And it'd be great if all those randomly selected could pull together in some way and meet up in advance of the meeting so that everybody knows what hymn sheet the others are singing off. Not everybody needs to have the same beliefs but it would be good to have a synthesised argument, and that's what one of the purposes of any football club Trust, to provide a platform for different opinions to be combined and expressed, with equal weighting.
Well...that escalated quickly from my last post!! I'm sure there's a pic out there somewhere for that!
I have just spent he afternoon in a meeting with two very large law firms on the brink of merging. My little brain, unfortunately, may struggle to understand the issues at stake here and perhaps I should turn down any potential invitation to be a "random supporter". I should probably not be reviewing docs for Prague/all of us anymore when it comes to the LLDC and OS either!
I have spent 30 years in one organisation and I abhor internal politics and avoid them like the plague. Probably explains why I only got so far, but it's far enough for me. For the same reason, I have avoided fan groups and other "clubs, associations, political groups and cliques"! Does that mean that I am uninterested and ignorant? (that's rhetorical by the way, so don't bother responding).
It has already been pointed out that there is a lot of arrogance and assumptions in some posts on here. It's wonderful that we have "active" supporters. I applaud them and I always have done. We wouldn't have seen some of the wonderful times recently without people like @Airman Brown and many others and I do not disregard the efforts that @razil put in for the Trust and certainly not @PragueAddick.
In the same way, I would be grateful if people did not disregard and put down supporters who are not members of any active group. With the best will in the world, they outnumber you by many thousands. Try seeing if they get involved in this and the outcomes and listen to them before dismissing them out of hand.
I think it's obvious there are many very intelligent and informed people outside the various groups and both on and off Charlton Life. The issue is whether selecting people at "random" - and I guarantee you it won't be that anyway - would be likely to identify any of them.
so do you think it'll be people already known to the club or some extremely selective "random" to up the chances of the attendees just being happy to be there?
I just think that any names that come up randomly which don't suit the club's purpose will be discarded.
You are for obvious reasons a very respected poster. But your comments are verging on paranoia now.
You'll be saying that the safe, middle aged families selected to sit on the sofa each game are an act of random as well!
The club won't have any non-manual ability to select at random, so let's just say the only way they can do is if for example, someone chooses 10 CON numbers at random. From that 10, 2 live in Yorkshire, 1 in Portsmouth, 1 in Brighton, 3 are children, 1 is on their risk category list, and 1 is someone known to the club as he sends in emails of complaints after every single game.
What if only 10% of those selected are actually interested in coming? How much time and effort do they put into trying to contact people? How much effort do they put into filling the places?
Will the ticket office have to close for one of the few remaining days that it is open to devote resources to this? :-)
Im not suggesting that any of what you write is wrong but how do you know there is not a mechanism for randomly selecting a number from a data base ? Hardly difficult to get a programme to do that is it ?
Do you also seriously think the club has a list of "risk category" fans based on their known views ? apart from those well known high profile fans all of whom amount to about half a dozen ? What chance of any being randomly selected anyway from a data base of ? 45k
As for those "selected" that live in eg Portsmouth or elsewhere and unlikely to be able to pitch up, well that's hardly the clubs fault is it ?
I'm really not trying to be an apologist for the club but in this particular instance I am finding it hard to take seriously the notion that everyone invited will be a stooge.
Well...that escalated quickly from my last post!! I'm sure there's a pic out there somewhere for that!
I have just spent he afternoon in a meeting with two very large law firms on the brink of merging. My little brain, unfortunately, may struggle to understand the issues at stake here and perhaps I should turn down any potential invitation to be a "random supporter". I should probably not be reviewing docs for Prague/all of us anymore when it comes to the LLDC and OS either!
I have spent 30 years in one organisation and I abhor internal politics and avoid them like the plague. Probably explains why I only got so far, but it's far enough for me. For the same reason, I have avoided fan groups and other "clubs, associations, political groups and cliques"! Does that mean that I am uninterested and ignorant? (that's rhetorical by the way, so don't bother responding).
It has already been pointed out that there is a lot of arrogance and assumptions in some posts on here. It's wonderful that we have "active" supporters. I applaud them and I always have done. We wouldn't have seen some of the wonderful times recently without people like @Airman Brown and many others and I do not disregard the efforts that @razil put in for the Trust and certainly not @PragueAddick.
In the same way, I would be grateful if people did not disregard and put down supporters who are not members of any active group. With the best will in the world, they outnumber you by many thousands. Try seeing if they get involved in this and the outcomes and listen to them before dismissing them out of hand.
I think it's obvious there are many very intelligent and informed people outside the various groups and both on and off Charlton Life. The issue is whether selecting people at "random" - and I guarantee you it won't be that anyway - would be likely to identify any of them.
so do you think it'll be people already known to the club or some extremely selective "random" to up the chances of the attendees just being happy to be there?
I just think that any names that come up randomly which don't suit the club's purpose will be discarded.
You are for obvious reasons a very respected poster. But your comments are verging on paranoia now.
You'll be saying that the safe, middle aged families selected to sit on the sofa each game are an act of random as well!
The club won't have any non-manual ability to select at random, so let's just say the only way they can do is if for example, someone chooses 10 CON numbers at random. From that 10, 2 live in Yorkshire, 1 in Portsmouth, 1 in Brighton, 3 are children, 1 is on their risk category list, and 1 is someone known to the club as he sends in emails of complaints after every single game.
What if only 10% of those selected are actually interested in coming? How much time and effort do they put into trying to contact people? How much effort do they put into filling the places?
Will the ticket office have to close for one of the few remaining days that it is open to devote resources to this? :-)
Im not suggesting that any of what you write is wrong but how do you know there is not a mechanism for randomly selecting a number from a data base ? Hardly difficult to get a programme to do that is it ?
Do you also seriously think the club has a list of "risk category" fans based on their known views ? apart from those well known high profile fans all of whom amount to about half a dozen ? What chance of any being randomly selected anyway from a data base of ? 45k
As for those "selected" that live in eg Portsmouth or elsewhere and unlikely to be able to pitch up, well that's hardly the clubs fault is it ?
I'm really not trying to be an apologist for the club but in this particular instance I am finding it hard to take seriously the notion that everyone invited will be a stooge.
But seeing how this mob have operated over the past two years a little part of you must be thinking " if there's any way they can fiddle this, they will" ?
Well...that escalated quickly from my last post!! I'm sure there's a pic out there somewhere for that!
I have just spent he afternoon in a meeting with two very large law firms on the brink of merging. My little brain, unfortunately, may struggle to understand the issues at stake here and perhaps I should turn down any potential invitation to be a "random supporter". I should probably not be reviewing docs for Prague/all of us anymore when it comes to the LLDC and OS either!
I have spent 30 years in one organisation and I abhor internal politics and avoid them like the plague. Probably explains why I only got so far, but it's far enough for me. For the same reason, I have avoided fan groups and other "clubs, associations, political groups and cliques"! Does that mean that I am uninterested and ignorant? (that's rhetorical by the way, so don't bother responding).
It has already been pointed out that there is a lot of arrogance and assumptions in some posts on here. It's wonderful that we have "active" supporters. I applaud them and I always have done. We wouldn't have seen some of the wonderful times recently without people like @Airman Brown and many others and I do not disregard the efforts that @razil put in for the Trust and certainly not @PragueAddick.
In the same way, I would be grateful if people did not disregard and put down supporters who are not members of any active group. With the best will in the world, they outnumber you by many thousands. Try seeing if they get involved in this and the outcomes and listen to them before dismissing them out of hand.
I think it's obvious there are many very intelligent and informed people outside the various groups and both on and off Charlton Life. The issue is whether selecting people at "random" - and I guarantee you it won't be that anyway - would be likely to identify any of them.
so do you think it'll be people already known to the club or some extremely selective "random" to up the chances of the attendees just being happy to be there?
I just think that any names that come up randomly which don't suit the club's purpose will be discarded.
You are for obvious reasons a very respected poster. But your comments are verging on paranoia now.
You'll be saying that the safe, middle aged families selected to sit on the sofa each game are an act of random as well!
The club won't have any non-manual ability to select at random, so let's just say the only way they can do is if for example, someone chooses 10 CON numbers at random. From that 10, 2 live in Yorkshire, 1 in Portsmouth, 1 in Brighton, 3 are children, 1 is on their risk category list, and 1 is someone known to the club as he sends in emails of complaints after every single game.
What if only 10% of those selected are actually interested in coming? How much time and effort do they put into trying to contact people? How much effort do they put into filling the places?
Will the ticket office have to close for one of the few remaining days that it is open to devote resources to this? :-)
Im not suggesting that any of what you write is wrong but how do you know there is not a mechanism for randomly selecting a number from a data base ? Hardly difficult to get a programme to do that is it ?
Do you also seriously think the club has a list of "risk category" fans based on their known views ? apart from those well known high profile fans all of whom amount to about half a dozen ? What chance of any being randomly selected anyway from a data base of ? 45k
As for those "selected" that live in eg Portsmouth or elsewhere and unlikely to be able to pitch up, well that's hardly the clubs fault is it ?
I'm really not trying to be an apologist for the club but in this particular instance I am finding it hard to take seriously the notion that everyone invited will be a stooge.
But seeing how this mob have operated over the past two years a little part of you must be thinking " if there's any way they can fiddle this, they will" ?
What I genuinely think is that we have an owner who has a vision of how he wants to run the football club that is not inclusive of fans views other than on a very superficial level. He isn't day to day hands on and never wants to be. He has appointed a CEO he trusts who will deal with the day to day and also to deal with the fans when issues arise that cause tension. She can only have so much latitude to engage because those are her instructions. She is effectively hamstrung. Pleasing us and pleasing him will only ever work out as pleasing him.
That's not to say that I think this policy is good. I don't. It's also not to say that I think she hasnt made errors. She has. What I don't think is that there is an underlying malevolence or intention to deceive.
Seems the club are dictating everything. Would be better if the individuals attending not only met up beforehand to create a unified voice but as soon as possible dictated to the club the agenda and structure of the actual meeting.
Well...that escalated quickly from my last post!! I'm sure there's a pic out there somewhere for that!
I have just spent he afternoon in a meeting with two very large law firms on the brink of merging. My little brain, unfortunately, may struggle to understand the issues at stake here and perhaps I should turn down any potential invitation to be a "random supporter". I should probably not be reviewing docs for Prague/all of us anymore when it comes to the LLDC and OS either!
I have spent 30 years in one organisation and I abhor internal politics and avoid them like the plague. Probably explains why I only got so far, but it's far enough for me. For the same reason, I have avoided fan groups and other "clubs, associations, political groups and cliques"! Does that mean that I am uninterested and ignorant? (that's rhetorical by the way, so don't bother responding).
It has already been pointed out that there is a lot of arrogance and assumptions in some posts on here. It's wonderful that we have "active" supporters. I applaud them and I always have done. We wouldn't have seen some of the wonderful times recently without people like @Airman Brown and many others and I do not disregard the efforts that @razil put in for the Trust and certainly not @PragueAddick.
In the same way, I would be grateful if people did not disregard and put down supporters who are not members of any active group. With the best will in the world, they outnumber you by many thousands. Try seeing if they get involved in this and the outcomes and listen to them before dismissing them out of hand.
I think it's obvious there are many very intelligent and informed people outside the various groups and both on and off Charlton Life. The issue is whether selecting people at "random" - and I guarantee you it won't be that anyway - would be likely to identify any of them.
so do you think it'll be people already known to the club or some extremely selective "random" to up the chances of the attendees just being happy to be there?
I just think that any names that come up randomly which don't suit the club's purpose will be discarded.
You are for obvious reasons a very respected poster. But your comments are verging on paranoia now.
You'll be saying that the safe, middle aged families selected to sit on the sofa each game are an act of random as well!
The club won't have any non-manual ability to select at random, so let's just say the only way they can do is if for example, someone chooses 10 CON numbers at random. From that 10, 2 live in Yorkshire, 1 in Portsmouth, 1 in Brighton, 3 are children, 1 is on their risk category list, and 1 is someone known to the club as he sends in emails of complaints after every single game.
What if only 10% of those selected are actually interested in coming? How much time and effort do they put into trying to contact people? How much effort do they put into filling the places?
Will the ticket office have to close for one of the few remaining days that it is open to devote resources to this? :-)
Im not suggesting that any of what you write is wrong but how do you know there is not a mechanism for randomly selecting a number from a data base ? Hardly difficult to get a programme to do that is it ?
Do you also seriously think the club has a list of "risk category" fans based on their known views ? apart from those well known high profile fans all of whom amount to about half a dozen ? What chance of any being randomly selected anyway from a data base of ? 45k
As for those "selected" that live in eg Portsmouth or elsewhere and unlikely to be able to pitch up, well that's hardly the clubs fault is it ?
I'm really not trying to be an apologist for the club but in this particular instance I am finding it hard to take seriously the notion that everyone invited will be a stooge.
But seeing how this mob have operated over the past two years a little part of you must be thinking " if there's any way they can fiddle this, they will" ?
What I genuinely think is that we have an owner who has a vision of how he wants to run the football club that is not inclusive of fans views other than on a very superficial level. He isn't day to day hands on and never wants to be. He has appointed a CEO he trusts who will deal with the day to day and also to deal with the fans when issues arise that cause tension. She can only have so much latitude to engage because those are her instructions. She is effectively hamstrung. Pleasing us and pleasing him will only ever work out as pleasing him.
That's not to say that I think this policy is good. I don't. It's also not to say that I think she hasnt made errors. She has. What I don't think is that there is an underlying malevolence or intention to deceive.
So she would be happy with the likes of Grapevine questioning her motives?
Seems the club are dictating everything. Would be better if the individuals attending not only met up beforehand to create a unified voice but as soon as possible dictated to the club the agenda and structure of the actual meeting.
Agreed. Fans should decide when meeting to be. After Ipswich protests better.
Seems the club are dictating everything. Would be better if the individuals attending not only met up beforehand to create a unified voice but as soon as possible dictated to the club the agenda and structure of the actual meeting.
Agreed. Fans should decide when meeting to be. After Ipswich protests better.
Well...that escalated quickly from my last post!! I'm sure there's a pic out there somewhere for that!
I have just spent he afternoon in a meeting with two very large law firms on the brink of merging. My little brain, unfortunately, may struggle to understand the issues at stake here and perhaps I should turn down any potential invitation to be a "random supporter". I should probably not be reviewing docs for Prague/all of us anymore when it comes to the LLDC and OS either!
I have spent 30 years in one organisation and I abhor internal politics and avoid them like the plague. Probably explains why I only got so far, but it's far enough for me. For the same reason, I have avoided fan groups and other "clubs, associations, political groups and cliques"! Does that mean that I am uninterested and ignorant? (that's rhetorical by the way, so don't bother responding).
It has already been pointed out that there is a lot of arrogance and assumptions in some posts on here. It's wonderful that we have "active" supporters. I applaud them and I always have done. We wouldn't have seen some of the wonderful times recently without people like @Airman Brown and many others and I do not disregard the efforts that @razil put in for the Trust and certainly not @PragueAddick.
In the same way, I would be grateful if people did not disregard and put down supporters who are not members of any active group. With the best will in the world, they outnumber you by many thousands. Try seeing if they get involved in this and the outcomes and listen to them before dismissing them out of hand.
I think it's obvious there are many very intelligent and informed people outside the various groups and both on and off Charlton Life. The issue is whether selecting people at "random" - and I guarantee you it won't be that anyway - would be likely to identify any of them.
so do you think it'll be people already known to the club or some extremely selective "random" to up the chances of the attendees just being happy to be there?
I just think that any names that come up randomly which don't suit the club's purpose will be discarded.
You are for obvious reasons a very respected poster. But your comments are verging on paranoia now.
You'll be saying that the safe, middle aged families selected to sit on the sofa each game are an act of random as well!
The club won't have any non-manual ability to select at random, so let's just say the only way they can do is if for example, someone chooses 10 CON numbers at random. From that 10, 2 live in Yorkshire, 1 in Portsmouth, 1 in Brighton, 3 are children, 1 is on their risk category list, and 1 is someone known to the club as he sends in emails of complaints after every single game.
What if only 10% of those selected are actually interested in coming? How much time and effort do they put into trying to contact people? How much effort do they put into filling the places?
Will the ticket office have to close for one of the few remaining days that it is open to devote resources to this? :-)
Im not suggesting that any of what you write is wrong but how do you know there is not a mechanism for randomly selecting a number from a data base ? Hardly difficult to get a programme to do that is it ?
Do you also seriously think the club has a list of "risk category" fans based on their known views ? apart from those well known high profile fans all of whom amount to about half a dozen ? What chance of any being randomly selected anyway from a data base of ? 45k
As for those "selected" that live in eg Portsmouth or elsewhere and unlikely to be able to pitch up, well that's hardly the clubs fault is it ?
I'm really not trying to be an apologist for the club but in this particular instance I am finding it hard to take seriously the notion that everyone invited will be a stooge.
But seeing how this mob have operated over the past two years a little part of you must be thinking " if there's any way they can fiddle this, they will" ?
What I genuinely think is that we have an owner who has a vision of how he wants to run the football club that is not inclusive of fans views other than on a very superficial level. He isn't day to day hands on and never wants to be. He has appointed a CEO he trusts who will deal with the day to day and also to deal with the fans when issues arise that cause tension. She can only have so much latitude to engage because those are her instructions. She is effectively hamstrung. Pleasing us and pleasing him will only ever work out as pleasing him.
That's not to say that I think this policy is good. I don't. It's also not to say that I think she hasnt made errors. She has. What I don't think is that there is an underlying malevolence or intention to deceive.
So she would be happy with the likes of Grapevine questioning her motives?
Well I can't answer that can I.
I'm sure that being a lawyer she would be able to answer where able and fend off when not. I'm sure that she is well aware that this meeting has the potential to be "uncomfortable". She will have prepared her answers as you would expect but she is not the owner and it is not her money to spend. I doubt she wants to fail either personally or for the club to fail.
She is working to a set of instructions given to her by a Bond villain sitting in another country. I'm actually not sure how she can possibly win.
Well...that escalated quickly from my last post!! I'm sure there's a pic out there somewhere for that!
I have just spent he afternoon in a meeting with two very large law firms on the brink of merging. My little brain, unfortunately, may struggle to understand the issues at stake here and perhaps I should turn down any potential invitation to be a "random supporter". I should probably not be reviewing docs for Prague/all of us anymore when it comes to the LLDC and OS either!
I have spent 30 years in one organisation and I abhor internal politics and avoid them like the plague. Probably explains why I only got so far, but it's far enough for me. For the same reason, I have avoided fan groups and other "clubs, associations, political groups and cliques"! Does that mean that I am uninterested and ignorant? (that's rhetorical by the way, so don't bother responding).
It has already been pointed out that there is a lot of arrogance and assumptions in some posts on here. It's wonderful that we have "active" supporters. I applaud them and I always have done. We wouldn't have seen some of the wonderful times recently without people like @Airman Brown and many others and I do not disregard the efforts that @razil put in for the Trust and certainly not @PragueAddick.
In the same way, I would be grateful if people did not disregard and put down supporters who are not members of any active group. With the best will in the world, they outnumber you by many thousands. Try seeing if they get involved in this and the outcomes and listen to them before dismissing them out of hand.
I think it's obvious there are many very intelligent and informed people outside the various groups and both on and off Charlton Life. The issue is whether selecting people at "random" - and I guarantee you it won't be that anyway - would be likely to identify any of them.
so do you think it'll be people already known to the club or some extremely selective "random" to up the chances of the attendees just being happy to be there?
I just think that any names that come up randomly which don't suit the club's purpose will be discarded.
You are for obvious reasons a very respected poster. But your comments are verging on paranoia now.
You'll be saying that the safe, middle aged families selected to sit on the sofa each game are an act of random as well!
The club won't have any non-manual ability to select at random, so let's just say the only way they can do is if for example, someone chooses 10 CON numbers at random. From that 10, 2 live in Yorkshire, 1 in Portsmouth, 1 in Brighton, 3 are children, 1 is on their risk category list, and 1 is someone known to the club as he sends in emails of complaints after every single game.
What if only 10% of those selected are actually interested in coming? How much time and effort do they put into trying to contact people? How much effort do they put into filling the places?
Will the ticket office have to close for one of the few remaining days that it is open to devote resources to this? :-)
Im not suggesting that any of what you write is wrong but how do you know there is not a mechanism for randomly selecting a number from a data base ? Hardly difficult to get a programme to do that is it ?
Do you also seriously think the club has a list of "risk category" fans based on their known views ? apart from those well known high profile fans all of whom amount to about half a dozen ? What chance of any being randomly selected anyway from a data base of ? 45k
As for those "selected" that live in eg Portsmouth or elsewhere and unlikely to be able to pitch up, well that's hardly the clubs fault is it ?
I'm really not trying to be an apologist for the club but in this particular instance I am finding it hard to take seriously the notion that everyone invited will be a stooge.
But seeing how this mob have operated over the past two years a little part of you must be thinking " if there's any way they can fiddle this, they will" ?
What I genuinely think is that we have an owner who has a vision of how he wants to run the football club that is not inclusive of fans views other than on a very superficial level. He isn't day to day hands on and never wants to be. He has appointed a CEO he trusts who will deal with the day to day and also to deal with the fans when issues arise that cause tension. She can only have so much latitude to engage because those are her instructions. She is effectively hamstrung. Pleasing us and pleasing him will only ever work out as pleasing him.
That's not to say that I think this policy is good. I don't. It's also not to say that I think she hasnt made errors. She has. What I don't think is that there is an underlying malevolence or intention to deceive.
So she would be happy with the likes of Grapevine questioning her motives?
Well I can't answer that can I.
I'm sure that being a lawyer she would be able to answer where able and fend off when not. I'm sure that she is well aware that this meeting has the potential to be "uncomfortable". She will have prepared her answers as you would expect but she is not the owner and it is not her money to spend. I doubt she wants to fail either personally or for the club to fail.
She is working to a set of instructions given to her by a Bond villain sitting in another country. I'm actually not sure how she can possibly win.
Far from the truth. VIP meeting as one example, her stance is she sits in a high position than the rest of us, if she doesn't like a question she laughs (embarrassment? awkwardness?) and in steps our friend Murray to shoot the question down in an impolite way.
I agree she's in an awkward position but that's the job she's signed up for. Can't give her an easy ride because it's not her fault - she also shouldn't be rude to fans or laugh when we are losing (not a one off - I could have had Al Murray sat next to me in some of our most recent home performances and I'd still be sat with a glum face); that would be a start for her.
@Eynsfordaddick My comment was not intended as ageist but calling out the Club's ageism - that they want young fans so let them hear the views from said young fans. I know of many in that age group who have serious concerns or are very disillusioned with things at cafc.. It was somewhat tongue in cheek, too...
Well...that escalated quickly from my last post!! I'm sure there's a pic out there somewhere for that!
I have just spent he afternoon in a meeting with two very large law firms on the brink of merging. My little brain, unfortunately, may struggle to understand the issues at stake here and perhaps I should turn down any potential invitation to be a "random supporter". I should probably not be reviewing docs for Prague/all of us anymore when it comes to the LLDC and OS either!
I have spent 30 years in one organisation and I abhor internal politics and avoid them like the plague. Probably explains why I only got so far, but it's far enough for me. For the same reason, I have avoided fan groups and other "clubs, associations, political groups and cliques"! Does that mean that I am uninterested and ignorant? (that's rhetorical by the way, so don't bother responding).
It has already been pointed out that there is a lot of arrogance and assumptions in some posts on here. It's wonderful that we have "active" supporters. I applaud them and I always have done. We wouldn't have seen some of the wonderful times recently without people like @Airman Brown and many others and I do not disregard the efforts that @razil put in for the Trust and certainly not @PragueAddick.
In the same way, I would be grateful if people did not disregard and put down supporters who are not members of any active group. With the best will in the world, they outnumber you by many thousands. Try seeing if they get involved in this and the outcomes and listen to them before dismissing them out of hand.
I think it's obvious there are many very intelligent and informed people outside the various groups and both on and off Charlton Life. The issue is whether selecting people at "random" - and I guarantee you it won't be that anyway - would be likely to identify any of them.
so do you think it'll be people already known to the club or some extremely selective "random" to up the chances of the attendees just being happy to be there?
I just think that any names that come up randomly which don't suit the club's purpose will be discarded.
You are for obvious reasons a very respected poster. But your comments are verging on paranoia now.
You'll be saying that the safe, middle aged families selected to sit on the sofa each game are an act of random as well!
The club won't have any non-manual ability to select at random, so let's just say the only way they can do is if for example, someone chooses 10 CON numbers at random. From that 10, 2 live in Yorkshire, 1 in Portsmouth, 1 in Brighton, 3 are children, 1 is on their risk category list, and 1 is someone known to the club as he sends in emails of complaints after every single game.
What if only 10% of those selected are actually interested in coming? How much time and effort do they put into trying to contact people? How much effort do they put into filling the places?
Will the ticket office have to close for one of the few remaining days that it is open to devote resources to this? :-)
Im not suggesting that any of what you write is wrong but how do you know there is not a mechanism for randomly selecting a number from a data base ? Hardly difficult to get a programme to do that is it ?
Do you also seriously think the club has a list of "risk category" fans based on their known views ? apart from those well known high profile fans all of whom amount to about half a dozen ? What chance of any being randomly selected anyway from a data base of ? 45k
As for those "selected" that live in eg Portsmouth or elsewhere and unlikely to be able to pitch up, well that's hardly the clubs fault is it ?
I'm really not trying to be an apologist for the club but in this particular instance I am finding it hard to take seriously the notion that everyone invited will be a stooge.
But seeing how this mob have operated over the past two years a little part of you must be thinking " if there's any way they can fiddle this, they will" ?
What I genuinely think is that we have an owner who has a vision of how he wants to run the football club that is not inclusive of fans views other than on a very superficial level. He isn't day to day hands on and never wants to be. He has appointed a CEO he trusts who will deal with the day to day and also to deal with the fans when issues arise that cause tension. She can only have so much latitude to engage because those are her instructions. She is effectively hamstrung. Pleasing us and pleasing him will only ever work out as pleasing him.
That's not to say that I think this policy is good. I don't. It's also not to say that I think she hasnt made errors. She has. What I don't think is that there is an underlying malevolence or intention to deceive.
I simply propose that each fan group should send along an articulate supporter aged under 25. This would emphasise that concerns are very serious and go beyond those of us who have been around for a while.
Who do Keith Blair, Graham Mackley, John Perkins, Craig Parrett currently represent?
How many of the supporters groups are currently active (maintaining meetings, annual memberships etc?
And how many members would something like the Reminiscence Group have?
This is a valid observation, but perhaps the key thing here is the message rather than the messenger. That is, how the various representatives present the issues and challenge the club on action. We need to be united.
As of today, the people listed are conduits for fans to express opinions. I'd say everyone pick your favourite and send them an email laying out what you think are the problems and, really important this, the solutions you'd like to see.
FYI I've emailed the other members of that list today in the hope we can get to a consensus on the key messages and start to plan together. I'm sure some will be cautious that "the Trust are taking over again" but for the avoidance of doubt I'm just stepping up as an individual to try to get us moving - I'm not precious about leading the conversations if others are better qualified to do so.
Well...that escalated quickly from my last post!! I'm sure there's a pic out there somewhere for that!
I have just spent he afternoon in a meeting with two very large law firms on the brink of merging. My little brain, unfortunately, may struggle to understand the issues at stake here and perhaps I should turn down any potential invitation to be a "random supporter". I should probably not be reviewing docs for Prague/all of us anymore when it comes to the LLDC and OS either!
I have spent 30 years in one organisation and I abhor internal politics and avoid them like the plague. Probably explains why I only got so far, but it's far enough for me. For the same reason, I have avoided fan groups and other "clubs, associations, political groups and cliques"! Does that mean that I am uninterested and ignorant? (that's rhetorical by the way, so don't bother responding).
It has already been pointed out that there is a lot of arrogance and assumptions in some posts on here. It's wonderful that we have "active" supporters. I applaud them and I always have done. We wouldn't have seen some of the wonderful times recently without people like @Airman Brown and many others and I do not disregard the efforts that @razil put in for the Trust and certainly not @PragueAddick.
In the same way, I would be grateful if people did not disregard and put down supporters who are not members of any active group. With the best will in the world, they outnumber you by many thousands. Try seeing if they get involved in this and the outcomes and listen to them before dismissing them out of hand.
I think it's obvious there are many very intelligent and informed people outside the various groups and both on and off Charlton Life. The issue is whether selecting people at "random" - and I guarantee you it won't be that anyway - would be likely to identify any of them.
so do you think it'll be people already known to the club or some extremely selective "random" to up the chances of the attendees just being happy to be there?
I just think that any names that come up randomly which don't suit the club's purpose will be discarded.
You are for obvious reasons a very respected poster. But your comments are verging on paranoia now.
You'll be saying that the safe, middle aged families selected to sit on the sofa each game are an act of random as well!
The club won't have any non-manual ability to select at random, so let's just say the only way they can do is if for example, someone chooses 10 CON numbers at random. From that 10, 2 live in Yorkshire, 1 in Portsmouth, 1 in Brighton, 3 are children, 1 is on their risk category list, and 1 is someone known to the club as he sends in emails of complaints after every single game.
What if only 10% of those selected are actually interested in coming? How much time and effort do they put into trying to contact people? How much effort do they put into filling the places?
Will the ticket office have to close for one of the few remaining days that it is open to devote resources to this? :-)
Im not suggesting that any of what you write is wrong but how do you know there is not a mechanism for randomly selecting a number from a data base ? Hardly difficult to get a programme to do that is it ?
Do you also seriously think the club has a list of "risk category" fans based on their known views ? apart from those well known high profile fans all of whom amount to about half a dozen ? What chance of any being randomly selected anyway from a data base of ? 45k
As for those "selected" that live in eg Portsmouth or elsewhere and unlikely to be able to pitch up, well that's hardly the clubs fault is it ?
I'm really not trying to be an apologist for the club but in this particular instance I am finding it hard to take seriously the notion that everyone invited will be a stooge.
But seeing how this mob have operated over the past two years a little part of you must be thinking " if there's any way they can fiddle this, they will" ?
What I genuinely think is that we have an owner who has a vision of how he wants to run the football club that is not inclusive of fans views other than on a very superficial level. He isn't day to day hands on and never wants to be. He has appointed a CEO he trusts who will deal with the day to day and also to deal with the fans when issues arise that cause tension. She can only have so much latitude to engage because those are her instructions. She is effectively hamstrung. Pleasing us and pleasing him will only ever work out as pleasing him.
That's not to say that I think this policy is good. I don't. It's also not to say that I think she hasnt made errors. She has. What I don't think is that there is an underlying malevolence or intention to deceive.
At this rate there will only be a few fans to choose from. The sooner Mr Burns and his Pinocchioesque sidekick pack their bags and take their two bob no mark manager with them the better.
Comments
Do you also seriously think the club has a list of "risk category" fans based on their known views ? apart from those well known high profile fans all of whom amount to about half a dozen ? What chance of any being randomly selected anyway from a data base of ? 45k
As for those "selected" that live in eg Portsmouth or elsewhere and unlikely to be able to pitch up, well that's hardly the clubs fault is it ?
I'm really not trying to be an apologist for the club but in this particular instance I am finding it hard to take seriously the notion that everyone invited will be a stooge.
That's not to say that I think this policy is good. I don't. It's also not to say that I think she hasnt made errors. She has. What I don't think is that there is an underlying malevolence or intention to deceive.
Sorted
edit: and Grapevine
I'm sure that being a lawyer she would be able to answer where able and fend off when not. I'm sure that she is well aware that this meeting has the potential to be "uncomfortable". She will have prepared her answers as you would expect but she is not the owner and it is not her money to spend. I doubt she wants to fail either personally or for the club to fail.
She is working to a set of instructions given to her by a Bond villain sitting in another country. I'm actually not sure how she can possibly win.
You'll be saying that the safe, middle aged families selected to sit on the sofa each game are an act of random as well!
Not entirely staged, but also not entirely random.
I agree she's in an awkward position but that's the job she's signed up for. Can't give her an easy ride because it's not her fault - she also shouldn't be rude to fans or laugh when we are losing (not a one off - I could have had Al Murray sat next to me in some of our most recent home performances and I'd still be sat with a glum face); that would be a start for her.
As of today, the people listed are conduits for fans to express opinions. I'd say everyone pick your favourite and send them an email laying out what you think are the problems and, really important this, the solutions you'd like to see.
FYI I've emailed the other members of that list today in the hope we can get to a consensus on the key messages and start to plan together. I'm sure some will be cautious that "the Trust are taking over again" but for the avoidance of doubt I'm just stepping up as an individual to try to get us moving - I'm not precious about leading the conversations if others are better qualified to do so.