I ahve tried several times to have a reasoned discussion with Sue but it is clear she has a very old-fashioned schoolteacher approach to all this. The management know best, we won't tell you what they are doing but you should all shut up and meekly accept it is being done in your best interests. Works with five years olds, less so with adults. Oh, and Sue, not everyone opposing RD/Daisy are foul-mouthed oiks with no right to express an opinion.
To be clear, the letter is very foolish and I told the club as soon as I saw it ten days ago that it would be explosive. However, it was provided in confidence and we (CARD) tried to manage the situation for the individual rather than exploit it to stir matters up. That is why the chair of CAST accompanied the recipient to the meeting and there it would have rested. We did not release it.
The problem for the club is that whatever gloss it puts on events now and however accurate that is, the letter does not justify their position. It is clearly silly for them to require fans to be "constructive" and entirely beyond their authority.
Sue implies we don't know the half of it. The point is we don't need to know any more than what is in the public domain. The salient FACTS are the content of the actual letter itself, and that one individual was singled out. The letter is indefensible. There have been thousands of individuals protesting.
But some of us do know a lot more about it than Sue Parkes, including what the club has to say privately.
The facts do not justify the letter and the letter does not justify the club's behaviour. The letter is why they are all over the media and that's entirely their work. CARD/CAST did not do this. The SMT did.
@BDL 8 minutes into program being very rational (albeit a bit casual in a Rush t shirt IMO) pointing out that the club has made itself look bad and produced its own viral storm. It is completely counter productive and a sledge hammer to crack a walnut. Also liked the legal opinion on the report that the contract is unenforceable in the report.
This regime really knows how to shoot itself in the foot.
I'm actually with @colthe3rd on this one. Bit of a storm in a tea cup.
As said Charlton have always done this and there are a few on here who have had an 'interview' with Mick previously. Don't think any of them have not been allowed to return.
The letter is a bit bull in a China shop, but the guy is new and wanted to make a point that they consider his actions near the mark. The fact that no ABC was drawn up would support that.
I do think some people are a little bit paranoid about the Club taking action, but other than Cahones pouring over this and other forums a couple of pitch invasion bans and having a few telephone conversations with @C4FC4L1f3 I'm not aware of any other sanctions.
They even sold me our Bury tickets without any grief.
Addickted, was the ABC not drawn up, or not signed? They are two very different things. I'm not sure which is worse, if no ABC existed, they tricked the chap into a meeting based on lies. It's bullying, plain and simple.
I just don't understand how any right minded person thinks it's acceptable for the club to try and censor fans, 1 fan or a million, it's wrong.
The statement is also a total joke and has almost nothing to do with the contents of the actual letter.
Our club is the laughing stock of football right now, yet gobshites like Sue Parkes and Co think it's OK to blame US, the fans.
The entireity of the SMT is a joke and not fit for purpose, it would be like me opening a new school and hiring the toilet cleaner from my previous employer to be COO! KM is a failed lawyer, TK seems more suited to serving chips and this new guy has jumped in with two feet and made an absolute pillock of himself.
Depressing times.
Agree with Stu of K. Also the letter went on to introduce some kind of condition whereby the club would be the judge of what constituted behaviour which might be deemed anti-social.
So have they formed a mini-committee which examines the 'evidence' (CE. TK and KM). and wouldn't Sue Parkes so love to be on it?
Clearly, they have already put together a data-base of what they will consider to be suspected 'offenders' with screen shots taken from Social Media sites, still photos taken at the protests and elsewhere in the ground (- see earlier postings) and video.
So not paranoid but increasingly seeing signs that the Club is at war with a huge number of its 'customers' and which would no doubt prefer them instead to go along to The Valley - have a meal and hospitality beforehand and then sit meekly in their seat saying things like 'ohh - such and such a youth player is doing well I do hope a Premiership Club comes in for him soon.'
From my experience last year that's exactly what they expect their hospitality customers to do. When I dared to wear the Pinocchio mask in the window of the Keith Peacock Suite, the blinds were immediately pulled down and I was asked not to look out of the window. We will not be attending this year.
I have never subscribed to the theory RD was trying to run the club into the ground to sell The Valley. I am now beginning to wonder as surely it would be impossible for even an idiot (such as Meire) to be so incompetent as to keep making to many howlers which alienate fans. Target 20K? Taregt 0K more like. And she's certainly well on target for that
I'm actually with @colthe3rd on this one. Bit of a storm in a tea cup.
As said Charlton have always done this and there are a few on here who have had an 'interview' with Mick previously. Don't think any of them have not been allowed to return.
The letter is a bit bull in a China shop, but the guy is new and wanted to make a point that they consider his actions near the mark. The fact that no ABC was drawn up would support that.
I do think some people are a little bit paranoid about the Club taking action, but other than Cahones pouring over this and other forums a couple of pitch invasion bans and having a few telephone conversations with @C4FC4L1f3 I'm not aware of any other sanctions.
They even sold me our Bury tickets without any grief.
Nick you would loose your nut if Ben got this letter
It is quite threatening for just swearing and stuff online don't you think?
Good point, well made.
But then Neither Ben or I have renewed.
@Addickted I'm convinced if we had we would have also got these letters mate!
To be clear, the letter is very foolish and I told the club as soon as I saw it ten days ago that it would be explosive. However, it was provided in confidence and we (CARD) tried to manage the situation for the individual rather than exploit it to stir matters up. That is why the chair of CAST accompanied the recipient to the meeting and there it would have rested. We did not release it.
The problem for the club is that whatever gloss it puts on events now and however accurate that is, the letter does not justify their position. It is clearly silly for them to require fans to be "constructive" and entirely beyond their authority.
Sue implies we don't know the half of it. The point is we don't need to know any more than what is in the public domain. The salient FACTS are the content of the actual letter itself, and that one individual was singled out. The letter is indefensible. There have been thousands of individuals protesting.
But some of us do know a lot more about it than Sue Parkes, including what the club has to say privately.
The facts do not justify the letter and the letter does not justify the club's behaviour. The letter is why they are all over the media and that's entirely their work. CARD/CAST did not do this. The SMT did.
No professional organisation, let alone one that employs a retired police officer and an ex-lawyer should have considered issuing a letter that they seemingly wished to be private without a nice upper case, enboldened and underlined "private and confidential" header.
In addition, the letter should have been finished off with a paragraph confirming the letter's confidential status, pretty much the same as you see on countless emails.
I doubt that it would have any legal standing except in limited circumstances. But to avoid using such techniques in a letter which the club presumably didn't want in the public domain is utter incompetence.
As things stand as soon as the letter hit the recipient's doormat, he could do entirely what he wanted with it as it was his property.
As you say, how much better if this had all been dealt with by way of a cosy little chat.
Sue implies we don't know the half of it. The point is we don't need to know any more than what is in the public domain. The salient FACTS are the content of the actual letter itself, and that one individual was singled out. The letter is indefensible. There have been thousands of individuals protesting.
Think we do know the facts. The person was recorded inside the stadium using foul and abusive language and using similar on the club's social media.
He apologised for the first and deleted the latter. He got his season ticket at the meeting without the order being issued.
There are always two sides to an argument but abusing people on this site does not help anybody.
I see she's njot commenting on the CAFC page she used to use. Is this a new page for the hardcore loyalists?!
SE7 is a facebook site where Sue Parkes is one of the administrators and if there is something she considers particularly offensive to Katrien Meire she will have it removed. This extends to jokes and sarcasm at Katrien Meire's expense. A cartoon of a woman which, when looked at from a particular angle spelled the word LIAR, was removed by Parkes.
That is the crass level of this woman's thinking and her attempt to glorify Meire's every move. The underlying theme is that Meire and the SMT are in charge and therefore they know best and are being unfairly criticised.
Many will know that she called the comments in the Cheltenham programme disgusting which was a total over-reaction. The woman is in absolute thrall of Katrien Meire and it is embarrassing to witness a grown adult adopt such a child-like admiration which blinkers her and renders her incapable of independent thought.
I'm actually with @colthe3rd on this one. Bit of a storm in a tea cup. As said Charlton have always done this and there are a few on here who have had an 'interview' with Mick previously. Don't think any of them have not been allowed to return.
The letter is a bit bull in a China shop, but the guy is new and wanted to make a point that they consider his actions near the mark. The fact that no ABC was drawn up would support that.
I do think some people are a little bit paranoid about the Club taking action, but other than Cahones pouring over this and other forums a couple of pitch invasion bans and having a few telephone conversations with @C4FC4L1f3 I'm not aware of any other sanctions.
They even sold me our Bury tickets without any grief.
Normally in that meeting the person involved had done something far more worthy of a discussion, an abc for saying bad things on social media come on this is the biggest over reaction by the club and they chose who they delivered it too carefully, there are many who have typed worse and requested to do worse who they would not call in to this meeting as those people would not accept anyone talking to them about what can be said against these cnuts, it's an attempt to bully manipulate and drive home a message that will curtail those normally passive fans who are turning
And Sue parkes I have never said nothing about you before but you can fuck right off with your bullshit patronising ways,
I'm actually with @colthe3rd on this one. Bit of a storm in a tea cup. As said Charlton have always done this and there are a few on here who have had an 'interview' with Mick previously. Don't think any of them have not been allowed to return.
The letter is a bit bull in a China shop, but the guy is new and wanted to make a point that they consider his actions near the mark. The fact that no ABC was drawn up would support that.
I do think some people are a little bit paranoid about the Club taking action, but other than Cahones pouring over this and other forums a couple of pitch invasion bans and having a few telephone conversations with @C4FC4L1f3 I'm not aware of any other sanctions.
They even sold me our Bury tickets without any grief.
Normally in that meeting the person involved had done something far more worthy of a discussion, an abc for saying bad things on social media come on this is the biggest over reaction by the club and they chose who they delivered it too carefully, there are many who have typed worse and requested to do worse who they would not call in to this meeting as those people would not accept anyone talking to them about what can be said against these cnuts, it's an attempt to bully manipulate and drive home a message that will curtail those normally passive fans who are turning
And Sue parkes I have never said nothing about you before but you can fuck right off with your bullshit patronising ways,
The meeting was about foul and abusive language recorded inside the ground as well as the club's social media.
The guy admitted he was wrong and got his season ticket.
I'm actually with @colthe3rd on this one. Bit of a storm in a tea cup. As said Charlton have always done this and there are a few on here who have had an 'interview' with Mick previously. Don't think any of them have not been allowed to return.
The letter is a bit bull in a China shop, but the guy is new and wanted to make a point that they consider his actions near the mark. The fact that no ABC was drawn up would support that.
I do think some people are a little bit paranoid about the Club taking action, but other than Cahones pouring over this and other forums a couple of pitch invasion bans and having a few telephone conversations with @C4FC4L1f3 I'm not aware of any other sanctions.
They even sold me our Bury tickets without any grief.
Normally in that meeting the person involved had done something far more worthy of a discussion, an abc for saying bad things on social media come on this is the biggest over reaction by the club and they chose who they delivered it too carefully, there are many who have typed worse and requested to do worse who they would not call in to this meeting as those people would not accept anyone talking to them about what can be said against these cnuts, it's an attempt to bully manipulate and drive home a message that will curtail those normally passive fans who are turning
And Sue parkes I have never said nothing about you before but you can fuck right off with your bullshit patronising ways,
The meeting was about foul and abusive language recorded inside the ground as well as the club's social media.
The guy admitted he was wrong and got his season ticket.
I'm actually with @colthe3rd on this one. Bit of a storm in a tea cup. As said Charlton have always done this and there are a few on here who have had an 'interview' with Mick previously. Don't think any of them have not been allowed to return.
The letter is a bit bull in a China shop, but the guy is new and wanted to make a point that they consider his actions near the mark. The fact that no ABC was drawn up would support that.
I do think some people are a little bit paranoid about the Club taking action, but other than Cahones pouring over this and other forums a couple of pitch invasion bans and having a few telephone conversations with @C4FC4L1f3 I'm not aware of any other sanctions.
They even sold me our Bury tickets without any grief.
Normally in that meeting the person involved had done something far more worthy of a discussion, an abc for saying bad things on social media come on this is the biggest over reaction by the club and they chose who they delivered it too carefully, there are many who have typed worse and requested to do worse who they would not call in to this meeting as those people would not accept anyone talking to them about what can be said against these cnuts, it's an attempt to bully manipulate and drive home a message that will curtail those normally passive fans who are turning
And Sue parkes I have never said nothing about you before but you can fuck right off with your bullshit patronising ways,
The meeting was about foul and abusive language recorded inside the ground as well as the club's social media.
The guy admitted he was wrong and got his season ticket.
Personal abuse is not tolerated on any website.
What a load of nonsense, football is full of foul and abusive language, it's a passion not a sterile business, if the club was to pursue every person who said something that could constitute foul and abusive language they would have to employ a full time shit cnut letter writer and toss pot to hold the meeting,
As for personal abuse on social media so what put your above the parapet you are going to be a target, it's bullshit how many of those who made a move towards the directors box last season did so without using F an a language, how many who stood outside abd on the pitch did so without swearing
The club's attempt to control and punish has resulted in more anger and disgust from fans
The blokes tweets were checked by talk sport his language was industrial and fair play to him
I see she's njot commenting on the CAFC page she used to use. Is this a new page for the hardcore loyalists?!
SE7 is a facebook site where Sue Parkes is one of the administrators and if there is something she considers particularly offensive to Katrien Meire she will have it removed. This extends to jokes and sarcasm at Katrien Meire's expense. A cartoon of a woman which, when looked at from a particular angle spelled the word LIAR, was removed by Parkes.
That is the crass level of this woman's thinking and her attempt to glorify Meire's every move. The underlying theme is that Meire and the SMT are in charge and therefore they know best and are being unfairly criticised.
Many will know that she called the comments in the Cheltenham programme disgusting which was a total over-reaction. The woman is in absolute thrall of Katrien Meire and it is embarrassing to witness a grown adult adopt such a child-like admiration which blinkers her and renders her incapable of independent thought.
Reading down it, it looks like little more than an area designed to peddle pro-club messages and belittle anyone who disagrees (as with description of those not backing the regime as the 'militant tendency' and this kind of post - "Mystified by how much pleasure people who purport to be fans of the club take from watching it being criticised. In what sense do you claim to be a supporter?"
All rather sad, but clearly a page started by, or certainly with the blessing of, Meire and her ilk.
Sue implies we don't know the half of it. The point is we don't need to know any more than what is in the public domain. The salient FACTS are the content of the actual letter itself, and that one individual was singled out. The letter is indefensible. There have been thousands of individuals protesting.
Think we do know the facts. The person was recorded inside the stadium using foul and abusive language and using similar on the club's social media.
He apologised for the first and deleted the latter. He got his season ticket at the meeting without the order being issued.
There are always two sides to an argument but abusing people on this site does not help anybody.
I rather hope you don't mean you think that I have been abusing people on this site.
In terms of the facts, there was a disparity between what the club said and what Quentin said. Quentin asked that the meeting be recorded but the representatives of the club refused, so in the absence of evidence there are indeed two sides to this argument. My understanding is that he was recorded at Bury after the letter had been posted, I have not seen what was written on social media and I fully accept it was probably nasty stuff.
The letter still remains about what might be posted in the future on social media if a season ticket is released. Now this kind of gagging order could apply to a lot of people with regard to their future behaviour on social media, it could apply to every season ticket holder couldn't it? Which brings me back to my second point about why this individual was singled out for the original letter. In what sense might his near the knuckle writings be worse than the near the knuckle writing of many other presently angry Charlton fans?
Either there was some kind of thought process or analysis why Quentin's stuff was so extreme, or he might have been, as he suggested, an easy target. His interview on Talksport is a side of the argument too.
No Talksport never actually named him, they just used that to give him a handle.
Double bluff, he is Quentin
Really, well I never, must be a family tradition, you wouldn't normally choose that for your son would you? I know mine wouldn't have thanked me at all. Mind you some of the names children are given these days and their spellings never cease to amaze me .
I'm actually with @colthe3rd on this one. Bit of a storm in a tea cup. As said Charlton have always done this and there are a few on here who have had an 'interview' with Mick previously. Don't think any of them have not been allowed to return.
The letter is a bit bull in a China shop, but the guy is new and wanted to make a point that they consider his actions near the mark. The fact that no ABC was drawn up would support that.
I do think some people are a little bit paranoid about the Club taking action, but other than Cahones pouring over this and other forums a couple of pitch invasion bans and having a few telephone conversations with @C4FC4L1f3 I'm not aware of any other sanctions.
They even sold me our Bury tickets without any grief.
Normally in that meeting the person involved had done something far more worthy of a discussion, an abc for saying bad things on social media come on this is the biggest over reaction by the club and they chose who they delivered it too carefully, there are many who have typed worse and requested to do worse who they would not call in to this meeting as those people would not accept anyone talking to them about what can be said against these cnuts, it's an attempt to bully manipulate and drive home a message that will curtail those normally passive fans who are turning
And Sue parkes I have never said nothing about you before but you can fuck right off with your bullshit patronising ways,
The meeting was about foul and abusive language recorded inside the ground as well as the club's social media.
The guy admitted he was wrong and got his season ticket.
Personal abuse is not tolerated on any website.
But the letter wasn't - it says nothing about behaviour in the ground at all - and it's the letter which has seen the club ridiculed by virtually every mainstream news outlet.
It's quite ridiculous to pretend the club has acted sensibly and reasonably against such overwhelming criticism from neutral third parties.
I'm actually with @colthe3rd on this one. Bit of a storm in a tea cup. As said Charlton have always done this and there are a few on here who have had an 'interview' with Mick previously. Don't think any of them have not been allowed to return.
The letter is a bit bull in a China shop, but the guy is new and wanted to make a point that they consider his actions near the mark. The fact that no ABC was drawn up would support that.
I do think some people are a little bit paranoid about the Club taking action, but other than Cahones pouring over this and other forums a couple of pitch invasion bans and having a few telephone conversations with @C4FC4L1f3 I'm not aware of any other sanctions.
They even sold me our Bury tickets without any grief.
Normally in that meeting the person involved had done something far more worthy of a discussion, an abc for saying bad things on social media come on this is the biggest over reaction by the club and they chose who they delivered it too carefully, there are many who have typed worse and requested to do worse who they would not call in to this meeting as those people would not accept anyone talking to them about what can be said against these cnuts, it's an attempt to bully manipulate and drive home a message that will curtail those normally passive fans who are turning
And Sue parkes I have never said nothing about you before but you can fuck right off with your bullshit patronising ways,
The meeting was about foul and abusive language recorded inside the ground as well as the club's social media.
The guy admitted he was wrong and got his season ticket.
Personal abuse is not tolerated on any website.
But the letter wasn't - it says nothing about behaviour in the ground at all - and it's the letter which has seen the club ridiculed by virtually every mainstream news outlet.
It's quite ridiculous to pretend the club has acted sensibly and reasonably against such overwhelming criticism from neutral third parties.
But they did say it in the statement on the OS.
Let's also not pretend that any media outlet give a shit about what happens at the club. All of this makes good copy for them. Basically anything that gets retweeted a couple of thousand times can make national news.
This isn't to defend the club, I think they dealt with it poorly in regards to that letter, I just don't think you can point to what is in the news as to a justification of what you believe.
Comments
The big issue is the club threatening fans who might say something negative on the Internet about the owner/SMT
It's pathetic
The problem for the club is that whatever gloss it puts on events now and however accurate that is, the letter does not justify their position. It is clearly silly for them to require fans to be "constructive" and entirely beyond their authority. But some of us do know a lot more about it than Sue Parkes, including what the club has to say privately.
The facts do not justify the letter and the letter does not justify the club's behaviour. The letter is why they are all over the media and that's entirely their work. CARD/CAST did not do this. The SMT did.
No professional organisation, let alone one that employs a retired police officer and an ex-lawyer should have considered issuing a letter that they seemingly wished to be private without a nice upper case, enboldened and underlined "private and confidential" header.
In addition, the letter should have been finished off with a paragraph confirming the letter's confidential status, pretty much the same as you see on countless emails.
I doubt that it would have any legal standing except in limited circumstances. But to avoid using such techniques in a letter which the club presumably didn't want in the public domain is utter incompetence.
As things stand as soon as the letter hit the recipient's doormat, he could do entirely what he wanted with it as it was his property.
As you say, how much better if this had all been dealt with by way of a cosy little chat.
He apologised for the first and deleted the latter. He got his season ticket at the meeting without the order being issued.
There are always two sides to an argument but abusing people on this site does not help anybody.
This extends to jokes and sarcasm at Katrien Meire's expense.
A cartoon of a woman which, when looked at from a particular angle spelled the word LIAR, was removed by Parkes.
That is the crass level of this woman's thinking and her attempt to glorify Meire's every move. The underlying theme is that Meire and the SMT are in charge and therefore they know best and are being unfairly criticised.
Many will know that she called the comments in the Cheltenham programme disgusting which was a total over-reaction. The woman is in absolute thrall of Katrien Meire and it is embarrassing to witness a grown adult adopt such a child-like admiration which blinkers her and renders her incapable of independent thought.
Normally in that meeting the person involved had done something far more worthy of a discussion, an abc for saying bad things on social media come on this is the biggest over reaction by the club and they chose who they delivered it too carefully, there are many who have typed worse and requested to do worse who they would not call in to this meeting as those people would not accept anyone talking to them about what can be said against these cnuts, it's an attempt to bully manipulate and drive home a message that will curtail those normally passive fans who are turning
And Sue parkes I have never said nothing about you before but you can fuck right off with your bullshit patronising ways,
The guy admitted he was wrong and got his season ticket.
Personal abuse is not tolerated on any website.
Well written article on the huge PR gaffe & ridiculous ABC letter.
What a load of nonsense, football is full of foul and abusive language, it's a passion not a sterile business, if the club was to pursue every person who said something that could constitute foul and abusive language they would have to employ a full time shit cnut letter writer and toss pot to hold the meeting,
As for personal abuse on social media so what put your above the parapet you are going to be a target, it's bullshit how many of those who made a move towards the directors box last season did so without using F an a language, how many who stood outside abd on the pitch did so without swearing
The club's attempt to control and punish has resulted in more anger and disgust from fans
The blokes tweets were checked by talk sport his language was industrial and fair play to him
All rather sad, but clearly a page started by, or certainly with the blessing of, Meire and her ilk.
In terms of the facts, there was a disparity between what the club said and what Quentin said. Quentin asked that the meeting be recorded but the representatives of the club refused, so in the absence of evidence there are indeed two sides to this argument. My understanding is that he was recorded at Bury after the letter had been posted, I have not seen what was written on social media and I fully accept it was probably nasty stuff.
The letter still remains about what might be posted in the future on social media if a season ticket is released. Now this kind of gagging order could apply to a lot of people with regard to their future behaviour on social media, it could apply to every season ticket holder couldn't it?
Which brings me back to my second point about why this individual was singled out for the original letter. In what sense might his near the knuckle writings be worse than the near the knuckle writing of many other presently angry Charlton fans?
Either there was some kind of thought process or analysis why Quentin's stuff was so extreme, or he might have been, as he suggested, an easy target. His interview on Talksport is a side of the argument too.
It's quite ridiculous to pretend the club has acted sensibly and reasonably against such overwhelming criticism from neutral third parties.
Let's also not pretend that any media outlet give a shit about what happens at the club. All of this makes good copy for them. Basically anything that gets retweeted a couple of thousand times can make national news.
This isn't to defend the club, I think they dealt with it poorly in regards to that letter, I just don't think you can point to what is in the news as to a justification of what you believe.
It was easy as fuck to find him when this news broke. If you're doubting him then shame on you.
I checked when the news broke. A trusted member of CharltonLife and the club mentioned his name on Twitter.
If you're prepared to trust the club over a volunteer, and someone even CAST will represent, then shame on you.
Mods and Admins: if this crosses the line I understand, but remove the name rather than the post please?