Why Is It So Nasty?

[buddiecat]

On this forum I tend to express my opinion, or agree with others. If their is a saints fan opinion I disagree with I may well offer my counter view, but I don't attack them (perhaps unless they are hell bent on making it personal), when it's happened to me I usually choose to ignore them if it persists.

Today and with the reviews of last night there is a real wave of personal attacks taking place that are putting saints fan against saints fan. Evidence what was said about Smisa last night, a group set up to protect our club, get involeved with youth developmnet and the community.

I challenge many points/proposals put forward by 10000 hours, but I don't result to personal attacks against fellow saints fans.

So why is it so nasty in here now?

well to answer your question - it's what they do, those being nasty are displaying their incapability to debate matters without resorting to personal attacks, smisa attacked by pro cic people, sid attacked for posting a view which unusually didn't contain references to people being nobs or scumbags etc, (well done sid) and all on a thread about "why be nasty" if the cic bid goes through i hope they stick to their own forum, i would get a bit annoyed at all their in-fighting

[Guest somner9]

well to answer your question - it's what they do, those being nasty are displaying their incapability to debate matters without resorting to personal attacks, smisa attacked by pro cic people, sid attacked for posting a view which unusually didn't contain references to people being nobs or scumbags etc, (well done sid) and all on a thread about "why be nasty" if the cic bid goes through i hope they stick to their own forum, i would get a bit annoyed at all their in-fighting

And there I think you have hit the nail on the head!!!

We don't have a fans forum to debate this proposal, the official site closed down the debate, this site is So-ooooo 70's russia it defies belief. " The Communist Party (10000 hours) have entire threads given to them by a party political forum team. Don't get me wrong its up to all to make their minds up, be we on this site are being treated like saps. "Support 10000 Hours or we wil DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Please.... you think the rank and file will continually swallow the brown smelly stuff???

We're StMirren till we die........ we aint never been 10000 hours for f**kology

Edit: Above post compiled after the requisite tipping point for alcohol had been reached. Apologies to anyone thus offended by it's content, I'll leave it here to remind me to stay away from the laptop post bevy!

Edited June 11, 2012 by somner9

[ktf]

And there I think you have hit the nail on the head!!!

We don't have a fans forum to debate this proposal, the official site closed down the debate, this site is So-ooooo 70's russia it defies belief. " The Communist Party (10000 hours) have entire threads given to them by a party political forum team. Don't get me wrong its up to all to make their minds up, be we on this site are being treated like saps. "Support 10000 Hours or we wil DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Please.... you think the rank and file will continually swallow the brown smelly stuff???

We're StMirren till we die........ we aint never been 10000 hours for f**kology

Another day, another bandwagon...

[div]

And there I think you have hit the nail on the head!!!

We don't have a fans forum to debate this proposal, the official site closed down the debate, this site is So-ooooo 70's russia it defies belief. " The Communist Party (10000 hours) have entire threads given to them by a party political forum team. Don't get me wrong its up to all to make their minds up, be we on this site are being treated like saps. "Support 10000 Hours or we wil DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Please.... you think the rank and file will continually swallow the brown smelly stuff???

We're StMirren till we die........ we aint never been 10000 hours for f**kology

I personally support and believe in the bid and have never changed or hidden that opinion.

Similarly I have never closed, edited, moved or removed a single post by anyone who is "anti" the 10000Hours bid.

I have also offered to publish an "anti" article on the homepage if anyone wants to write one.

To suggest this forum is not providing an independent platform for discussing the bid is both insulting and completely disrespectful.

[buddiecat]

Another day, another bandwagon...

another not adding anything but ridicule

[ktf]

another not adding anything but ridicule

He invites it. He has offered nothing constructive. He has accepted no answers given to him. He has taken offence at the smallest things. When I have added constructive comments to his thread they are either completely ignored, purposefully twisted or half a sentence is highlighted and argued.

When he has run out of negative things to say, he jumps on another bandwagon. He used to offer good counter-debate to this topic but sadly that had gone. Is this what the "anti" brigade are reduce to, taking offence at what annoymous Internet aliases post on a football forum?

I have added plenty, both positive and critical to this debate - so your accusation is entirely false. However on a thread that is all about someone imagninery being pretend offended by other fake people, I will offer very little in the way of serious comment.

[Dibbles old paperboy]

I find it deeply sad that 10000 hours found it necessary to "Come Armed" to deal with Smisa last night. Do they not appreciate that Smisa are a group of saints fans? Why weren't 10000 hours "Armed" to engage and get smisa and saints fans onside rather than pitting them against each other?

Were you at the game caller?

My guess is that given the meeting was always going to have a Q&A element to it that RA was expecting a question about where things were with SMISA and why there were stories of a fall out or SMISA pulling out their money etc. Perhaps he brought bits of paper with him, like the SMISA constitution so that when he answered the question he could quote stuff verbatim rather than answering off the top of his head and possibly misquoting folks?

RA was at pains to point out that even though people laughed when he said that SMISA had the same clauses in their constitution which they were querying in the CIC's constitution that he wasn't out to humiliate SMISA and thought they were right to question or police the CIC bid and follow their own rules about spending their money... how this adds up RA attacking SMISA is beyond me!

[Dibbles old paperboy]

Replying to Somner9's original question, it's so nasty because that's what St.Mirren fans have always done best. Carp at the team, carp at the management and then carp at one another. But even by our standards, I've found a lot of the content of this thread pretty depressing. We're at a pivotal point for the club's future and it's really disappointing to hear so much negativity.

I regard myself as reasonably bright but I've struggled to get my head round exactly what the CIC in its original form was really trying to achieve. Partly that was because the 10,000 hours campaign has to be the most amateurish I have ever witnessed. This has been pointed out before so no point in going over it again. I have no doubt,however, that they were and still are well intentioned and have the best interests of St.Mirren at heart. We know though that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

A year or two ago if I had been asked if fan ownership was a good thing I would have had quite a few doubts and I still have some. The debacle up the road has changed that and if fan ownership really can eradicate the likes of capture by a Newco Rangers or any other crowd of assholes, we should go for it.

What we all want is a successful and financially sound St.Mirren. Any investment involves an element of risk and hopefully no one is going to invest more than they can afford to lose. This could well be the last chance of achieving fan ownership.

A lot has been made of one man one vote. OK for politics but I'm not convinced it's absolutely essential for a football team. Big committees quite often achieve hee haw and have a succession of greetin' meetins. I worry too that some guys still think they'll get picking the team. I've got a nightmare vision of 750 guys picking the team for the first game of the season. Can you imagine it? The vote for centre half. Cheesy 340, McGregor 360, Bobby Reid 25, Jackie McGugan 22, Willie Telfer 3. Trouble was in my nightmare, I was one of the guys that voted for big Wullie Telfer!

It's make your mind up time big style now. There are difficulties out there but I believe the risks are worthwhile. Some of the alternatives might be the death knell of our beloved St.Mirren.

The St Mirren board will still run SMFC as they do now, and appoint a manager who picks the team... the CIC will be the majority shareholders and represent at least 52% of the board. If fans feel strongly about an issue like newco Rangers it is the kind of issue where the CIC would meet and give fans the facts and pros and cons, the fans then vote and the CIC go back to the SMFC board meeting and say how the vote went and give direction to the board and when reps from the SMFC board meet the SPL committees will cast SMFC vote taking account of how the fans have voted.

[Stuart Dickson]

I thought the perk was that you were going to have a say in running the club - it absolutely shouldn't be anything that costs the club money.

Have you ever been a member of a club where all you get for your subscription is the chance to vote for your committee? Would you join one?

As I said it doesn't need to cost the club money and the perks could quite easily be used to generate EXTRA income rather than depleting it. The Well Society are offering discounts on season tickets in return for your membership, but if you look at Clyde they are simply offering deals from their corporate membership at discounted prices.

[St. Sid]

Agreed! Which was the reason for my social funder/community questions on Thurs eve. The answers for which still weren't 100% clear except to say that I think the best solution to ensuring that the community element is a success (which is to the benefit of the club and the deal as a whole) is to have someone on the CiC board who has the community stuff at heart. Preferably a bud too!

You are supposed to accompany such posts with a pic of yourself kissing babies. Although that all went wrong in the Bongkok FC CIC elections for Gary Glitter.

This is the sort of stuff that I would like to see 10000 Hours tackling at this point rather than the fielding questions / trashing dafties like somner9. I thought the response to your question - very well constructed and respectful & clearly from a CIC supporter - ,like most questions on the night never really got to the nub of it in terms of the response. It was very much a response relating to the finding dependencies rather than - here's how the community aspect is going to work. The fact that StuDick had to ask about how the direct debit mandates works for community orgs was a key indicator of the community involvement now.

For me personally, I would like a picture painted in terms of how this will all work - not a photoshop effort just in case the geeks get a chubby one - but the vision of what St Mirren will look like in a few years time. This would be far more effective than some shite about whatever you want it to be. I want to hear about the initiatives, the one town- one club stuff. That has all been parked and replaced with complexity, clubs, scare stories. I haven't seen a single positive message about the CIC within the last twelve months. The "opportunity" appears to have been replaced by "its the only option left open".

[Stuart Dickson]

You are supposed to accompany such posts with a pic of yourself kissing babies. Although that all went wrong in the Bongkok FC CIC elections for Gary Glitter.

This is the sort of stuff that I would like to see 10000 Hours tackling at this point rather than the fielding questions / trashing dafties like somner9. I thought the response to your question - very well constructed and respectful & clearly from a CIC supporter - ,like most questions on the night never really got to the nub of it in terms of the response. It was very much a response relating to the finding dependencies rather than - here's how the community aspect is going to work. The fact that StuDick had to ask about how the direct debit mandates works for community orgs was a key indicator of the community involvement now.

For me personally, I would like a picture painted in terms of how this will all work - not a photoshop effort just in case the geeks get a chubby one - but the vision of what St Mirren will look like in a few years time. This would be far more effective than some shite about whatever you want it to be. I want to hear about the initiatives, the one town- one club stuff. That has all been parked and replaced with complexity, clubs, scare stories. I haven't seen a single positive message about the CIC within the last twelve months. The "opportunity" appears to have been replaced by "its the only option left open".

Sid, I've always said that the St Mirren support were too thick to understand the full potential of what is on offer and I think it's the early doors response to the idea 10000hours may use some St Mirren resources to help the community in return for an SROI and for endearing themselves more to the community that may have switched off discussion on the matter.

If you'll remember going back months ago I suggested that one of the ways in which St Mirren could work with community football clubs in the area was to grant them the occasional one off opportunity to use the 3g pitch at Ralston. I suggested that after a bad winter if a juvenile club were struggling to catch up on league fixtures they should be able to apply to St Mirren to play a one off midweek game under the floodlights - for a small fee - but perhaps at the expense of one training night for one of the pro youth teams. I went on to outline how that partnership would bring mutual benefits showing how you could increase shirt sales and sales of equipment and merchandising and how you could use those community clubs to boost the average gate at Greenhill Road but the idea was rubbished.....by you amongst others. The main crux of the argument against was that any involvement in the community should not disadvantage St Mirren FC in any way.

Last night you talked about member perks for individual members and suggested a £20 discount on season ticket sales. At Motherwell they are doing exactly that kind of thing but look at the response that got from Buddiecat and from Bud The Baker. Given that I can completely understand why REA is giving it a wide berth.

Just to add though I spoke to colleagues of mine from Renfrew Victoria, Mossvale and St James, and from Barrhead Youth Club over the last couple of weeks and all of them have confirmed that their impression of St Mirren is that they are the competition in the area for funding and grants, that the youth development at the club has been all about taking players, sponsorship and funding without giving anything back, and that they see the growth of community initiatives at Greenhill Road as a threat to their existence rather than as a resource to tap into. I think that is a huge shame and it's something that really needs reversing.

[Guest somner9]

I personally support and believe in the bid and have never changed or hidden that opinion.

Similarly I have never closed, edited, moved or removed a single post by anyone who is "anti" the 10000Hours bid.

I have also offered to publish an "anti" article on the homepage if anyone wants to write one.

To suggest this forum is not providing an independent platform for discussing the bid is both insulting and completely disrespectful.

see my edited offending post

[div]

see my edited offending post

Hmm, apology accepted.

However it is rather ironic that you should make that post in this particular thread. Seems like you have answered your own question.

[Jeremiah Cole]

He invites it. He has offered nothing constructive. He has accepted no answers given to him.

He has taken offence at the smallest things. When I have added constructive comments to his thread they are either completely ignored, purposefully twisted or half a sentence is highlighted and argued.

When he has run out of negative things to say, he jumps on another bandwagon. He used to offer good counter-debate to this topic but sadly that had gone. Is this what the "anti" brigade are reduce to, taking offence at what annoymous Internet aliases post on a football forum?

I have added plenty, both positive and critical to this debate - so your accusation is entirely false. However on a thread that is all about someone imagninery being pretend offended by other fake people, I will offer very little in the way of serious comment.

On the contrary, IMO Somner9's posts have been great.

And he is correct that the pro CIC clique end up hurling abuse at anyone whose opinion differs.

Edited June 11, 2012 by Jeremiah Cole

[Bud the Baker]

Have you ever been a member of a club where all you get for your subscription is the chance to vote for your committee? Would you join one?

As I said it doesn't need to cost the club money and the perks could quite easily be used to generate EXTRA income rather than depleting it. The Well Society are offering discounts on season tickets in return for your membership, but if you look at Clyde they are simply offering deals from their corporate membership at discounted prices.

I have no objection to the CIC offering discounts to members so long as it doesn't cost the club money, something we seem to agree on.

[Guest somner9]

Hmm, apology accepted.

However it is rather ironic that you should make that post in this particular thread. Seems like you have answered your own question.

I do, do irony and laundry

having read it (post) several times today I don't really know what it means. I even came over all sex pistols in it.

However If any young person learns the danger of attempting to post whilst under the influence of several large peroni's then my work here is done

[Tennant's Lager]

Were you at the game caller?

My guess is that given the meeting was always going to have a Q&A element to it that RA was expecting a question about where things were with SMISA and why there were stories of a fall out or SMISA pulling out their money etc. Perhaps he brought bits of paper with him, like the SMISA constitution so that when he answered the question he could quote stuff verbatim rather than answering off the top of his head and possibly misquoting folks?

RA was at pains to point out that even though people laughed when he said that SMISA had the same clauses in their constitution which they were querying in the CIC's constitution that he wasn't out to humiliate SMISA and thought they were right to question or police the CIC bid and follow their own rules about spending their money... how this adds up RA attacking SMISA is beyond me!

I was at the game, caller.

Now, on the SMiSA thing lets be very clear. I made the decision to bring up the point about the constitution myself, not with any coercing from the rest of the SMiSA committee. I did this because I felt a duty to do so, given that the two best qualified people on that to analyse it (Wullie Bell & Alistair Colquhoun) could not be present at the meeting as said earlier, and also as an individual, concerned quite honestly that if I sign up (again) to 10k Hours that at some point in the future, the directors of the CIC (with no involvement from the wider membership) could change the minimum for Direct Debits from £10 p/m to considerably more than this, as outlined by the analysis of said constitution by SMiSA in their statement. Personally I thought this was the most important thing to raise, and with Richard saying anything not presented in the meeting at the start could be changed I wanted to know if this extended to constitution clauses that people may be concerned about.

Now Richard's response made it clear that a similar/identical clause is in SMiSA's constitution. However, I have since had a conversation with Wullie Bell (the trust's secretary) and it seems that it is not exactly as cut-and-dried as Richard made out at the meeting. The clause in SMiSA's constitution is, as I understand it, in a context that its committee cannot take any significant decision without input from the membership. They certainly could not do so with regard to changing the monthly sub amount without a members vote. I did say at the meeting, that there was precedent for exactly this - namely that when the subs were reduced from £10 p/m to £2 p/m it was carried through by postal member vote after being recommended by the committee.

That said I freely admit that I was not aware of this fact re the context and that it wasn't just a decision to allow the members a vote, rather than absolutely required. It could be said that Richard played a fly one with that, a subtlety that I for one was certainly unaware of. It's a shame Wullie & Alistair weren't able to attend the meeting or the facts would have been made clear at the time.

As I've said all along, my intention is simply to ensure that the truth outs. If I didn't do a great job on that then I can only apologise and accept I wasn't able to do so and that there are others better qualified. Personally I'd say it would be going to far to say Richard was out to humiliate SMiSA (and if anyone asks, no I didn't feel it either). That said, he likely has gotten away with an argument that he probably wouldn't have had Wullie & Alistair been present last week.

I will say however that at the end of the meeting, Chris Stewart came and talked to me about the constitution and he said there were a number of things within SMiSA's that 10k Hours may look to adopt in theirs as part of a redraft, and he took a copy of their statement re the constitution that I had printed off. I'm therefore hopeful that at least some of the concerns can and will be addressed in the future.

As far as SMiSA's future involvement (or lack thereof) is concerned - they have made it clear when issuing their statement of withdrawl of 'in principle' support, that they would review the situation if the information they need to go to the members is made available. There's clear due process for all of that so it would take some time for them to get back to the position with the CIC they were in, if they so wished.

As for my own decision on 10k Hours - in all honesty I'm considering it still as regards signing up again. If anyone asks me I'd encourage them to make up their own mind with all the facts available and make their choice accordingly. Personally I'm concerned that it's being rushed to, and in doing so mistakes can be made. The general principle is great, and that was enough to win my support initially yes. However with all that's happened, is has to be right that everyone takes on all information available and makes their decision on that. Alas, the cold, hard facts of rules & numbers have to add up just as much as this appeals to the heart otherwise it truly would be a no-brainer.

I am looking forward to it being concluded though, whatever happens.

[St. Sid]

Good post TL.....I think there was a wee bit too much focus on the constitution points. SMiSA raised a lot more posts than that at the previous meeting; however they didn't really get heard as the meeting was empty that time around. Some of it was a bit laboured at that meeting; however it certainly got me thinking. With the deadline the opportunity to revisit that is effectively gone - however as you say SMiSA are not walking away from discussions - my impression is the opposite. Hopefully no doors will be closed should 10000 Hours get the necessary numbers. I hope it goes ahead and that 10000 Hours really start to step up on consultation with fans with all the confidentiality bollox over and done with.

[santaponsasaint]

I was at the game, caller.

Now, on the SMiSA thing lets be very clear. I made the decision to bring up the point about the constitution myself, not with any coercing from the rest of the SMiSA committee. I did this because I felt a duty to do so, given that the two best qualified people on that to analyse it (Wullie Bell & Alistair Colquhoun) could not be present at the meeting as said earlier, and also as an individual, concerned quite honestly that if I sign up (again) to 10k Hours that at some point in the future, the directors of the CIC (with no involvement from the wider membership) could change the minimum for Direct Debits from £10 p/m to considerably more than this, as outlined by the analysis of said constitution by SMiSA in their statement. Personally I thought this was the most important thing to raise, and with Richard saying anything not presented in the meeting at the start could be changed I wanted to know if this extended to constitution clauses that people may be concerned about.

Now Richard's response made it clear that a similar/identical clause is in SMiSA's constitution. However, I have since had a conversation with Wullie Bell (the trust's secretary) and it seems that it is not exactly as cut-and-dried as Richard made out at the meeting. The clause in SMiSA's constitution is, as I understand it, in a context that its committee cannot take any significant decision without input from the membership. They certainly could not do so with regard to changing the monthly sub amount without a members vote. I did say at the meeting, that there was precedent for exactly this - namely that when the subs were reduced from £10 p/m to £2 p/m it was carried through by postal member vote after being recommended by the committee.

That said I freely admit that I was not aware of this fact re the context and that it wasn't just a decision to allow the members a vote, rather than absolutely required. It could be said that Richard played a fly one with that, a subtlety that I for one was certainly unaware of. It's a shame Wullie & Alistair weren't able to attend the meeting or the facts would have been made clear at the time.

As I've said all along, my intention is simply to ensure that the truth outs. If I didn't do a great job on that then I can only apologise and accept I wasn't able to do so and that there are others better qualified. Personally I'd say it would be going to far to say Richard was out to humiliate SMiSA (and if anyone asks, no I didn't feel it either). That said, he likely has gotten away with an argument that he probably wouldn't have had Wullie & Alistair been present last week.

I will say however that at the end of the meeting, Chris Stewart came and talked to me about the constitution and he said there were a number of things within SMiSA's that 10k Hours may look to adopt in theirs as part of a redraft, and he took a copy of their statement re the constitution that I had printed off. I'm therefore hopeful that at least some of the concerns can and will be addressed in the future.

As far as SMiSA's future involvement (or lack thereof) is concerned - they have made it clear when issuing their statement of withdrawl of 'in principle' support, that they would review the situation if the information they need to go to the members is made available. There's clear due process for all of that so it would take some time for them to get back to the position with the CIC they were in, if they so wished.

As for my own decision on 10k Hours - in all honesty I'm considering it still as regards signing up again. If anyone asks me I'd encourage them to make up their own mind with all the facts available and make their choice accordingly. Personally I'm concerned that it's being rushed to, and in doing so mistakes can be made. The general principle is great, and that was enough to win my support initially yes. However with all that's happened, is has to be right that everyone takes on all information available and makes their decision on that. Alas, the cold, hard facts of rules & numbers have to add up just as much as this appeals to the heart otherwise it truly would be a no-brainer.

I am looking forward to it being concluded though, whatever happens.

David, In regards to whether Smisa join our not, no one cares, it will go thru hopefully with or without Smisa, You were using smisa as stick to beat RA with and when he defended his position your now your up on high horse, your not that important in the great scheme of things, Either join or don't its very simple, you had the right to ask the question or any other question, now its been answered you still want to make a issue out of it, Why should RA consult smisa before anyone else, You don't represent the majority of fans only a small number, and you've all got the hump cos RA has beat to the punch, live with it, join or don't your call, Edited June 11, 2012 by santaponsasaint

[Isle Of Bute Saint]

I just don't get it I really don't. The usual suspects are arguing over hell I don't know to be honest. SMISA is arguing over the dots and nots. Yet here we have a chance to own the club with a say where safe guards are as water tight as they can be. There will be not one person in charge making decisions , decisions will be put to the vote by members.

Then we have some fans who see Richard as an outsider. The whole thing is bizarre but also goes some way to expelling what a mad planet we live in.

[David Mc]

That's a big generalisation you make. I'm in SMISA and have signed up to the CIC. I can afford £10 a month and the relatively small gamble. However, I agree with the SMISA committee that given the lump of cash they have that every care must be taken before committing. I am pretty sure there are other SMISA supporters in the same boat. No point in stirring up divisions where there aren't necessarily any.

[Tennant's Lager]

David, In regards to whether Smisa join our not, no one cares. it will go thru hopefully with or without Smisa,

Fine with me if it does.

You were using smisa as stick to beat RA with and when he defended his position your now your up on high horse, your not that important in the great scheme of things,

I don't claim to be that important but to say I was using SMiSA as a stick to beat RA is frankly complete garbage when I was seeking answers to questions that I felt should be asked. I was happy RA had answers to them at the time.

Either join or don't its very simple, you had the right to ask the question or any other question, now its been answered you still want to make a issue out of it,

Well sorry for thinking that more information has come to light, information that I happened to think people may like to know given the repeated comments about SMiSA on this forum.

Why should RA consult smisa before anyone else, You don't represent the majority of fans only a small number, and you've all got the hump cos RA has beat to the punch, live with it, join or don't your call,

Again, complete tripe. There are a number of differing opinions within even the committee of SMiSA, let alone the wider membership. I would say I am more in favour of 10k Hours than some, less than others for all that matters.

As for consulting SMiSA, when the organisation has been asked to put in £50k of money raised by supporter subscriptions I don't think it's asking too much for the membership to be given the info necessary to make a decision. To claim otherwise is ludicrous quite honestly.

Oh and as for your last comment, I really couldn't care less if we have fan ownership of the club if it is under the auspices of 10k Hours, SMiSA or the Incorporated Intergalactic Federation of Associated St Mirren Supporters. The acid test is whether is is democratic, fit for purpose & workable.

[santaponsasaint]

Fine with me if it does.

I don't claim to be that important but to say I was using SMiSA as a stick to beat RA is frankly complete garbage when I was seeking answers to questions that I felt should be asked. I was happy RA had answers to them at the time.

Well sorry for thinking that more information has come to light, information that I happened to think people may like to know given the repeated comments about SMiSA on this forum.

Again, complete tripe. There are a number of differing opinions within even the committee of SMiSA, let alone the wider membership. I would say I am more in favour of 10k Hours than some, less than others for all that matters.

As for consulting SMiSA, when the organisation has been asked to put in £50k of money raised by supporter subscriptions I don't think it's asking too much for the membership to be given the info necessary to make a decision. To claim otherwise is ludicrous quite honestly.

Oh and as for your last comment, I really couldn't care less if we have fan ownership of the club if it is under the auspices of 10k Hours, SMiSA or the Incorporated Intergalactic Federation of Associated St Mirren Supporters. The acid test is whether is is democratic, fit for purpose & workable.

Not much of st.mirren fan are you keep ur 50k if its that important to you, im sure it will still go thru, and the all mighty smisa will be sitting in the sidelines, best place for them IMO Edited June 11, 2012 by santaponsasaint

[Isle Of Bute Saint]

That's a big generalisation you make. I'm in SMISA and have signed up to the CIC. I can afford £10 a month and the relatively small gamble. However, I agree with the SMISA committee that given the lump of cash they have that every care must be taken before committing. I am pretty sure there are other SMISA supporters in the same boat. No point in stirring up divisions where there aren't necessarily any.

It's an over view of what's actually going on. Everyone makes their own mind up what way they want the club to go which I have no problem with one way or the other.

[billyg]

SMISA have made some very valid points , some I agree with some I don't , but they have helped me make my mind up , I won't be signing up to the CIC. There are just too many things which don't add up IMO. REA , to me , just seems to be the wrong type of person to convince me and others that he is the real deal , one things for sure , he's not a football man !