internal minutes" to be issued to all parties represented at the meeting (and for information purposes to other "internal parties" directly impacted by the topics under discussion) within 24/48hrs. Such minutes are not usually formally agreed until the next meeting where ALL parties present can address any inaccuracies or different interpretations before formal agreement can be registered, while other informed parties can feed their input to this next meeting for it to be raised via Matters Arising.
In the event the minutes are to be published beyond those parties present or directly involved there is a natural delay because all parties need to agree they actually reflect what was said and agreed. Equally it is in all parties interests to be aware of any matters arising before the minutes are put in the "public" domain so any pertinent appendix can be added.
The minutes themselves are not usually however subject to external influence. If they are/were to any unreasonable extent then it is within the control of any of the parties to withdraw from future participation in such meetings.
As a communication tool the minutes of any meeting are probably the last media vehicle I would want to use. They are usually stodgy, over long and wordy documents (now you know where I spent a lot of my career).
I understand and to a large degree share the prevailing negativity about the events of recent days but have we not seen enough lack of respect (on which I agree there has been much excellent comment) without joining in by maligning those processes we do have, no matter the personalities involved, which seek to establish/ rebuild a worthwhile dialogue with the club?
We are all entitled to our opinions but whose interest is this obsessive flagellation of the club really serving?
You talk a lot of sense, Grapevine, but the FF largely deals with issues that in no way need to be secret and its discussions are being elevated to an unrealistic status.
Fanny decided to disclose aspects relating to KM and the events of this week. I would be very surprised if these were set out in detail in the minutes, since that would not reflect favourably on RD if I am understanding her correctly.
Otherwise you seem to be complaining about something which is characteristic of the internet as a whole rather than Charlton Life in particular, namely the tendency for discussions to feed off themselves.
The formal version of FF discussions for the record may need to be agreed, but the idea that all aspects must be kept under wraps until then and nothing can be said outside that is both recent and grossly disproportionate to the subject matter.
I am in no way saying this to be nasty or rude to anyone who attends these meetings, and have utmost respect for someone like Fanny and Mr. F who do so much work as volunteers to help the club. RD would do nothing if there wasn't something in it for him. Please lets all stick together as fans on the same side, (that of our club) and even if we have different opinions on how things should be done, lets try not to fall out with each other as that will help RD to continue his reign of "like it or lump it".
Another is that of the 'secretary' and how it is selected, no biggy just think now JC has stood down it should be put to the group via nomination/vote, it seems to have been appointed by the club - but perhaps Fanny can put me straight on that. I think Craig VIP was taking the notes in the end. There was a funny moment where Mick thought I was taking the meeting, did make me chuckle. Anyway I nominate Fanny if it ever happens.
One thing from the previous meeting was around the loss leader argument for Valley Express, I think its something for debate, once the next minutes are released, based on the actual numbers/roi etc
Additionally the Friday football thing, which the Trust will be covering in depth when we publish results of the latest survey.
But at that time there was no mention or suggestion about making them available to supporters via the OS.
This was introduced last season, or may the one before at, I seem to recall my thoughts on the matter.
But that still doesn't address the issue I raised last night regarding "someone" at Thursday's meeting leaking information ahead of said agreed process.
As you are totally aware, issues of far more importance are mentioned in confidence from time to time ( you mention "largely" dealing with issues that in no way need to be secret) so please don't try to bullsh*t me.
So, you'd rather that every FF member attending a meeting immediately comes on CL & gives their version of proceedings earlier that evening.
There would be 10 differing versions of course - unless you expect us volunteers to stay behind after the meeting to pore over the notes before agreeing on the final draft , then emailing them to Katrien ( by this time it would likely be 10-10.30pm ) for her go ahead. Bear also in mind that reps travel from as far away as Hastings & Ashford and that meetings are usually on a Thursday , with most having worked for a full day and working on the Friday afterwards.
Perhaps you'd like to make your way down from Glasgow once a quarter to represent the "Scottish Addicks" , volunteer to take the notes, review them with colleagues etc etc ?
I don't believe it's the FF members that are disrespectful....
As you are aware, John decided to stand down from his involvement only last week due to health issues so no-one has had time to take this forward as yet.
Craig, VIP rep, has taken the minutes for the past couple of years, if memory serves me right - basically he probably volunteered. Simple as that.
Thanks for nominating me, Barnie but I think I do my bit already.
If something was said in confidence that was and should be respected but the majority of discussions are not sensitive and elevating them to that status is unnecessary and somewhat self-serving, in my opinion.
Otherwise I refer you to Razil's previous comment: "The Forum is supposed to be for operational matters, I can't for the life of me think of anything I've heard on that was remotely worthy of secrecy."
It's a fans forum, you discuss catering and running out of big roll, who really cares when minutes are released or whether there is a leak before they are.