SouthLanarkshireWhite Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Interesting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawfield shed boy Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 It would probably have taken about the same amount of time to fill in the form and email it as it has taken you to post about not being bothered to vote. Good yin:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_BullyWee Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Not really, just find it strange but if you ain't interested anymore then suppose we need to wait until the team starts winning again regularly for some fans to come back but I guess that could be their other excuse now the EK name change is off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthLanarkshireWhite Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Good yin:D I actually don't believe in voting if you are not attending and not contributing financially, so the amount of time , effort or anything else is irrelevant in that scenario. I will leave the democratic right to those paying their money, like taxpayers they have earned it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_BullyWee Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 If you are a member of the CIC then you have earned the right to vote even if you ain't going to the games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthLanarkshireWhite Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Some will disagree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannibal Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 I actually don't believe in voting if you are not attending and not contributing financially, so the amount of time , effort or anything else is irrelevant in that scenario. I will leave the democratic right to those paying their money, like taxpayers they have earned it. the resolution required a percentage of owners to vote in order for the result to stand. By joining then not voting you were effectively reducing the chances of the name change being removed rather than stepping back and letting others decide. Regardless of whether owners still go, I'd have thought some "yes" voters may have taken the opportunity to undo a little of the damage they caused in 2013. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfcuk Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 I couldn't even be bothered to vote. Let's hope a change in fortunes on/off the pitch get people like me re-engaged. wouldn't have anything to do with the dream move Scottish football's nirvana (east Kilbride ) biting the dust???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfcuk Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Not really, just find it strange but if you ain't interested anymore then suppose we need to wait until the team starts winning again regularly for some fans to come back but I guess that could be their other excuse now the EK name change is off. think you will find he was one of the biggest supporters of the ek Clyde franchise ???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShawfieldAggro Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 If you are a member of the CIC then you have earned the right to vote even if you ain't going to the games. Absolute bollocks. What will it be next, then, for the 'owners'....priority at the pie stall?? Free programmes?? What else has snyone paying thirty quid earned that those forking out a monkey a year haven't?? The whole thing is in my opinion completely untenable now, and shorn of any integrity. Evdn tbe announcement from the secretary (sorry cfcuk) about how dmphatic the margin was, is further evidence of this.....on top of totally splitting the support completely unnecessarily, and now with a situation where even more uncertainty has apparently been voted for than ever before....at least with the launch of the CiC and the namechange, we were faced at least with eventualities, however dark, in those circumstances. Clearly, the experiment has failed.....and those coughing up the mighty thirty quid a year, would they happily watch the club struggle without their website fee, if the CIC was wound up, with no vote at the end of it??? More questions than answers..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaggy Snake Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Given the way the voting went, anyone who would have voted against the resolution would have actually been better abstaining. Their best chance was for not enough people to vote, as opposed to voting against it and hoping enough others would. Regardless of whether owners still go, I'd have thought some "yes" voters may have taken the opportunity to undo a little of the damage they caused in 2013. The "yes" voters didn't do any damage - they voted for what they thought was best, based on the information provided. It's over now anyway, so just give it a rest with the petty little jibes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannibal Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Given the way the voting went, anyone who would have voted against the resolution would have actually been better abstaining. Their best chance was for not enough people to vote, as opposed to voting against it and hoping enough others would. The "yes" voters didn't do any damage - they voted for what they thought was best, based on the information provided. It's over now anyway, so just give it a rest with the petty little jibes. Well I doubt I am alone in thinking the yes vote did damage, as did the complete lack of effort from those who believed the lies to overturn the resolution or to make those who lied accountable. I doubt many would disagree with that. I've happily left it alone but was merely pointing out to one member that not voting was not a neutral position. Let's all move on by all means but don't come on and say it did no damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macclyde+ Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Would say the best way forward is for the supporters to set aside their differences, whether yes or no voters originally. I am prepared to admit I chose wrongly by voting yes to the EK thing, however no sense in going over old ground again. A club the size of Clyde cannot afford to have a divided support, and I hope all no voters who stayed away now return to the fold. This is as good a time as any to get on the march again to a better future, starting with the title this coming season. Mon the Bully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannibal Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Absolute bollocks. What will it be next, then, for the 'owners'....priority at the pie stall?? Free programmes?? What else has snyone paying thirty quid earned that those forking out a monkey a year haven't?? The whole thing is in my opinion completely untenable now, and shorn of any integrity. Evdn tbe announcement from the secretary (sorry cfcuk) about how dmphatic the margin was, is further evidence of this.....on top of totally splitting the support completely unnecessarily, and now with a situation where even more uncertainty has apparently been voted for than ever before....at least with the launch of the CiC and the namechange, we were faced at least with eventualities, however dark, in those circumstances. Clearly, the experiment has failed.....and those coughing up the mighty thirty quid a year, would they happily watch the club struggle without their website fee, if the CIC was wound up, with no vote at the end of it??? More questions than answers..... You probably know I am no supported of the CIC and only reluctantly joined in frustration at feeling like I had no access to information, so I am not going to defend it - but what is it you feel has made it "untenable" now? I agree there are issues about HOW someone is granted a membership but why is the idea of fans/owners having a say so wrong? Genuine question. I wish the owners would take more interest in things and demand more of the Board - I certainly prefer "us" to have a say over things such as changing the club's name or where we move to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannibal Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Would say the best way forward is for the supporters to set aside their differences, whether yes or no voters originally. I am prepared to admit I chose wrongly by voting yes to the EK thing, however no sense in going over old ground again. A club the size of Clyde cannot afford to have a divided support, and I hope all no voters who stayed away now return to the fold. This is as good a time as any to get on the march again to a better future, starting with the title this coming season. Mon the Bully Well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfcuk Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Absolute bollocks. What will it be next, then, for the 'owners'....priority at the pie stall?? Free programmes?? What else has snyone paying thirty quid earned that those forking out a monkey a year haven't?? The whole thing is in my opinion completely untenable now, and shorn of any integrity. Evdn tbe announcement from the secretary (sorry cfcuk) about how dmphatic the margin was, is further evidence of this.....on top of totally splitting the support completely unnecessarily, and now with a situation where even more uncertainty has apparently been voted for than ever before....at least with the launch of the CiC and the namechange, we were faced at least with eventualities, however dark, in those circumstances. Clearly, the experiment has failed.....and those coughing up the mighty thirty quid a year, would they happily watch the club struggle without their website fee, if the CIC was wound up, with no vote at the end of it??? More questions than answers..... the CIC doesn't work with the size of fanbase / finances and I find it incredible when I suggested in the past that buying a season ticket should automatically make you an owner it was treated with total contempt and the usual suspects said it's only another 30 quid no its the other way around my boy has just spent 300+ quid on season ticket two strips and a jacket doesn't get a mention but pay 30 quid never go to game and your treated as a full paid up member of the Clyde glee club ???? wonder what novelty owner they are going to wheel out this year? full tour of stadium meet the directors spread in the programme etc ???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_BullyWee Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Absolute bollocks. What will it be next, then, for the 'owners'....priority at the pie stall?? Free programmes?? What else has snyone paying thirty quid earned that those forking out a monkey a year haven't?? The whole thing is in my opinion completely untenable now, and shorn of any integrity. Evdn tbe announcement from the secretary (sorry cfcuk) about how dmphatic the margin was, is further evidence of this.....on top of totally splitting the support completely unnecessarily, and now with a situation where even more uncertainty has apparently been voted for than ever before....at least with the launch of the CiC and the namechange, we were faced at least with eventualities, however dark, in those circumstances. Clearly, the experiment has failed.....and those coughing up the mighty thirty quid a year, would they happily watch the club struggle without their website fee, if the CIC was wound up, with no vote at the end of it??? More questions than answers..... If you are a member and then you are entitled to vote so it doesn't matter if you are going to games or not. There is no point having a one member one vote structure when you get told that if you ain't going to games then sorry you ain't allowed to vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannibal Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 the CIC doesn't work with the size of fanbase / finances and I find it incredible when I suggested in the past that buying a season ticket should automatically make you an owner it was treated with total contempt and the usual suspects said it's only another 30 quid no its the other way around my boy has just spent 300+ quid on season ticket two strips and a jacket doesn't get a mention but pay 30 quid never go to game and your treated as a full paid up member of the Clyde glee club ???? wonder what novelty owner they are going to wheel out this year? full tour of stadium meet the directors spread in the programme etc ???? it's a definite flaw in the system - the flipside is there are minimum percentages of owners needed for certain things to pass so we'd have to ensure people don't automatically become members if they really don't care about voting. Totally agree it is a nonsense that fans pay hundreds and don't get a say and people can pay much less and make their whole family members and all get votes... Like anything though these rules can be challenged by the owners themselves, and this is the main issue with the CIC (or perhaps the current membership) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShawfieldAggro Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 It's untenable now because as CfcUk has continually pointed out, and been proven correct, that the 'owners' are getting a fairly disproportionate slice of the pie ((ie decisions) for little or no action (initiative, forward thinking, etc). You'll be wishing your life away hoping for anything more than what occurred from the ownership in this instance, or in any other...what you, i and we all got was the stark reality. This isn't a new dawn; an announcement on a ground is all that could represent that. I think we're entering limbo with where we go with this from here, and i say that with the current board in mind. With no sugar daddy to propel us to the First Division again, the only way the club can, or will go forward is with important decisions being taken away from fairly easily-swayed members, and greater autonomy restored to those in the comfy seats.....there are lessons in all of this....it'd be wise to heed them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShawfieldAggro Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 it's a definite flaw in the system - the flipside is there are minimum percentages of owners needed for certain things to pass so we'd have to ensure people don't automatically become members if they really don't care about voting. Totally agree it is a nonsense that fans pay hundreds and don't get a say and people can pay much less and make their whole family members and all get votes... Like anything though these rules can be challenged by the owners themselves, and this is the main issue with the CIC (or perhaps the current membership) You can't pick and choose who you want as members for f**k's sake....and you're certainly not going to inherit a mythical new membership......i dont like it any more than you, but the clear result here is that this vote only occurred due to extensive hearsay and confusion among supporters....not a White knight rounding everyone up to save us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.