Rangers First update

[Rangersitis 0]

No you were spot on. Save Rangers was the RST's pledge initiative set up after we went into admin in 2012, but subsequently put on the back burner to allow the RFFF to get priority. The trust then ditched the Save Rangers initiative and created the BuyRangers fan ownership scheme.

 

Aye, just found this:

 

http://www.therst.co.uk/launch-of-saverangers/

[Rangersitis 0]

Oh dear, what a response from RF. Pathetic.

 

Agreed. Nowhere near good enough.

[Stimpy 0]

had a reply back from Rangers First:

 

 

 

Remind me what was Save Rangers again? don't know if I was on this database.

 

all very confusing:confused:

 

I wonder when the RST gave Rangers First permission to use their database from SaveRangers? I'm betting they never asked or told the RST about this.

[Stimpy 0]

Here's the thing, BuyRangers.org was the SaveRangers website. RF's webmaster was also the RST's before absconding to RF.

[Little General 80]

Here's the thing, BuyRangers.org was the SaveRangers website. RF's webmaster was also the RST's before absconding to RF.

 

so they are using RST email database, presumably without RST permission.

[Stimpy 0]

so they are using RST email database, presumably without RST permission.

 

Yip, and I highly doubt they've got permission. Companies don't share customers/members with competitors.

[Rangersitis 0]

I wonder when the RST gave Rangers First permission to use their database from SaveRangers? I'm betting they never asked or told the RST about this.

 

Could any disgruntled ex-RST members who perhaps flitted to Rangers First have had access to this database?

 

In what way could it even be remotely described as 'publicly available' if it requires permission to be granted for it's use?

 

EDIT: I see that you have already answered this.

[Stimpy 0]

Could any disgruntled ex-RST members who perhaps flitted to Rangers First have had access to this database?

 

In what way could it even be remotely described as 'publicly available' if it requires permission to be granted for it's use?

 

EDIT: I see that you have already answered this.

Aye, the RST's old webmaster who is now RF's webmaster.

[Little General 80]

Cue the bickering match!

 

I would suggest it's a wee bit more serious than a bickering match.

[Stimpy 0]

I would suggest it's a wee bit more serious than a bickering match.

 

As an RST member I will be pushing the reps to complain to the info commissioner and police.