Jordanhill Jag Posted July 29 Report Share Posted July 29 So all potential Fan Rep Candidates are to be vetted by TJF to ensure that they are Ideologically compliant – TJF no longer believe in “Pure Democracy” ( there words not mine) – in essence there is a danger the Fans may elect the wrong type of person – so to ensure they don’t – TJF will put out a Candidate List of the “Right Type of Candidates” as they cant trust the idiot Fan Base to get it right This is based on unspecified “Feedback & Supporter Comments” Now for Clarity – this Vetting is not to ensure the Candidate has the required Business Experience or Skills – as TJF don’t need to go via the Fan Base to put someone on the Board ~ and have rejected various offers of assistance or removed very qualified people – TJF Control the Board appointments BUT – they don’t Control the Elected Fan Reps - that’s left to the Fans & clearly they believe that they should Control that process also – as only those that agree with TJF are considered worthy of standing But here is the thing – so far those who are deemed worthy by TJF burnt through £1MN of investment with zero to show for it ( apart from selling off 20% of the Club ) – TJF approved a £350K loss making Budget – despite it being pointed out to them that it swallowed up most of Tranche 2 Investment -before we even got it Then the Blame for Season 24/25 Massive Losses were put on various Board Members – despite the Bulk of the Losses being the agreed £350K Loss + £60K to PTWFC – and early Cup Exits – however no one at TJF in any shape or form takes ownership that they had a major part to play in allowing these losses ~ a Big Boy did it and ran away. And for the Record anyone who signs off a £350K Budget loss should be now here near the Place ( Club Board or TJF Board ) Season 25/26 ~ they will try and show how there changes have turned things around – only key difference is Prize Money from Two Cup Runs & finishing Second – it will ( as usual ) be Spun to make TJF and there Gang look Good – but it’s not – Boards don’t Control what happens on the Park -or the Luck of a Cup Draw I’m often accused of being Anti Fan Ownership – which is nonsense- for various Clubs it works – however at ours it’s a circle of being acceptable to a handful of people who call the shots at TJF & elsewhere – they have been calling the Shots for a considerable period – same faces – reheated - that’s it We may be Fan Owned ~ but without large external Cash Injections we are not a sustainable Business – the Risk that if those Cash Injections Dry Up ~ we are massively exposed ( notwithstanding multiple other issues associated with large funding from a Single Source ) I’m told that its believed we will be promoted this Season – that’s a Big Bet based on our track Record over the last Five Seasons - promotion is as elusive as the Club “5 Year Plan” Democracy is far from perfect - we see that every day in various Government Forms However as a Wise Man said 🙂 Democracy is the worst form of Government Apart from the alternative Controlling who gets to stand is not Democracy - using 1984 Speak like "Pure Democracy" not being the correct process is simply saying you don't trust your Supporters We cant get people to stand for lots of reasons ( a Key one being TJF who cant even get people to stand for there own elections ) - there exists a Culture of Bullying towards anyone that speaks out - or doesn't follow that TJF are the saviour of PTFC - that is certainly a larger issue regards getting decent people involved in running the Club than the "Right Type of Democracy". Everyone on the Board apart from Donald McClymont & the elected Fan Rep is hand picked by TJF - its there Board - Donald has legal protection ref his Directorship - now TJF want to choose who stands as Fan Rep - that's not healthy in any organisation & bordering on the obsessive Cry Havoc & Release the TJF Dogs of War & there Helpers 😀( most of whom hide behind Forum anonymity pretending they are just fans ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted July 29 Report Share Posted July 29 Hearts and Foundation of Hearts The Foundation of Hearts has the power to nominate three directors to the Heart of Midlothian Board of Directors. These positions are filled by an internal vote of the Foundation of Hearts' board, from among their own number. The members of the Foundation of Hearts vote for the members of the Foundation of Hearts board, but do not then have a vote on which of them should serve on the Club Board. Hearts. Fan owned. Less democratic than the Thistle process. Motherwell and The Well Society The Well Society has the power to nominate two directors to the Motherwell Board of Directors. These positions are filled by an internal decision of The Well Society's board, from among their own number. The members of The Well Society vote for the members of The Well Society board, but do not then have a vote on which of them should serve on the Club Board. Motherwell. Fan owned. Less democratic than the Thistle process. St Mirren and SMiSA SMiSA has the power to appoint four directors to the St Mirren Board of Directors. These positions are filled by a two-stage process. Firstly there are confidential nominations with relevant CV and expression of interest and (if necessary) interviews. SMiSA then whittles those down to a short-list or a preferred candidate, based on suitable experience and candidates. There is then a member vote to ratify/reject/determine the preferred choice of candidate. St Mirren. Fan owned. Doing exactly the same thing as Thistle. Morton and Morton Club Together Morton Club Together has the power to nominate two directors to the Morton Board of Directors. These positions are filled by an internal decision of Morton Club Together's board, from among their own number. The members of Morton Club Together vote for the members of Morton Club Together board, but do not then have a vote on which of them should serve on the Club Board. Morton. Fan owned. Less democratic than the Thistle process. Falkirk and the Falkirk Supporters' Society FFS has the power to appoint two directors to the Falkirk Board of Directors. These positions are filled by a two-stage process. Firstly there are confidential nominations with relevant CV and expression of interest and (if necessary) interviews. FFS then whittles those down to a short-list or a preferred candidate, based on suitable experience and candidates. There is then a member vote to ratify/reject/determine the preferred choice of candidate. Falkirk. Minority fan owned. Doing exactly the same thing as Thistle. Nothing further, m'lud. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted July 29 Report Share Posted July 29 I see this as positive step, and the chats I’ve been in with other fans see the same. A pre- vetting stops someone who’s a Celtic fan for example (as happened last year) putting their name publicly forward, it ensures that folk also are aware of the commitment needed. It also can identify any potential red-flags. And of course a fan board rep for a fan owned club should have leanings towards fan ownership. It’s not TJF that decides it it’s the 2 trustees, TJF is one and The Jags Trust the other, both are active trustees, and between them represent around 2000 of our supporters 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordanhill Jag Posted July 29 Author Report Share Posted July 29 38 minutes ago, Norgethistle said: I see this as positive step, and the chats I’ve been in with other fans see the same. A pre- vetting stops someone who’s a Celtic fan for example (as happened last year) putting their name publicly forward, it ensures that folk also are aware of the commitment needed. It also can identify any potential red-flags. And of course a fan board rep for a fan owned club should have leanings towards fan ownership. It’s not TJF that decides it it’s the 2 trustees, TJF is one and The Jags Trust the other, both are active trustees, and between them represent around 2000 of our supporters The Celtic Fan was found out and was never getting voted onto the Board so that's simply an excuse - this is to ensure that only TJF approved candidates are allowed to stand - you can be for Fan Ownership & think how TJF operate is not healthy for the Club Why was this not voted for at the TJF AGM that the TJF Board now Control every aspect of who gets to be on the PTFC Board TJF Dominate anything to do with the Thistle Trust so lets stop pretending otherwise Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordanhill Jag Posted July 29 Author Report Share Posted July 29 1 hour ago, Woodstock Jag said: Hearts and Foundation of Hearts The Foundation of Hearts has the power to nominate three directors to the Heart of Midlothian Board of Directors. These positions are filled by an internal vote of the Foundation of Hearts' board, from among their own number. The members of the Foundation of Hearts vote for the members of the Foundation of Hearts board, but do not then have a vote on which of them should serve on the Club Board. Hearts. Fan owned. Less democratic than the Thistle process. Motherwell and The Well Society The Well Society has the power to nominate two directors to the Motherwell Board of Directors. These positions are filled by an internal decision of The Well Society's board, from among their own number. The members of The Well Society vote for the members of The Well Society board, but do not then have a vote on which of them should serve on the Club Board. Motherwell. Fan owned. Less democratic than the Thistle process. St Mirren and SMiSA SMiSA has the power to appoint four directors to the St Mirren Board of Directors. These positions are filled by a two-stage process. Firstly there are confidential nominations with relevant CV and expression of interest and (if necessary) interviews. SMiSA then whittles those down to a short-list or a preferred candidate, based on suitable experience and candidates. There is then a member vote to ratify/reject/determine the preferred choice of candidate. St Mirren. Fan owned. Doing exactly the same thing as Thistle. Morton and Morton Club Together Morton Club Together has the power to nominate two directors to the Morton Board of Directors. These positions are filled by an internal decision of Morton Club Together's board, from among their own number. The members of Morton Club Together vote for the members of Morton Club Together board, but do not then have a vote on which of them should serve on the Club Board. Morton. Fan owned. Less democratic than the Thistle process. Falkirk and the Falkirk Supporters' Society FFS has the power to appoint two directors to the Falkirk Board of Directors. These positions are filled by a two-stage process. Firstly there are confidential nominations with relevant CV and expression of interest and (if necessary) interviews. FFS then whittles those down to a short-list or a preferred candidate, based on suitable experience and candidates. There is then a member vote to ratify/reject/determine the preferred choice of candidate. Falkirk. Minority fan owned. Doing exactly the same thing as Thistle. Nothing further, m'lud. TJF Already decide on the PTFC with the exception of Donald McClymont - now they want to ensure that the Correct People get to stand for Election as the Fans are too stupid to make the right decision - shudder the thought they would Vote for someone TJF didn't like Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Dastardly Posted July 29 Report Share Posted July 29 5 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said: shudder the thought they would Vote for someone TJF didn't like I think that would rule you out 😀 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordanhill Jag Posted July 29 Author Report Share Posted July 29 2 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said: I think that would rule you out 😀 Your Correct - which is exactly the point Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted July 29 Report Share Posted July 29 18 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said: The Celtic Fan was found out and was never getting voted onto the Board so that's simply an excuse - this is to ensure that only TJF approved candidates are allowed to stand - you can be for Fan Ownership & think how TJF operate is not healthy for the Club Why was this not voted for at the TJF AGM that the TJF Board now Control every aspect of who gets to be on the PTFC Board TJF Dominate anything to do with the Thistle Trust so lets stop pretending otherwise TJF represent nearly 2000 fans so they should have a significant influence as 1 of the 2 trustees that make up the major shareholding. Any other business the majority shareholder decides Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordanhill Jag Posted July 29 Author Report Share Posted July 29 1 hour ago, Woodstock Jag said: Hearts and Foundation of Hearts The Foundation of Hearts has the power to nominate three directors to the Heart of Midlothian Board of Directors. These positions are filled by an internal vote of the Foundation of Hearts' board, from among their own number. The members of the Foundation of Hearts vote for the members of the Foundation of Hearts board, but do not then have a vote on which of them should serve on the Club Board. Hearts. Fan owned. Less democratic than the Thistle process. Motherwell and The Well Society The Well Society has the power to nominate two directors to the Motherwell Board of Directors. These positions are filled by an internal decision of The Well Society's board, from among their own number. The members of The Well Society vote for the members of The Well Society board, but do not then have a vote on which of them should serve on the Club Board. Motherwell. Fan owned. Less democratic than the Thistle process. St Mirren and SMiSA SMiSA has the power to appoint four directors to the St Mirren Board of Directors. These positions are filled by a two-stage process. Firstly there are confidential nominations with relevant CV and expression of interest and (if necessary) interviews. SMiSA then whittles those down to a short-list or a preferred candidate, based on suitable experience and candidates. There is then a member vote to ratify/reject/determine the preferred choice of candidate. St Mirren. Fan owned. Doing exactly the same thing as Thistle. Morton and Morton Club Together Morton Club Together has the power to nominate two directors to the Morton Board of Directors. These positions are filled by an internal decision of Morton Club Together's board, from among their own number. The members of Morton Club Together vote for the members of Morton Club Together board, but do not then have a vote on which of them should serve on the Club Board. Morton. Fan owned. Less democratic than the Thistle process. Falkirk and the Falkirk Supporters' Society FFS has the power to appoint two directors to the Falkirk Board of Directors. These positions are filled by a two-stage process. Firstly there are confidential nominations with relevant CV and expression of interest and (if necessary) interviews. FFS then whittles those down to a short-list or a preferred candidate, based on suitable experience and candidates. There is then a member vote to ratify/reject/determine the preferred choice of candidate. Falkirk. Minority fan owned. Doing exactly the same thing as Thistle. Nothing further, m'lud. And the TJF Board Nominate EVERY Board Member ~ not Two or Four as per other Clubs EVERY DIRECTOR ( with the exception of Donald McClymont ) - now they also want to Control the Directly Elected Elected Directors via the Fans as well as Nominating ALL THE OTHER DIRECTORS That means the TJF Board Control every Director ( with the exception of Donald McClymont ) on the TJF Board - that means EVERY DIRECTOR in some shape or form owes there Board Position to the internal process of the TJF Board And dare not question TJF or they don't get nominated or pass the vetting process for elected Reps - this gives the TJF Board TOTAL Control over the Club - bearing in mind the TJF Board struggle to get enough Candidates to hold elections We are not even close to these Clubs Democracy Wise Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordanhill Jag Posted July 29 Author Report Share Posted July 29 4 minutes ago, Norgethistle said: TJF represent nearly 2000 fans so they should have a significant influence as 1 of the 2 trustees that make up the major shareholding. Any other business the majority shareholder decides And where did TJF get its shares from ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted July 29 Report Share Posted July 29 43 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said: And where did TJF get its shares from ? TJF don’t have any shares Jim PTFC Trust have the shares, gifted by Colin Weir Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordanhill Jag Posted July 29 Author Report Share Posted July 29 12 minutes ago, Norgethistle said: TJF don’t have any shares Jim PTFC Trust have the shares, gifted by Colin Weir PTFC Trust in the format that the Shares were gifted no longer exists - its Controlled by TJF -as The Jags Trust are moribund - despite the fact that Colin Weirs Representatives specifically excluded TJF from any ownership Im not convinced that our current set up where TJF have control over every Director apart from Donald is what Colin Weir envisaged If someone could point out where in the Club Trust agreement it states TJF vet Candidates under there proposed process ? Otherwise its a TJF Powergrab Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted July 29 Report Share Posted July 29 Just now, Jordanhill Jag said: PTFC Trust in the format that the Shares were gifted no longer exists - its Controlled by TJF -as The Jags Trust are moribund - despite the fact that Colin Weirs Representatives specifically excluded TJF from any ownership Im not convinced that our current set up where TJF have control over every Director apart from Donald is what Colin Weir envisaged If someone could point out where in the Club Trust agreement it states TJF vet Candidates under there proposed process ? Otherwise its a TJF Powergrab Sorry that’s nonsense. You have no idea what Colin Weir envisioned for PTFC Trust, but fan organizations have to be democratic or else they aren’t fan owned organizations. I’ve had dealings with the Trustees over the last 12 - 14 months and I can assure you The Jags Trust are very active on the dealings I have had as have TJF. Ultimately your views on the set up of the club seem to be at loggerheads with vast majority of our regular fanbase as the TJF membership is growing. I’d also say if they were so bad at it they’d be a groundswell of folk standing at elections to change it or dumping their membership, neither is happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordanhill Jag Posted July 29 Author Report Share Posted July 29 6 minutes ago, Norgethistle said: Sorry that’s nonsense. You have no idea what Colin Weir envisioned for PTFC Trust, but fan organizations have to be democratic or else they aren’t fan owned organizations. I’ve had dealings with the Trustees over the last 12 - 14 months and I can assure you The Jags Trust are very active on the dealings I have had as have TJF. Ultimately your views on the set up of the club seem to be at loggerheads with vast majority of our regular fanbase as the TJF membership is growing. I’d also say if they were so bad at it they’d be a groundswell of folk standing at elections to change it or dumping their membership, neither is happening. Your correct - I have no idea what Colin Weir envisioned but he put his Trust in his representatives ( one of which was his Lawyer ) and they made it clear that TJFs Vision was not in line with Colin Weirs wishes - and they were a lot closer to him than anyone else at PTFC There is No Groundswell for anything - TJF cant get enough people to stand to hold Elections - 90% of Fans only care about results on the park - we have no idea what the majority of Fans wish ( beyond promotion ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordanhill Jag Posted July 29 Author Report Share Posted July 29 3 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said: Hearts and Foundation of Hearts The Foundation of Hearts has the power to nominate three directors to the Heart of Midlothian Board of Directors. These positions are filled by an internal vote of the Foundation of Hearts' board, from among their own number. The members of the Foundation of Hearts vote for the members of the Foundation of Hearts board, but do not then have a vote on which of them should serve on the Club Board. Hearts. Fan owned. Less democratic than the Thistle process. Motherwell and The Well Society The Well Society has the power to nominate two directors to the Motherwell Board of Directors. These positions are filled by an internal decision of The Well Society's board, from among their own number. The members of The Well Society vote for the members of The Well Society board, but do not then have a vote on which of them should serve on the Club Board. Motherwell. Fan owned. Less democratic than the Thistle process. St Mirren and SMiSA SMiSA has the power to appoint four directors to the St Mirren Board of Directors. These positions are filled by a two-stage process. Firstly there are confidential nominations with relevant CV and expression of interest and (if necessary) interviews. SMiSA then whittles those down to a short-list or a preferred candidate, based on suitable experience and candidates. There is then a member vote to ratify/reject/determine the preferred choice of candidate. St Mirren. Fan owned. Doing exactly the same thing as Thistle. Morton and Morton Club Together Morton Club Together has the power to nominate two directors to the Morton Board of Directors. These positions are filled by an internal decision of Morton Club Together's board, from among their own number. The members of Morton Club Together vote for the members of Morton Club Together board, but do not then have a vote on which of them should serve on the Club Board. Morton. Fan owned. Less democratic than the Thistle process. Falkirk and the Falkirk Supporters' Society FFS has the power to appoint two directors to the Falkirk Board of Directors. These positions are filled by a two-stage process. Firstly there are confidential nominations with relevant CV and expression of interest and (if necessary) interviews. FFS then whittles those down to a short-list or a preferred candidate, based on suitable experience and candidates. There is then a member vote to ratify/reject/determine the preferred choice of candidate. Falkirk. Minority fan owned. Doing exactly the same thing as Thistle. Nothing further, m'lud. There is nothing in the Club Trust Agreement - nor published election process that gives Authority for the Vetting Process described of Candidates for Fan Rep Elections - TJF are simply acting of there own accord - making rules up as they go along The proposals were not even discussed nor voted on at the TJF AGM There is No Authority to bring in these rules - you cant just make things up as you go along - especially if its Elections Your the TJF Secretary - its your job to point this out to the TJF Board that they are acting without Authority Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted July 29 Report Share Posted July 29 For the avoidance of doubt there is such authority to bring in these rules. The process is set by the Trustees. Paragraph 3.4 of the Club-Trust Agreement states (emphasis added): ”From May 2024 until otherwise agreed by the Trustees, the Football Club Board will contain two democratically elected supporter representatives. This process will be run by the Trust with support from the Club.” The process by which the Fan Rep Directors are appointed to the Club Board is therefore set by the Trustees, and can be varied by the Trustees as they see fit. The rules for elections have never been set by TJF’s members at its AGMs (indeed, that would have given one set of beneficiaries a say but not another, season ticket holders). The question of the Fan Reps process was in fact discussed at TJF’s AGM, when a member of this forum raised a question about it, and there was a discussion about the plans to introduce a sift. The Trustees (not simply TJF or TJF’s board) took a decision, based on supporters’ feedback at the last election, to introduce a sifting process for the next vacancy in a manner consistent with other fan owned clubs like majority fan-owned St Mirren and minority fan-owned Falkirk. We also chose to retain the beneficiary vote as part of the process, something which lacks an equivalent at Hearts, Morton or Motherwell. I don’t hear any of their fans complaining that Foundation of Hearts, Morton Club Together, or The Well Society are acting undemocratically. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordanhill Jag Posted July 29 Author Report Share Posted July 29 19 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said: For the avoidance of doubt there is such authority to bring in these rules. The process is set by the Trustees. Paragraph 3.4 of the Club-Trust Agreement states (emphasis added): ”From May 2024 until otherwise agreed by the Trustees, the Football Club Board will contain two democratically elected supporter representatives. This process will be run by the Trust with support from the Club.” The process by which the Fan Rep Directors are appointed to the Club Board is therefore set by the Trustees, and can be varied by the Trustees as they see fit. The rules for elections have never been set by TJF’s members at its AGMs (indeed, that would have given one set of beneficiaries a say but not another, season ticket holders). The question of the Fan Reps process was in fact discussed at TJF’s AGM, when a member of this forum raised a question about it, and there was a discussion about the plans to introduce a sift. The Trustees (not simply TJF or TJF’s board) took a decision, based on supporters’ feedback at the last election, to introduce a sifting process for the next vacancy in a manner consistent with other fan owned clubs like majority fan-owned St Mirren and minority fan-owned Falkirk. We also chose to retain the beneficiary vote as part of the process, something which lacks an equivalent at Hearts, Morton or Motherwell. I don’t hear any of their fans complaining that Foundation of Hearts, Morton Club Together, or The Well Society are acting undemocratically. The Trust has an established Election process which has run for Two Elections - based on a couple of comments the Trustees are making significant changes to that - No Consultation - No discussion & the decisions will be based on an unknown process ~ with no right of external appeal to decisions - there are Masonic Lodges more open than TJF So there are no checks or balances to stop the process being abused or influenced by external parties - and simply used to stop people from standing that TJF don't like ie the process has the potential to be tainted with bias TJF get to control who sits on the Board & who gets elected to the Board ~ based on who they like or don't like. Fans are obviously electing the wrong Board Reps & we cant have that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted July 29 Report Share Posted July 29 2 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said: 90% of Fans only care about results on the park Stick me down as one of the remaining 10%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
partickthedog Posted July 29 Report Share Posted July 29 21 minutes ago, lady-isobel-barnett said: Stick me down as one of the remaining 10%. Me too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
partickthedog Posted July 29 Report Share Posted July 29 2 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said: 90% of Fans only care about results on the park. If your thesis is correct (which I would hope is not the case, but let us go with it for the time being), then that would be an argument against "pure democracy" being the best way of selecting those who will fulfil an important and demanding role in the governance of the club in which collective responsibility to the board has to be held in constructive tension with advocating for supporters' interests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordanhill Jag Posted July 29 Author Report Share Posted July 29 2 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said: For the avoidance of doubt there is such authority to bring in these rules. The process is set by the Trustees. Paragraph 3.4 of the Club-Trust Agreement states (emphasis added): ”From May 2024 until otherwise agreed by the Trustees, the Football Club Board will contain two democratically elected supporter representatives. This process will be run by the Trust with support from the Club.” The process by which the Fan Rep Directors are appointed to the Club Board is therefore set by the Trustees, and can be varied by the Trustees as they see fit. The rules for elections have never been set by TJF’s members at its AGMs (indeed, that would have given one set of beneficiaries a say but not another, season ticket holders). The question of the Fan Reps process was in fact discussed at TJF’s AGM, when a member of this forum raised a question about it, and there was a discussion about the plans to introduce a sift. The Trustees (not simply TJF or TJF’s board) took a decision, based on supporters’ feedback at the last election, to introduce a sifting process for the next vacancy in a manner consistent with other fan owned clubs like majority fan-owned St Mirren and minority fan-owned Falkirk. We also chose to retain the beneficiary vote as part of the process, something which lacks an equivalent at Hearts, Morton or Motherwell. I don’t hear any of their fans complaining that Foundation of Hearts, Morton Club Together, or The Well Society are acting undemocratically. So what your clearly saying is that the Trustees can vary the process anytime the chose - and in effect make a change to the Fan Trust Agreement which is a legally binding document without Consultation - the justification being that a couple of Fans raised the issue The Clause specifically mentions Elections when it mentions "process" yet somehow that's now being extended to Candidate Selection - not sure how that massive leap was made ( or justified ) as its a major change to the intended use of the Clause Now we have a situation where Candidates must pass a Secret Process known only to the Trustees - there is No Grounds for appeal regards the decision nor any third party acting as independent arbitrator Seems fine - no scope for bias or abuse of the process to weed out unbelievers on any level - or put TJF preferred Candidates forwards You honestly couldn't make this up - arguing that "Pure Democracy" is not suitable - its like something out of 1984 TJF have lost the plot in there Paranoia to Control who goes onto the Club Board Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordanhill Jag Posted July 29 Author Report Share Posted July 29 44 minutes ago, partickthedog said: If your thesis is correct (which I would hope is not the case, but let us go with it for the time being), then that would be an argument against "pure democracy" being the best way of selecting those who will fulfil an important and demanding role in the governance of the club in which collective responsibility to the board has to be held in constructive tension with advocating for supporters' interests. 90% of people who Vote in Elections take little interest in Politics - it doesn't mean you change the Election Process and exclude people from standing - as it stands the proposal does not stop the process from being used to weed out those that TJF do not see fit because of ideological reasons - its not transparent - there is No measurement criteria - or right to appeal decisions to an independent third party - which leaves the process open to abuse - nor is there solid grounds for the proposed changes beyond a couple of Fan comments TJF are not arbiters on the right type of Fan Rep that gets elected - as for the other comments - that could apply to any Director and the Board Track Record ( all signed off by TJF ) has left a lot to be desired Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted July 29 Report Share Posted July 29 It’s Trustees (The Jags Trust & TJF) not just TJF, for the final time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hopeless Unbeliever Posted July 29 Report Share Posted July 29 Serious question JJ - what are you trying to achieve? We get that you don't like TJF for whatever reason. We get that you have grievances with the decisions that have been made. I think anyone involved with TJF would agree they've not been perfect but as far as I can see the vast majority of fans think they have done a phenomenal job to get things to where they are given the position we started from and have a lot of credit in the bank. With the greatest of respect to Colin Weir, I don't give a flying **** what his intentions were when he handed over the shares, all I care about is that our football club is in the hands of people who have its best interests at heart and have the ability to give us the best platform to achieve success on the park. I strongly believe both of those criteria are currently met under the stewardship of TJF. You have presumably had plenty of opportunity to put yourself forward under the previous system yet have chosen not to do so, instead firing pot shots from the side and seemingly refusing to accept that you appear to be in a very small minority with any objections you have raised so far. That being the case, what do you realistically hope to achieve? As I've said before, any legitimate points you may have are lost in the relentlessly pugilistic nature of your engagement. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lambies Lost Doo Posted July 29 Report Share Posted July 29 Im a member of TJF and not fussed by this change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.