BrahimHemdani 1 Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 If I'm reading that correctly, it sounds like it might be the first step to individuals on the RFB getting marginalised or even sent on their way. That would appear to suggest that the Club Board do not trust certain members of the RFB to maintain confidentiality. Leaving aside Gary Gillan, Robert Callaghan and Tom Johnston who are out of this country, that would appear to tarr all the others with the same brush. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 I wasn't invited to that meeting and wasn't aware that it was taking place. I'm merely the message boy on this occasion and know little more about the meeting other than is contained in those notes. That's ridiculous, surely all members should at least have been made aware that the meeting was to take place, so they could input questions? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 That's ridiculous, surely all members should at least have been made aware that the meeting was to take place, so they could input questions? the 3 people who attended this are either collaborating in our demise, utter morrons or unbelievably naive. i am not sure it matters which. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,624 Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 If the attendees withheld information that the meeting was happening from other board members until after it took place then they should resign 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,743 Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 If the attendees withheld information that the meeting was happening from other board members until after it took place then they should resign But this is again just ifs and buts and maybes. Why not wait till someone like fs actually finds out before traversing the paranoia path again? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 That would appear to suggest that the Club Board do not trust certain members of the RFB to maintain confidentiality. Leaving aside Gary Gillan, Robert Callaghan and Tom Johnston who are out of this country, that would appear to tarr all the others with the same brush. That is a strange way of looking at this. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 But this is again just ifs and buts and maybes. Why not wait till someone like fs actually finds out before traversing the paranoia path again? FS has already told us he wasn't invited. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,743 Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) FS has already told us he wasn't invited. Sure. Does that say anything about whether the "Board" does not "trust" him? Edited February 1, 2015 by der Berliner 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 Sure. Does that say anything about whether the "Board" does not "trust" him? Bluedell didn't say that. You replied to him. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,743 Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) Bluedell didn't say that. You replied to him. Yep, and I replied to you. And apart from this last sentence, I won't indulge in talking for talking's sake any more. Edited February 1, 2015 by der Berliner 0 Quote Link to post 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.