Empowering the SMISA Membership to begin building for the future now.

[bazil85]

48 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:

I'd say the hand driers was a fan benefit with the academy goals being a club benefit.

Not used the toilets so don't know if the hand driers have been installed. Have they?

All one IMO, it’s money to the club that they can use for things they would or would not buy, which saves them money if they would and improves facilities if they wouldn’t. 

Again you could make an opposing argument on the save the pot. One is save for a future spend one is save to the end so can we really justify adding them together?

I think the bottom line is, it would be a very big stretch to democratically justify an option passing that finished 4th out of 5. Plenty of other ways that would be fairer including representing the top two for a second vote. 

I see the reasoning for why you’ve presented it but still feel it wouldn’t be fair/ moot because club benefits will likely win anyway if history is anything to go by. 

[Kombibuddie]

3 hours ago, bazil85 said:

Would you still love it if they combined club benefit votes together as well as save the pot benefits? 

if it came 2nd to save. absolutely

[bazil85]

23 minutes ago, Kombibuddie said:

if it came 2nd to save. absolutely

I wouldn’t hold your breath 

[oaksoft]

4 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:

Are you like myself don't know if the club has installed new hand driers, or you know they didn't so there was no cash payout by club?

So they were only getting bought for the benefit of the fans if the SMISA QV paid for them directly rather than indirectly through the club.

I think you are splitting hairs here.

Providing hand driers (whether hypothetical or not) would be a benefit to the club (because it is their responsibility to provide these facilities). Obviously fans benefit as well but the club should be making the provision. We don't bring our own toilet bowls, toilet paper, soap and bins for example for the same reason. If smisa step in then this is a benefit to the club in the form of zero outlay.

On this instance baz is right to lump it in as a club thing.

[oaksoft]

9 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:

 

 

So have they bought them, if not I was right.

 

To quote Hugh Grant in Bridget Jones Diary, "I couldn't give a f**k Jones". 😀

[bazil85]

57 minutes ago, cockles1987 said:

Are you like myself don't know if the club has installed new hand driers, or you know they didn't so there was no cash payout by club?

So they were only getting bought for the benefit of the fans if the SMISA QV paid for them directly rather than indirectly through the club.

Like you I have no idea, as per my previous point. It either boosts the club (facilities or otherwise) or saves the club money. They’ll always get my vote and there seems to be a majority of voting members that are the same.

I’m not saying it should happen, I’m simply saying there is the same argument you’re making for the two save options 

there is still the same justification in putting two different options together as there is in putting two other different options together. People that vote for saving for a future option, are not voting to keep the money until the end of BTB. 

[Kombibuddie]

 

 

 

Like you I have no idea,

 

I agree with Bazil 🤣🤣🤣