shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Can't confirm that Simon, but I have had a reply saying I'm not wanted, came through on Valentines Day which is when she said at the meeting it would be picked.:
Garlick said:
- Status
Can't confirm that Simon, but I have had a reply saying I'm not wanted, came through on Valentines Day which is when she said at the meeting it would be picked.:
Hobo
Well-Known Member
That is because the Sandra Garlick Forum was always going to be truly unrepresentational. They are not going to input anything anyway. It is all a nonsense just like the rest of the SISU regime.
SimonGilbert
Telegraph Tea Boy
Thanks Shmmeee. Have chased up directly again today.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Monkeyface
Well-Known Member
So why exactly were ACL and CCC, brought into a thread about the consultation group? Believe me, I think they have played their part in this balls-up, but that's not what this thread was about. If you wanted to add some balance to the discussion, you could have pointed out that these consultation groups are independent of the club, and that its findings would be took to the club. Instead you choose, again to fan the flames of an irrelevant point. Think sometimes you like this in fighting because it keeps people on here. Personally, as a lifelong Sky Blue, who's whole family have watched the club for many years, it find it gutting.
How many of you that slate the Trust and the work that people like Michael do, have been to a Trust meeting? You should go, because despite the what you might read on GMK and by some posters on here, they are to a man, good people, with only club at their heart. CCFC is our club, its our community and I want to see it back in Coventry... not in Warwickshire... In Coventry. Now I know a some people, not all, in the Trust do blame SISU, but the vast majority know there are other factors at play. So instead of sitting behind screen pointing fingers, go to the next Trust meeting and have your voice heard. Tell them what you want to see happening and your ideas for getting our club back, after all its a democracy and they will listen.
Now that's a rant!
How many of you that slate the Trust and the work that people like Michael do, have been to a Trust meeting? You should go, because despite the what you might read on GMK and by some posters on here, they are to a man, good people, with only club at their heart. CCFC is our club, its our community and I want to see it back in Coventry... not in Warwickshire... In Coventry. Now I know a some people, not all, in the Trust do blame SISU, but the vast majority know there are other factors at play. So instead of sitting behind screen pointing fingers, go to the next Trust meeting and have your voice heard. Tell them what you want to see happening and your ideas for getting our club back, after all its a democracy and they will listen.
Now that's a rant!
Monkeyface
Well-Known Member
How the bloody hell do you do that quoting thing? My last post was in reply to Nick on page four, who had replied to BHSB!
The Gentleman
Well-Known Member
Does the fact that she sent it on Valentines mean that the door has been firmly shut on being involved in any other group activities with Ms Garlick too
RoboCCFC90
Well-Known Member
You mean like this??
Monkeyface
Well-Known Member
Yeah, just like that smart arse!
Yes, the members had a vote on whether to put a representative forward for the SCG, they voted that they would like this to happen.
letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
Press reply with quote under the the thread you are replying to.
And yes the trust do have City Fans at heart they do many things that they do not get credit for.
Trouble is some people feel they have had their noses put out of place by the trust so feel they have to slag off all the good work they do.
It will come out one day I may even spill the beans on all the stuff I know they have done but is not common knowledge.
Maybe just Maybe.
letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
I don't actually care as I voted no.
But it was a democratic vote. you would have thought that they would have wanted a trust member on the board as obviously their members voted yes meaning that most were ether curious or maybe likely to go to the new ground.
I am not interested in the new ground so voted no.
They really haven't got a clue how to communicate with fans even after so many own goals change of staff, they still get it wrong.
But it was a democratic vote. you would have thought that they would have wanted a trust member on the board as obviously their members voted yes meaning that most were ether curious or maybe likely to go to the new ground.
I am not interested in the new ground so voted no.
They really haven't got a clue how to communicate with fans even after so many own goals change of staff, they still get it wrong.
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
Use the "Reply With Quote" button the arrow points to.
==================================================================================================================================================V
lamtara2006
Member
I also know one forum member who has been selected over 1 week ago, therefore it seems likely that the group is formed.
The Gentleman
Well-Known Member
Talking about Twitter, seen this on Yahoo sport website about Man U last night and it made me chuckle.
The line at the bottom was 'Jose Mourinho's missed calls list last night.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Yoou are not suggesting that SISU or anyone associated with them would lie to us are you?
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
To be fair, it's never been democratic really. The board have always taken it in the direction they feel is right and only pop up for a vote every now and then. But that's like most of these organisations: those who were in early have the lions share of the power. Not sure how else you'd do it as they seem to be the only people actually willing to put in the time. There are a lot of people that just want to moan but won't actually do anything when asked, or won't volunteer. It's always going to be run by those with the time and inclination to do so.
But I'd say that too many people hold them to too high standards. They're a bunch of city fans, no different really form us on here or GMK so they're not going to be polished professional and the likes of Nick and Grendel seem to treat them as if they should be on a level with several multi billion pound industries. I'll note that neither of those two have volunteered for anything which tells you all you need to know.
People need to realise they're just a bunch of fans, in fact the largest bunch of fans. They are literally representative of their active membership. You can't really whinge if you haven't actively tried to engage.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
She said several times very clearly that it would be selected by the 14th Feb. As things had to move quickly and she expected the first meeting to be last week (dunno if that happened) as all plans need to be in by the end of March.
Nick
Administrator
Really? Maybe you should check your source before posting about the offers of websites, website hosting / development, internet marketing, graphic design etc etc that I have offered the trust in the past? It has only ever been Steve that has ever spoken to me about it though.
So your note is quite clearly wrong.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
No source Nick (you see a conspiracy everywhere) but to be honest not sure that's that valuable. There all skills that are ten a penny and not related directly to the cause.
How many meetings have you been to to drive the direction that you complain about? That's what I'm talking about. Not offering web space (which is free everywhere). If you have an issue with how they are run (and you obviously do) then why haven't you attempted to drive the policy of the group?
That's what I mean by being actively engaged. And it's not just you guys, most of us are to blame, myself included. I'm just saying that it means you don't have a right to complain.
Nick
Administrator
Ah is that why only Steve has bothered to speak to me about it because it isn't valueable enough? I guess that explains why I often got ignored unless I spoke to Steve.
Of course it can be valueable, if you have somebody sitting and counting email replies with YES or NO in the title for a vote when you can have a system that does it for you is one example of how it is related to the cause.
You said I hadn't volunteered, when I have offered my time, contacts and resources for free which is volunteering and could help in ways I know best. I know people who are accountants have given their time to the cause which helps greatly, but unfortunately I am not an accountant or lawyer
. I felt I had the skills and resources to help out in ways I could which would help the trust, but obviously not. IF I was a printer I would print flyers etc or whatever to help, but I'm not.Thanks for clearing it up though, it at least explains why I was ignored most of the time. Obviously not valuable enough to be volunteer
Why would I want to go to a trust meeting with some of the stuff that you read on here from "die hards" (not actual trust board members) but some of the crap that gets posted when you even question a tiny thing from the trust which is a valid point, doesn't actually make you want to go to a meeting does it?
As a member of the trust, why couldn't I complain or make suggestions? Why do I have to go and sit in a pub to be heard? What is wrong with emails, PMs, posts on a forum (that are constructive)? If I was just posting "the trust are dicks" then I could fully understand.
Matty_CCFC
New Member
Maybe someone has had a letter telling them to shut the fuck up or else they will end up in Court
Nick
Administrator
Who? What? Where?
- Status