RST AGM - Secretary's statement

[Totti 0]

I note a few people have attempted to post this statement on FF but it has been deleted immediately.

 

Hardly seems fair that some Trust board members can comment there on the existing issues but others can't have their opinion heard?

Follow Follow is a mess. There is no control, mods just do what the fuck they want.

[rbr 1,270]

The reason for FF getting info first is quite simple , every hit brings in revenue , maybe not directly but the bigger the membership the more active the site the more money can be made , it aint rocket science

[wabashcannonball 0]

What a fekin farce gettin worse by the minuteffs somebody dynamite every one o these trust threads.....

 

 

 

Badger

.........

 

 

Group:Admin

Posts:14,213

Joined:18-December 06

Gender:Male

Location:Ayrshire

Posted Today, 04:52 PM

Just to be clear, I banned Christine Sommerville from here.

 

Why?

 

She'd been PM'ing influential members on this forum twisted information about Scott (McMillan). This was reported to me by one of the people who received a PM. Sorry, but if somebody is distributing distorted and potentially damaging information about the person who is organising our dinner (on our website), which in turn undermines our event, they are getting banned. I've no doubts at all the intent of this was malicious.

 

Just to be clear, Scott buys a lot of merchandise for charity events, one such purchase items may of been fake (still not proven either way). The wording of the PM was such that it suggested Scott was responsible for distributing fake merchandise, whilst technically that isn't a lie, it's a pretty big twist on things.

 

To clarify (to the best of my knowledge), he was responsible (as agreed and approved by the RST board of the time) to purchase memorabilia for RST events. One such purchase was later revealed to perhaps be fake, and if true (never been proven either way), it's fair to say he'd been conned.

 

I'm sure Scott or anyone else more up to speed will provide more details of exactly what happened. I've had one conversation (over a year ago) about this.

[Super_Ally 0]

Is it not the case that one individual on the Trust Board is the catalyst for all the agro.

 

Does it not come down to what is more important, The Trust or MD?

 

THis is a line of questioning I have tried to have answered for a while, most recently this post here;

 

http://www.gersnetonline.co.uk/vb/showpost.php?p=221080&postcount=144

 

In MF's RST AGM thread.

 

I don't believe that many of the current RST board put the RST ahead of their own self-interest and have thought as such since the first major split.

 

I think their actions clearly back this up to.

 

If Mark Dingwall, and possibly a few others, left the RST board it would have a far better chance of flourishing. So why wont he?

[plgsarmy 111]

What a fekin farce gettin worse by the minuteffs somebody dynamite every one o these trust threads.....

 

 

 

Badger

.........

 

 

Group:Admin

Posts:14,213

Joined:18-December 06

Gender:Male

Location:Ayrshire

Posted Today, 04:52 PM

Just to be clear, I banned Christine Sommerville from here.

 

Why?

 

She'd been PM'ing influential members on this forum twisted information about Scott (McMillan). This was reported to me by one of the people who received a PM. Sorry, but if somebody is distributing distorted and potentially damaging information about the person who is organising our dinner (on our website), which in turn undermines our event, they are getting banned. I've no doubts at all the intent of this was malicious.

 

Just to be clear, Scott buys a lot of merchandise for charity events, one such purchase items may of been fake (still not proven either way). The wording of the PM was such that it suggested Scott was responsible for distributing fake merchandise, whilst technically that isn't a lie, it's a pretty big twist on things.

 

To clarify (to the best of my knowledge), he was responsible (as agreed and approved by the RST board of the time) to purchase memorabilia for RST events. One such purchase was later revealed to perhaps be fake, and if true (never been proven either way), it's fair to say he'd been conned.

 

I'm sure Scott or anyone else more up to speed will provide more details of exactly what happened. I've had one conversation (over a year ago) about this.

 

I categorically deny that I attempted to bad mouth Scott in any way. I was explaining to someone why I wasn't going on the thread about last year's AGM. I didn't want to get involved in case the subject came up. Scott bought the items and I know this was done in good faith. I have never, ever, tried to suggest otherwise and have also discussed this with Scott who was fine about it. At the end of the day the RST had to write off �£3K due to this but I don't know anyone who said Scott had done this knowingly. That would be crazy.

[rbr 1,270]

I categorically deny that I attempted to bad mouth Scott in any way. I was explaining to someone why I wasn't going on the thread about last year's AGM. I didn't want to get involved in case the subject came up. Scott bought the items and I know this was done in good faith. I have never, ever, tried to suggest otherwise and have also discussed this with Scott who was fine about it. At the end of the day the RST had to write off �£3K due to this but I don't know anyone who said Scott had done this knowingly. That would be crazy.

 

Just out of interest what happened to the strips in question , and on who's wall do they now hang ???

[Super_Ally 0]

Just out of interest what happened to the strips in question , and on who's wall do they now hang ???

 

I'm assuming you know but it will be interesting for the rest of us to find out.

[wabashcannonball 0]

I categorically deny that I attempted to bad mouth Scott in any way. I was explaining to someone why I wasn't going on the thread about last year's AGM. I didn't want to get involved in case the subject came up. Scott bought the items and I know this was done in good faith. I have never, ever, tried to suggest otherwise and have also discussed this with Scott who was fine about it. At the end of the day the RST had to write off �£3K due to this but I don't know anyone who said Scott had done this knowingly. That would be crazy.

 

 

Haud oan hen, am no taking sides, seems to me like one big bun fight, for the sake of all, RST should liquidate forthwith.

 

Maybe then we can have a fresh look at things, my own idea would be one organisation for all, but I still think as orgs go, none will have any say or influence in or on the club.

[plgsarmy 111]

Haud oan hen, am no taking sides, seems to me like one big bun fight, for the sake of all, RST should liquidate forthwith.

 

Maybe then we can have a fresh look at things, my own idea would be one organisation for all, but I still think as orgs go, none will have any say or influence in or on the club.

 

 

I know you're not taking sides but I don't want my name plastered across the Internet accusing me of something I didn't do.

[plgsarmy 111]

 

I humbly ask that one of the Trust board members clarify why Alan Harris' statement is "cynical" ? On the face of it and at its mose base level, this is someone who, in their PAYING profession, operates under the auspices of the FSA. This is someone who appears to have been told (by the auditors) that the potential rule breaches could possibly cause the FSA to take action. That in itself could open Mr Harris up to regulatory investigation and, ultimately, suspension from doing business. So can someone from the RST board please tell me why Mr Harris is being cynical and not merely attempting to protect both his professional integrity and his livelihood. Yet here we stand with the Trust, again, suggesting that it is the big bad "cynical" Mr Harris who is at fault for this debacle.

 

 

Before I reply I'd like to hear Alan's responses to the questions I posted last night and were obviously missed.

 

Just to be clear Alan, did you or did you not offer to sign off the accounts if certain Board members resigned and various other demands were met?

Did you fail to attend the last 2 Board meetings where much of this could have been cleared up? Did you make the excuse for not attending the last meeting (our pre-AGM meeting) that there was no time and venue given, even though the notice said Saturday and the venue was going to be one of two we use about 500 yards from each other. Going by our constitution, then technically you were correct but with such important matters to discuss I'm surprised you didn't make the effort as no other member of the Board objected to it.

What is your version of what GD actually said to you at the AGM? Did you try to make it clear that your statement was pertaining to the accounts? Why did you not try to force the issue?

Did you try to clarify the circumstances of the debt by asking Mr Dingwall?