VFF yes I agree other groups such as ITTV / Not 606 etc should all be involved and have a representative
Seen this sort of thing crop up a few times.
'Forums' do not / should not have opinions. There is no such thing as 'CL are saying etc'. It is the people who use the forums that have opinions, and a forum should just be there to facilitate that and provide the platform.
As you can see on here, there is every view possible on the Charlton situation being offered and debated, exactly how it should be. How could someone ever 'represent' that under an agreed collective?
'Forums' do not / should not have opinions. There is no such thing as 'CL are saying etc'. It is the people who use the forums that have opinions, and a forum should just be there to facilitate that and provide the platform.
As you can see on here, there is every view possible on the Charlton situation being offered and debated, exactly how it should be. How could someone ever 'represent' that under an agreed collective?
Well said. This lazy thinking feeds the fiction that there are squabbling factions among the support. There may well be individuals who have violently opposing views, but that is another matter.
'Forums' do not / should not have opinions. There is no such thing as 'CL are saying etc'. It is the people who use the forums that have opinions, and a forum should just be there to facilitate that and provide the platform.
As you can see on here, there is every view possible on the Charlton situation being offered and debated, exactly how it should be. How could someone ever 'represent' that under an agreed collective?
Well said. This lazy thinking feeds the fiction that there are squabbling factions among the support. There may well be individuals who have violently opposing views, but that is another matter.
VFF yes I agree other groups such as ITTV / Not 606 etc should all be involved and have a representative
Seen this sort of thing crop up a few times.
'Forums' do not / should not have opinions. There is no such thing as 'CL are saying etc'. It is the people who use the forums that have opinions, and a forum should just be there to facilitate that and provide the platform.
As you can see on here, there is every view possible on the Charlton situation being offered and debated, exactly how it should be. How could someone ever 'represent' that under an agreed collective?
Fair point. I see what you are getting at. But if Not 606 / ITTV discuss it and have people who they represent the forums then how is that not other than a positive thing ? They have the debate and they have an individual who can articulate the balance of opinions on that forum. The forums have diverse opinions but in the modern technological age they represent communities of posters who regular communicate with each other. They both have substantial numbers of visitors to their sites.
Intelligent use of social media can be a vital and creative way to get the message accross. As, I said to NLA and Martinho, it is important that the supporters can be united and a wide spread section of support is reflected.
I am just trying to promote inclusion and that wide sections of supporters are encouraged to be part of decisions and discussion. Without ensuring this, KM will be able to be dismissive like she was with the G21 statement last season. If strong forums are not part of the decision making process then it is less likely that unified and creative actions can take place or suggested actions will be supported.
If I can I will be at the meeting. My opinion is that just like the OP on the Bothered thread has stated I will still be going as my stance is I will be going longer than any owner will be in charge of us.
That said I'm not happy with the nonsense that has been going on particularly since the dismissal of Peeters. So I will stop giving the club any of my money bar the price of mine and the kids season tickets. The 5 year ticket will not be renewed (although that has more to do with Richard Murray's pisstake response to the shortfall we have had at last years VIP meeting), until the owners are clear with what they are doing.
I feel the most effective way of getting a message across would be something to Man Utd false wearing the clubs original colours (yellow and green). The trust come up with a simple design, produce and sell something (scarf?) the fans can wear at games that will show their dissatisfaction. The Trust could have a small surplus on top of the price which would go into its own account and they could use for future initiatives.
I like the scarf idea. The kit below is the Charlton home kit from the 1923/1924 season and bar that every other home kit has been red/white.
Black is one of our colours. That would work for me.
Could some nice moderator person please amend thread title to include date and venue?
Let's not forget we are the only football club whose fans started a political party and fought an election. Let's put our collective minds to it and see if we can come up with something special again.
Black is one of our colours. That would work for me.
Could some nice moderator person please amend thread title to include date and venue?
Let's not forget we are the only football club whose fans started a political party and fought an election. Let's put our collective minds to it and see if we can come up with something special again.
Lets not lose sight of this fact...please...but we need solidarity of thought and purpose
VFF yes I agree other groups such as ITTV / Not 606 etc should all be involved and have a representative
Seen this sort of thing crop up a few times.
'Forums' do not / should not have opinions. There is no such thing as 'CL are saying etc'. It is the people who use the forums that have opinions, and a forum should just be there to facilitate that and provide the platform.
As you can see on here, there is every view possible on the Charlton situation being offered and debated, exactly how it should be. How could someone ever 'represent' that under an agreed collective?
Fair point. I see what you are getting at. But if Not 606 / ITTV discuss it and have people who they represent the forums then how is that not other than a positive thing ? They have the debate and they have an individual who can articulate the balance of opinions on that forum. The forums have diverse opinions but in the modern technological age they represent communities of posters who regular communicate with each other. They both have substantial numbers of visitors to their sites.
Intelligent use of social media can be a vital and creative way to get the message accross. As, I said to NLA and Martinho, it is important that the supporters can be united and a wide spread section of support is reflected.
I am just trying to promote inclusion and that wide sections of supporters are encouraged to be part of decisions and discussion. Without ensuring this, KM will be able to be dismissive like she was with the G21 statement last season. If strong forums are not part of the decision making process then it is less likely that unified and creative actions can take place or suggested actions will be supported.
I'm a member of all three of those forums. Not sure any of the forum admins would ever fully represent my views. This is the problem, and if every individual who wanted to say something was accommodated the meeting would take a week.
Even if you felt each forum could be represented, there is a question of the size of that - not606's match thread got 250 views compared to 30k on here for example. It's an almost impossible job for the Supporters' Trust, who will be criticised whatever.
Personally speaking I'd encourage anyone who feels they have something to say in representation of a group of supporters to contact the Supporters' Trust and lay it all out, what you want to say, why it should be you, etc. Give us a chance to ensure we have the breadth of coverage that will be needed and to plan timings.
But, if the drive to be heard is solely self serving, or "if they can speak I should be allowed" then the point is being missed isn't it?
Generally, I think VFF has the right of this arguement. You need to bring other groups in, and unite the fans. The impression I get is that both NOT606 and ITTV have people they want to send. I don't really see a downside.
I feel the most effective way of getting a message across would be something to Man Utd false wearing the clubs original colours (yellow and green). The trust come up with a simple design, produce and sell something (scarf?) the fans can wear at games that will show their dissatisfaction. The Trust could have a small surplus on top of the price which would go into its own account and they could use for future initiatives.
I am new on here. Like this idea - did Man U include yellow and green shirts too? Cuts down on club shops huge profits
I will go and put over my views. But if someone on Not606 wants me to put over their views, because they can't get there themselves, I will do it for them. I hope that clears up the people that they want to send comment NLA?
Generally, I think VFF has the right of this arguement. You need to bring other groups in, and unite the fans. The impression I get is that both NOT606 and ITTV have people they want to send. I don't really see a downside.
That wasn't the point I was trying to make Ken Shabs. Forums aren't representative bodies, they are a platform for individual views. You can't attach a groupthink mentality to that imo.
For example, my opinion on the current issues is very different to that of @Addickted, whose opinion is currently pinned at the top of the forum. Neither of us could ever provide a "CL representative view", but we could offer our individual views, which you hope would be equally taken on merit.
Not a big deal, but that was the point I was trying to make on the previous page.
Now that we've got the date and venue sorted, for sure the Trust will turn its attention to making the meeting as effective as possible, and that means on the one hand making sure all shades of opinion have a chance to be heard, and on the other hand steering the discussion towards practical goals and tactics for achieving them. So as @se9addick said, there won't be any top table, but we will work out a way of organising speakers effectively.
Re the discussion above about various groups and their voices being heard; it's worth reminding ourselves that the Trust and the Supporters' clubs are properly constituted democratic organisations. Anyone who speaks on their behalf knows they have some responsibility to speak for the members. As @AFKABartram says, a website forum isn't constituted like that. Yet, AFKA is a brilliant reader and summariser of the mood of the fans. I hope he will speak on the night. When it comes to the other forums, somebody can say "well I am the admin from site x, and my reading of the mood on our site is different to AFKA's". And that's valid, and worth hearing.
It's also worth saying that responsibility on the night for the meeting being effective, lies with everyone who is there. There will be no "enemy" present. If we all accept that everyone is there because they care deeply about the direction in which our club is being taken, we can find out where the common ground is, and accept differences with respect.
Comments
As you can see on here, there is every view possible on the Charlton situation being offered and debated, exactly how it should be. How could someone ever 'represent' that under an agreed collective?
Well said. This lazy thinking feeds the fiction that there are squabbling factions among the support. There may well be individuals who have violently opposing views, but that is another matter.
http://www.castrust.org/2015/02/public-meeting-woolwich-grand-theatre-wed-18th-feb-7-30pm/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Intelligent use of social media can be a vital and creative way to get the message accross. As, I said to NLA and Martinho, it is important that the supporters can be united and a wide spread section of support is reflected.
I am just trying to promote inclusion and that wide sections of supporters are encouraged to be part of decisions and discussion. Without ensuring this, KM will be able to be dismissive like she was with the G21 statement last season. If strong forums are not part of the decision making process then it is less likely that unified and creative actions can take place or suggested actions will be supported.
http://forum.charltonlife.com/discussion/66353/trust-public-meeting-18th-feb-woolwich-grand-theatre-7-30#latest
Could some nice moderator person please amend thread title to include date and venue?
Let's not forget we are the only football club whose fans started a political party and fought an election. Let's put our collective minds to it and see if we can come up with something special again.
Even if you felt each forum could be represented, there is a question of the size of that - not606's match thread got 250 views compared to 30k on here for example. It's an almost impossible job for the Supporters' Trust, who will be criticised whatever.
Personally speaking I'd encourage anyone who feels they have something to say in representation of a group of supporters to contact the Supporters' Trust and lay it all out, what you want to say, why it should be you, etc. Give us a chance to ensure we have the breadth of coverage that will be needed and to plan timings.
But, if the drive to be heard is solely self serving, or "if they can speak I should be allowed" then the point is being missed isn't it?
The impression I get is that both NOT606 and ITTV have people they want to send. I don't really see a downside.
What does that mean?
If you want to go, go if you don't don't it's not a charlton life meeting or as raz has said even a trust meeting
It's an open meeting
The way it was posted above is as if a splinter group is going to attend from each forum which won't make the meeting workable
For example, my opinion on the current issues is very different to that of @Addickted, whose opinion is currently pinned at the top of the forum. Neither of us could ever provide a "CL representative view", but we could offer our individual views, which you hope would be equally taken on merit.
Not a big deal, but that was the point I was trying to make on the previous page.
Re the discussion above about various groups and their voices being heard; it's worth reminding ourselves that the Trust and the Supporters' clubs are properly constituted democratic organisations. Anyone who speaks on their behalf knows they have some responsibility to speak for the members. As @AFKABartram says, a website forum isn't constituted like that. Yet, AFKA is a brilliant reader and summariser of the mood of the fans. I hope he will speak on the night. When it comes to the other forums, somebody can say "well I am the admin from site x, and my reading of the mood on our site is different to AFKA's". And that's valid, and worth hearing.
It's also worth saying that responsibility on the night for the meeting being effective, lies with everyone who is there. There will be no "enemy" present. If we all accept that everyone is there because they care deeply about the direction in which our club is being taken, we can find out where the common ground is, and accept differences with respect.