|
|
Post by colebridgebull on Sept 11, 2015 11:22:20 GMT
And that is relevant to an election because......
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2015 11:22:23 GMT
BB etiquette term - RHETORICAL QUESTION = Fact.
See FACT - probably fiction.
Does this help?
|
|
|
|
Post by bullish on Sept 11, 2015 11:26:25 GMT
Why the hell would there an 'interview process' in the first place? Election is supposed to be open to all trust members...
|
|
jc
Junior Member
Having a small psychotic episode - will be back yesterday, maybe!
Posts: 482
|
Post by jc on Sept 11, 2015 11:26:31 GMT
What if someone put themselves forward and during the interview process made it known they intended to be the fans representative and would hold the board to account accordingly and then found their application to be rejected. What would your view be on that Grayham? On your second question then no they cannot be elected by the membership at the AGM but the board then in place could co-opt them on to the board until either an EGM is called or until the next AGM held Did the fans vote for this person to be their representative?. A bit presumptuous to go to an interview dictating terms, without a mandate, would be my opinion. But that's the point isn't it Grayham, the fans should vote and if they want that person on the board and a vacancy exists shouldn't it be so. Or are you saying you should only be on the board if you have a personal self serving ambition which maybe unconnected to the fans will? When applying for an election place you have to create a manifesto giving your background, why you want to be on the board and what you bring to the board. From my point of view I think it important that some decisions made in the name of the fans are put to the fans and others should just be dealt with by the Trust as and when needed. That said I think the members should be entitled to know about both, but that isn't the case presently with HUST or have I missed the minutes of the July and August board meetings being made available to us. |
|
|
|
Post by somnambulist on Sept 11, 2015 11:32:12 GMT
Well if no one else puts themselves forward not sure what else can be done. If all of them are approved, that still leaves 2 positions, so could people be nominated at the AGM? What if someone put themselves forward and during the interview process made it known they intended to be the fans representative and would hold the board to account accordingly and then found their application to be rejected. What would your view be on that Grayham? On your second question then no they cannot be elected by the membership at the AGM but the board then in place could co-opt them on to the board until either an EGM is called or until the next AGM held A schoolboy error. We favour the trojan horse system of infiltration at this club. Breach the gates and then go rogue. Always worked very well. No real need for change. |
|
|
|
Post by HamptonParkBull on Sept 11, 2015 11:35:32 GMT
Every candidate standing for election seems to have been nominated by an existing HUST Board Member. Bit disappointing that. I may be wrong here but I thought any full member could stand as "candidate" providing they have the backing of at least two other full members. On the basis that they do back them, there was no need to ask other full members to back them. I would guess if none of the current "HUST BOARD" had backed them "WE" as full HUST members would of been asked to back them. |
|
|
|
Post by onlooker on Sept 11, 2015 11:35:35 GMT
So are you saying a prospective candidate, duly nominated and seconded, has to pass an interview (by the current HUST board?) before their name is included on the ballot?
|
|
jc
Junior Member
Having a small psychotic episode - will be back yesterday, maybe!
Posts: 482
|
Post by jc on Sept 11, 2015 11:37:09 GMT
And that is relevant to an election because...... Absolutely no idea as I've no idea if the " interview" had anything to do with being rejected. Didn't even know you had to have an interview. And Grayham makes a good point about not knowing an interview takes place as I can see no requirement for one in the Constitution nor the Election policy. Yet I know someone whom was, albeit informally. And this is my point, the HUST board seem to be doing things they want to do in the name of the Trust, not necessarily with the approval or knowledge of the members. It's why I and many I have spoken to want clarity and transparancy. The level of trust I have is eroding and eroding quickly. I am also having difficulty in squaring the issues surrounding the closure of BB and the possible involvement of a HUST board member or members in that debacle. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2015 11:38:30 GMT
I've applied to set up a HFC Supporters Trust which will render the HUFC supporters trust invalid as their club no longer exists.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2015 11:39:19 GMT
The concept of an interview to stand for election seems pretty mad, unless it's just to check that the person standing really is a H(U)FC fan, which should be the only real requirement.
|
|
|
|
Post by HamptonParkBull on Sept 11, 2015 11:41:59 GMT
The concept of an interview to stand for election seems pretty mad, unless it's just to check that the person standing really is a H(U)FC fan, which should be the only real requirement. Or that they could fufill the role (have the spare time to do it) as an example. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2015 11:44:16 GMT
Thinking about it, is it possible that the 'interview' was merely meeting with Martin and Chris, in the absence of any other nominees, given them the opportunity to decide if they'd personally like to nominate in lieu of anyone else?
If nominated by two other HUSt members, perhaps this wouldn't have been necessary? Anyone know somebody who definitely had two nominations from anyone not currently on the HUST board? If not then perhaps this is why they aren't up for election?
|
|
jc
Junior Member
Having a small psychotic episode - will be back yesterday, maybe!
Posts: 482
|
Post by jc on Sept 11, 2015 11:46:46 GMT
But that's the point isn't it Grayham, the fans should vote and if they want that person on the board and a vacancy exists shouldn't it be so. Or are you saying you should only be on the board if you have a personal self serving ambition which maybe unconnected to the fans will? When applying for an election place you have to create a manifesto giving your background, why you want to be on the board and what you bring to the board. From my point of view I think it important that some decisions made in the name of the fans are put to the fans and others should just be dealt with by the Trust as and when needed. That said I think the members should be entitled to know about both, but that isn't the case presently with HUST or have I missed the minutes of the July and August board meetings being made available to us. The fans are getting the chance to vote though. Those present at the AGM can reject any of the applicants. They can't vote for someone not on the list. The persons manifesto may not be the reason they aren't on the list. As you know a lot about this, can you tell us what exactly happens after a person applies? No Grayham you are completely missing the point. The fans are getting to vote for the people they are ALLOWED to vote for as dictated by the HUST board. That is the basic and fundamental issue. The HUST board appear to be saying whom can stand not the fans. Look I have no problem if someone whom is eligible stands and is rejected by the fans for whatever reason the fans decide. That's is democracy at work. But if a group are using their power to deny an eligible candidate to stand so only those considered suitable to that group stand, well that's just plain wrong. It's a bit like the government calling a general election and only allowing members of the Conservative Party stand in the elections. A predictable result but not a fair one. Can you always come and talk to me face to face about the process after someone applies Grayham |
|
|
|
Post by oldmeadowender on Sept 11, 2015 11:53:29 GMT
One of them is an expert in 'negotiation and conflict resolution', which has got to be a plus. Bringing peace to Somalia and the Niger Delta is surely the perfect training ground for a HUST board member. Bringing peace to it or destroying it? What did he do for a living again? |
|
jc
Junior Member
Having a small psychotic episode - will be back yesterday, maybe!
Posts: 482
|
Post by jc on Sept 11, 2015 11:53:55 GMT
The concept of an interview to stand for election seems pretty mad, unless it's just to check that the person standing really is a H(U)FC fan, which should be the only real requirement. Actually I disagree. I think an interview is very appropriate. In a round about way there is a requirement for any HUST board director to pass the owners and directors test as there is a possibility of being elected to the HFC board. There will also be those ineligible or incapable of doing the job say because they live in New Zealand or at Her Majesties Pleasure and wouldn't be able to attend the monthly meetings. The interview should be a way of explaining to the potential candidate the duties and responsibilities expected and for the potential candidate to consider if they are still suitable for the role. Interviews work both ways |
|
|
|
Post by Peroni on Sept 11, 2015 11:53:46 GMT
The fans are getting the chance to vote though. Those present at the AGM can reject any of the applicants. They can't vote for someone not on the list. The persons manifesto may not be the reason they aren't on the list. As you know a lot about this, can you tell us what exactly happens after a person applies? No Grayham you are completely missing the point. The fans are getting to vote for the people they are ALLOWED to vote for as dictated by the HUST board. That is the basic and fundamental issue. The HUST board appear to be saying whom can stand not the fans. Look I have no problem if someone whom is eligible stands and is rejected by the fans for whatever reason the fans decide. That's is democracy at work. But if a group are using their power to deny an eligible candidate to stand so only those considered suitable to that group stand, well that's just plain wrong. It's a bit like the government calling a general election and only allowing members of the Conservative Party stand in the elections. A predictable result but not a fair one. Can you always come and talk to me face to face about the process after someone applies Grayham Err, don't prospective MP's get chosen before it goes to the public ? Not sure the local veggie party would want me as their sausage candidate |
|
|
|
Post by oldmeadowender on Sept 11, 2015 11:56:14 GMT
"I am keen to ensure HUST supports the new HFC." Langley made me feel uncomfortable on behalf of those of you who are HUST members. (I am not, so I suppose Grayham can tell me to shut up again if he wishes.) So what happens, Mr Langley, if HFC is doing something the fans shouldn't be supporting?
|
|
jc
Junior Member
Having a small psychotic episode - will be back yesterday, maybe!
Posts: 482
|
Post by jc on Sept 11, 2015 11:58:10 GMT
Thinking about it, is it possible that the 'interview' was merely meeting with Martin and Chris, in the absence of any other nominees, given them the opportunity to decide if they'd personally like to nominate in lieu of anyone else? If nominated by two other HUSt members, perhaps this wouldn't have been necessary? Anyone know somebody who definitely had two nominations from anyone not currently on the HUST board? If not then perhaps this is why they aren't up for election? Yes I am aware of someone eligible to stand whom had two nominees from non HUST Board members submitted on time whose details are not presently on the list of those to be consider for election. |
|
|
|
Post by HamptonParkBull on Sept 11, 2015 12:05:06 GMT
Thinking about it, is it possible that the 'interview' was merely meeting with Martin and Chris, in the absence of any other nominees, given them the opportunity to decide if they'd personally like to nominate in lieu of anyone else? If nominated by two other HUSt members, perhaps this wouldn't have been necessary? Anyone know somebody who definitely had two nominations from anyone not currently on the HUST board? If not then perhaps this is why they aren't up for election? Yes I am aware of someone eligible to stand whom had two nominees from non HUST Board members submitted on time whose details are not presently on the list of those to be consider for election. Will they be at the HUST meeting so they can ask why they aren't on the list? |
|
|
|
Post by oldmeadowender on Sept 11, 2015 12:06:41 GMT
LOL. I don't endorse anything I don't find truly democratic. That's why I haven't voted for more than thirty years. You can only really improve the system by refusing to play the game the way it wants you to...
|
|
