I absolutely disagree with this approach. The word 'targeting' has been questioned in this thread - and rightly so. However I would go further and say it is intimidation.
What on earth does anyone expect to achieve by intimidating KM's parents, or even total strangers who just happen to live in the area. Headline ' Charlton's CEO forced to resign after her parents targeted by fans'. I would expect any sympathy generated by CARD in its actions to date would evaporate overnight.
I think (happy to be corrected) that this wasn't a CARD protest. I imagine that subtlety would be lost on anyone from the outside looking in though so your point is completely valid.
This, for me, is important. On another thread I went rambling on about the Belgium 20 protests. I thought the first protest in Belgium was brilliant and got good publicity. I think I'm right in saying it was mentioned on a CARD leaflet given out that same day (?) The 'Belgium 20' seems to now be used as a general name for all protests in Belgium - including the ones targetting KM's Mum and Dad (which I totally disagree with). So an initial protest that CARD 'approved of' has, IMO, become mixed in with these additional Belgium protests and targetting.
Let me try to clarify this.
The "Belgian 20" protests were not planned by, discussed with, approved of, or undertaken by CARD.
The Protest Fund (not CARD) paid for some of the expenses of both of the Belgium protests; the leaflets on the first occasion, and then the leaflets, coffin, grim reaper outfits on the second occasion.
The Protest Fund is open to all fans groups - including CARD - who want funding to support a protest. All of them (again including CARD) have to make a case for the financial support which is then considered and responded to by myself and @Curb_It. Most cases are approved but some are not.
The leaflet for the original STVV trip had the CARD logo on it, at the protestors' request and with CARD's agreement. Subsequently some of those who went seem to have been disappointed that the credit they received, rightly in my view, was mixed up with CARD and didn't continue to resonate to the same extent after other protests were carried out.
Despite me publishing an article written by one of them about the first visit and arranging for the SLP to speak to one of them about the second, there seems to be a feeling it is a competition, which is unfortunate. To be clear, neither trip has been planned, managed or approved by CARD, which meets to discuss its protests and as a group comprises more than dozen people.
For what it's worth (=precisely nothing) I disagree with this, just think it's out of order really!
It's probably because I still see KM as a fairly pleasant young lady who was given a great job that she wasn't ready for. I still think she should resign now as her inexperience is clearly hurting the club, but in her position I'd probably cling on too - as her boss doesn't seem too fussed about her performance.
RD is the problem... I wouldn't bring his family into it personally, just my opinion, it's only football.
I send a letter to Buckingham Palace and told The Queen, that Air Miles Andy was Rubbish at his Job. Lizzy Replied, and said i know He is rubbish, You poor subject, But NEPOTISM RULES OK.
Disagree entirely with this action. It's an own goal and counter productive.
Just had a discussion with a fellow Charlton supporting friend. He was initially supportive of Roly Two Sheds tenure but has slowly turned away from the "dark side" over the last few months i.e. he was starting to see the light and moving to a "Roly Out" position. However, he is now stating that he could not support any group that stooped to this sort of action.
A Millwall supporting friend in on the discussion stated "f**k that is low!"
I agree with both of them. It was an ill thought out thing to do and CARD supported or not it has made getting the "waivers" on side a bit more difficult.
A step too far. But if Roland and Katrien want to continue to take the piss, wind people up, push people too far and show a total disregard for their feelings, then they shouldn't be surprised when this sort of thing happens. They are screwing with people's minds and their lives, it's a dangerous game to play.
I don't have any problem with this. No harm has been done to anyone, nothing illegal has been done, no-one has been threatened, and the message has been taken a bit further. I see it as a positive move. Much more acceptable than a couple of the chants I hear, which would put any parent off bringing their kids to a protest.
I think the important thing with protests that we all have to think, whatever our personal point of view on certain protests are, is how the outside world will respond to it.
Example - a few people are so riled up that they think the only way to protest would be a pitch invasion. Two or three people pitch invade, they achieve what they wanted to achieve but it's the only bad bit of coverage the Boro game protests had on Sky Sports.
This one - a few people think leafleting KM's parents house is a good idea. They do it, feel like they've achieved what they want to achieve. However, the bigger reaction appears to be that it was a step too far.
Shows that no matter how you personally feel about something and whether you think it's a good idea for achieving your aim - you have to think about how others would see it otherwise, despite doing what you wanted to do, you risk a backlash of people who thought it was a bad idea and on the whole that negatively effects the protest situation.
A step too far. But if Roland and Katrien want to continue to take the piss, wind people up, push people too far and show a total disregard for their feelings, then they shouldn't be surprised when this sort of thing happens. They are screwing with people's minds and their lives, it's a dangerous game to play.
I want them gone as much as anyone but get a grip. It's just football.
Do the people against going to Meire's family house think dressing up as camels and singing ' we're all going on a summer holiday' will help them sell up?
Well done all the lads that went out there, good tactic IMO
Do the people against going to Meire's family house think dressing up as camels and singing ' we're all going on a summer holiday' will help them sell up?
Well done all the lads that went out there, good tactic IMO
No, but where you draw a line is a question of values and how your parents raised you (ironically) and each person will have a different sense of what's right and what's wrong. For me, targeting someone's parents at their home who have nothing to do with it is beyond the pale. Other people were raised differently and will believe different things.
Disagree entirely with this action. It's an own goal and counter productive.
Just had a discussion with a fellow Charlton supporting friend. He was initially supportive of Roly Two Sheds tenure but has slowly turned away from the "dark side" over the last few months i.e. he was starting to see the light and moving to a "Roly Out" position. However, he is now stating that he could not support any group that stooped to this sort of action.
A Millwall supporting friend in on the discussion stated "f**k that is low!"
I agree with both of them. It was an ill thought out thing to do and CARD supported or not it has made getting the "waivers" on side a bit more difficult.
this sort of action? what leafleting? My God, it was a piece of paper and a polite conversation. They didn't beat the door down, ransack the place and abuse him and his wife. Weird.
Much more of this creepy stuff and CARD might find itself in injunction territory.
Can't believe the stupidity behind this.
It wasn't CARD.
I'm glad to hear it but would that distinction be important to Meire seeking some sort of protection for her parents in a foreign country ? The adverse publicity would be awful.
Do the people against going to Meire's family house think dressing up as camels and singing ' we're all going on a summer holiday' will help them sell up?
Well done all the lads that went out there, good tactic IMO
Katrien Meire Works For Duchatelet.
Target the Organ Grinder not the performing Monkey.
His business interests in Brussels would seem a better place to Protest.
Do the people against going to Meire's family house think dressing up as camels and singing ' we're all going on a summer holiday' will help them sell up?
Well done all the lads that went out there, good tactic IMO
No, but where you draw a line is a question of values and how your parents raised you (ironically) and each person will have a different sense of what's right and what's wrong. For me, targeting someone's parents at their home who have nothing to do with it is beyond the pale. Other people were raised differently and will believe different things.
A step too far. But if Roland and Katrien want to continue to take the piss, wind people up, push people too far and show a total disregard for their feelings, then they shouldn't be surprised when this sort of thing happens. They are screwing with people's minds and their lives, it's a dangerous game to play.
I want them gone as much as anyone but get a grip. It's just football.
Do the people against going to Meire's family house think dressing up as camels and singing ' we're all going on a summer holiday' will help them sell up?
Well done all the lads that went out there, good tactic IMO
No, but where you draw a line is a question of values and how your parents raised you (ironically) and each person will have a different sense of what's right and what's wrong. For me, targeting someone's parents at their home who have nothing to do with it is beyond the pale. Other people were raised differently and will believe different things.
One polite visit and a leaflet is fine as long as it rests there. We are in a lesser of several evils scenario here. For some it is about either lose the club or lose goodwill, and go against standards they would prefer to uphold.
Standard won their fight by invading his personal space not throwing balls into the pitch , that's kindergarden stuff and will have no affect what so ever
So what you saying here, maybe kidnap her parents and lock her in the ibis in Bexleyheath with Marc Wilmots and James Henry until pen is put to paper and the transfer is done
Do the people against going to Meire's family house think dressing up as camels and singing ' we're all going on a summer holiday' will help them sell up?
Well done all the lads that went out there, good tactic IMO
Personally I don't agree with either, but it's not really meant to viewed as a comparison. There have been numerous CARD things that have not gained universal approval, that will always be the case.
There is a difference though in what you believe is effective in achieving your aims and what is deemed as acceptable behaviour. that's like saying there is no point in doing anything that isn't hard hitting / extreme.
It is purely about where do you draw the line. There is no universal place where we would all draw it, it's just to me, targeting associated family in their homes is past the line I personally would draw.
That's nothing to do with being nice, not wanting to impact wider support etc it's just involving family is not something I agree with.
It's clear though that not everyone agrees with that so I'll ask a question to anyone who thinks I'm being wet with that stance.
About five years ago I banned an overseas-based poster from here. Over the next year I kept getting emails about what a coward I was, how he was going to track me down and beat me up, how he was going to f*ck my mum etc.
What would you say if he come over from abroad, knocked on my parents door wanting to speak to them about me, and leafleted all their neighbours about the terrible way in his opinion I moderate a forum and impacted on his enjoyment.
Standard won their fight by invading his personal space not throwing balls into the pitch , that's kindergarden stuff and will have no affect what so ever
So what you saying here, maybe kidnap her parents and lock her in the ibis in Bexleyheath with Marc Wilmots and James Henry until pen is put to paper and the transfer is done
That's ridiculous, kidnapping is completely over the top. We should be looking to dig up her Granny and hold the remains hostage instead.
Katrien has been quick to make herself a public figure. Filmed conferences, women in football events, sky TV, university awards, sitting on judging panels and so on. So far there has been one polite bit of doorstepping, and a leaflet. If left there it is fair enough, because those who promote themselves as public figures often run the risk of family scrutiny even if distasteful. We have the cynical exploitation of staff, fans, players, and managers going on at Charlton. Alongside the hollow reflected glory of Community Trust success, families being targeted for a wholesome fun day experience, children especially being used by the club for their propaganda purposes. In that context of family values being waved around, whilst others like staff, older supporters, players and management are coldly and deliberately being excluded from this family fantasy because their perspectives are rejected. In that context I believe the one visit is OK. I said earlier about the lesser of two evils, and what has happened so far seems to be a fair enough conduit for pressing home a message.
Katrien has been quick to make herself a public figure. Filmed conferences, women in football events, sky TV, university awards, sitting on judging panels and so on. So far there has been one polite bit of doorstepping, and a leaflet. If left there it is fair enough, because those who promote themselves as public figures often run the risk of family scrutiny even if distasteful. We have the cynical exploitation of staff, fans, players, and managers going on at Charlton. Alongside the hollow reflected glory of Community Trust success, families being targeted for a wholesome fun day experience, children especially being used by the club for their propaganda purposes. In that context of family values being waved around, whilst others like staff, older supporters, players and management are coldly and deliberately being excluded from this family fantasy because their perspectives are rejected. In that context I believe the one visit is OK. I said earlier about the lesser of two evils, and what has happened so far seems to be a fair enough conduit for pressing home a message.
Sorry Seth, I have to disagree with you on this one.
If it’s “distasteful” then it’s distasteful. I see no justification in her despicable actions at work for targeting her parents in their home. Having foreign blokes turn up at your mum and dad’s door to tell them what they think of you, regardless of how polite the conversation was, is a long way from “family scrutiny” and I’m surprised that you can’t see that.
Another point that seems to have been missed in the debate around the morality of doing such a thing is whether or not it was actually worth it. I’d suggest there were far better targets in Duchatelet’s home town than the parents and neighbours of his CEO, an opportunity wasted and the fall out could be potentially damaging for the protest movement as a whole.
Do the people against going to Meire's family house think dressing up as camels and singing ' we're all going on a summer holiday' will help them sell up?
Well done all the lads that went out there, good tactic IMO
Personally I don't agree with either, but it's not really meant to viewed as a comparison. There have been numerous CARD things that have not gained universal approval, that will always be the case.
There is a difference though in what you believe is effective in achieving your aims and what is deemed as acceptable behaviour. that's like saying there is no point in doing anything that isn't hard hitting / extreme.
It is purely about where do you draw the line. There is no universal place where we would all draw it, it's just to me, targeting associated family in their homes is past the line I personally would draw.
That's nothing to do with being nice, not wanting to impact wider support etc it's just involving family is not something I agree with.
It's clear though that not everyone agrees with that so I'll ask a question to anyone who thinks I'm being wet with that stance.
About five years ago I banned an overseas-based poster from here. Over the next year I kept getting emails about what a coward I was, how he was going to track me down and beat me up, how he was going to f*ck my mum etc.
What would you say if he come over from abroad, knocked on my parents door wanting to speak to them about me, and leafleted all their neighbours about the terrible way in his opinion I moderate a forum and impacted on his enjoyment.
Katrien has been quick to make herself a public figure. Filmed conferences, women in football events, sky TV, university awards, sitting on judging panels and so on. So far there has been one polite bit of doorstepping, and a leaflet. If left there it is fair enough, because those who promote themselves as public figures often run the risk of family scrutiny even if distasteful. We have the cynical exploitation of staff, fans, players, and managers going on at Charlton. Alongside the hollow reflected glory of Community Trust success, families being targeted for a wholesome fun day experience, children especially being used by the club for their propaganda purposes. In that context of family values being waved around, whilst others like staff, older supporters, players and management are coldly and deliberately being excluded from this family fantasy because their perspectives are rejected. In that context I believe the one visit is OK. I said earlier about the lesser of two evils, and what has happened so far seems to be a fair enough conduit for pressing home a message.
Much more of this creepy stuff and CARD might find itself in injunction territory.
Can't believe the stupidity behind this.
It wasn't CARD.
I'm glad to hear it but would that distinction be important to Meire seeking some sort of protection for her parents in a foreign country ? The adverse publicity would be awful.
Others will know better, but I'd be surprised if a judge would be willing to injunct one group of people (CARD), the full identity and extent of which cannot be identified by the petitioner, on the basis of the actions of another group of people, also largely unidentified, in relation to something that the petitioner alleges happened in another jurisdiction.
Comments
Despite me publishing an article written by one of them about the first visit and arranging for the SLP to speak to one of them about the second, there seems to be a feeling it is a competition, which is unfortunate. To be clear, neither trip has been planned, managed or approved by CARD, which meets to discuss its protests and as a group comprises more than dozen people.
It's probably because I still see KM as a fairly pleasant young lady who was given a great job that she wasn't ready for. I still think she should resign now as her inexperience is clearly hurting the club, but in her position I'd probably cling on too - as her boss doesn't seem too fussed about her performance.
RD is the problem... I wouldn't bring his family into it personally, just my opinion, it's only football.
that Air Miles Andy was Rubbish at his Job.
Lizzy Replied, and said i know He is rubbish, You poor subject,
But NEPOTISM RULES OK.
Just had a discussion with a fellow Charlton supporting friend. He was initially supportive of Roly Two Sheds tenure but has slowly turned away from the "dark side" over the last few months i.e. he was starting to see the light and moving to a "Roly Out" position. However, he is now stating that he could not support any group that stooped to this sort of action.
A Millwall supporting friend in on the discussion stated "f**k that is low!"
I agree with both of them. It was an ill thought out thing to do and CARD supported or not it has made getting the "waivers" on side a bit more difficult.
As a protest we are going to lose every external support we currently have.
It's happened. Nothing will change that, if you agree or disagree with the actions.
Move on and look forward to saturday.
2 days to go....
Can't believe the stupidity behind this.
Example - a few people are so riled up that they think the only way to protest would be a pitch invasion. Two or three people pitch invade, they achieve what they wanted to achieve but it's the only bad bit of coverage the Boro game protests had on Sky Sports.
This one - a few people think leafleting KM's parents house is a good idea. They do it, feel like they've achieved what they want to achieve. However, the bigger reaction appears to be that it was a step too far.
Shows that no matter how you personally feel about something and whether you think it's a good idea for achieving your aim - you have to think about how others would see it otherwise, despite doing what you wanted to do, you risk a backlash of people who thought it was a bad idea and on the whole that negatively effects the protest situation.
Well done all the lads that went out there, good tactic IMO
Target the Organ Grinder not the performing Monkey.
His business interests in Brussels would seem a better place to Protest.
We are in a lesser of several evils scenario here.
For some it is about either lose the club or lose goodwill, and go against standards they would prefer to uphold.
There is a difference though in what you believe is effective in achieving your aims and what is deemed as acceptable behaviour. that's like saying there is no point in doing anything that isn't hard hitting / extreme.
It is purely about where do you draw the line. There is no universal place where we would all draw it, it's just to me, targeting associated family in their homes is past the line I personally would draw.
That's nothing to do with being nice, not wanting to impact wider support etc it's just involving family is not something I agree with.
It's clear though that not everyone agrees with that so I'll ask a question to anyone who thinks I'm being wet with that stance.
About five years ago I banned an overseas-based poster from here. Over the next year I kept getting emails about what a coward I was, how he was going to track me down and beat me up, how he was going to f*ck my mum etc.
What would you say if he come over from abroad, knocked on my parents door wanting to speak to them about me, and leafleted all their neighbours about the terrible way in his opinion I moderate a forum and impacted on his enjoyment.
Would that have been fair game?
So far there has been one polite bit of doorstepping, and a leaflet. If left there it is fair enough, because those who promote themselves as public figures often run the risk of family scrutiny even if distasteful.
We have the cynical exploitation of staff, fans, players, and managers going on at Charlton. Alongside the hollow reflected glory of Community Trust success, families being targeted for a wholesome fun day experience, children especially being used by the club for their propaganda purposes.
In that context of family values being waved around, whilst others like staff, older supporters, players and management are coldly and deliberately being excluded from this family fantasy because their perspectives are rejected. In that context I believe the one visit is OK.
I said earlier about the lesser of two evils, and what has happened so far seems to be a fair enough conduit for pressing home a message.
If it’s “distasteful” then it’s distasteful. I see no justification in her despicable actions at work for targeting her parents in their home. Having foreign blokes turn up at your mum and dad’s door to tell them what they think of you, regardless of how polite the conversation was, is a long way from “family scrutiny” and I’m surprised that you can’t see that.
Another point that seems to have been missed in the debate around the morality of doing such a thing is whether or not it was actually worth it. I’d suggest there were far better targets in Duchatelet’s home town than the parents and neighbours of his CEO, an opportunity wasted and the fall out could be potentially damaging for the protest movement as a whole.