Jump to content

Lord Pityme

Kibble/SMiSA Partnership Proposal (Merged)

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:
10 minutes ago, bazil85 said:
Not my memory of it at all. Was the first time I really took notice of SMFC related social media and was massively against any vote that would allow the new club in anywhere but the bottom of Scottish football (Personally didn’t think they should even get in there). I remember it as a near consensus. 
Not sure what the benefit is in pulling up old points though. 

Were you at the "Armageddon" meeting?

It was a long-time ago, I think I was though. Like I say, don’t think this subject coming back up is relevant. 
 

my memory is fundamentally a majority of St Mirren fans Discussing the subject being completely against them being voted in. I think that’s backed up by SG voting in the manner he did. If that was his view and the majority St Mirren view, why did he change it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

I have to say I'm disappointed in the Smisa committee for sending out that email today titled a "Reminder to Vote". A reminder should be just that, a nudge to the recipient in case they have forgotten about the vote. Nothing more than that. Instead Smisa have used this email as another opportunity to push their case for a Yes vote. That's not a "reminder" it is blatant propaganda aimed at influencing the voter. We've already seen the original email pushing for members' support for the proposal, we've had the opportunity to attend the Q&A, and the video of that Q&A is out on general release. Yet still the "reminder" isn't even-handed. Poor show IMO. Fear that the proposal might fail ? 

And I'm wondering what exactly is the criteria that entitles people to cast a vote here. Do you have to be an active member of (contributor to) BtB or is just being a Smisa member enough to qualify ? I am in the latter category (non-contributor) yet I am being invited to vote. Why should I have the same voting rights as those who are shelling out their hard-earned £££ every month ? I have presumed that this is an administrative error and I won't be voting as I feel unqualified to cast a vote. Certainly morally unqualified.

The vote is open to all registered members of SMISA. If you think that you are morally unqualified to vote why are you getting so het up about the reminder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, smcc said:

The vote is open to all registered members of SMISA. If you think that you are morally unqualified to vote why are you getting so het up about the reminder?

Thanks for the clarification on the voting issue.

As for your question, even though I have chosen not to vote (for reasons stated above) I realise that the outcome of the vote will affect all St Mirren supporters (ie me). Therefore I see it as important that voters make their choice free from propaganda disguised as a reminder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have to say I'm disappointed in the Smisa committee for sending out that email today titled a "Reminder to Vote". A reminder should be just that, a nudge to the recipient in case they have forgotten about the vote. Nothing more than that. Instead Smisa have used this email as another opportunity to push their case for a Yes vote. That's not a "reminder" it is blatant propaganda aimed at influencing the voter. We've already seen the original email pushing for members' support for the proposal, we've had the opportunity to attend the Q&A, and the video of that Q&A is out on general release. Yet still the "reminder" isn't even-handed. Poor show IMO. Fear that the proposal might fail ? 
And I'm wondering what exactly is the criteria that entitles people to cast a vote here. Do you have to be an active member of (contributor to) BtB or is just being a Smisa member enough to qualify ? I am in the latter category (non-contributor) yet I am being invited to vote. Why should I have the same voting rights as those who are shelling out their hard-earned £££ every month ? I have presumed that this is an administrative error and I won't be voting as I feel unqualified to cast a vote. Certainly morally unqualified.
I got the reminder.

Still waiting on a reply to the questions I submitted following the first invitation to vote.

Wouldn't it be funny if my reply came in just before the deadline giving me enough time to vote but after most votes have been cast and further discussion in public is pointless?

Cynical? Moi?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Being positive doesn’t mean you’ll always agree with everything that happens. The BOD made a mistake in hiring Stubbs last season & in turn he made a mistake in multiple signings. I aired my frustration, there was no ‘attacking’ 

 

As I said, you were negative towards the manager, the players and the club.

Other forum members have the right to not agree with everything as well!

As for Stubbs, it was a mistake in your opinion.

The reality is that he had a more successful League Cup campaign than either Jack Ross or Jim Goodwin managed.

He was sacked after 4 league games, 1 of which he won and 2 of which were away to Rangers and Hearts

In effect, he was sacked on the basis of 1 game - a defeat to Livingston - as they were assumed to be cannon fodder. How wrong was that assumption!

That highlights that you are a negative person in the extreme! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I got the reminder.

Still waiting on a reply to the questions I submitted following the first invitation to vote.

Wouldn't it be funny if my reply came in just before the deadline giving me enough time to vote but after most votes have been cast and further discussion in public is pointless?

Cynical? Moi?

Have you chased them up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have to say I'm disappointed in the Smisa committee for sending out that email today titled a "Reminder to Vote". A reminder should be just that, a nudge to the recipient in case they have forgotten about the vote. Nothing more than that. Instead Smisa have used this email as another opportunity to push their case for a Yes vote. That's not a "reminder" it is blatant propaganda aimed at influencing the voter. We've already seen the original email pushing for members' support for the proposal, we've had the opportunity to attend the Q&A, and the video of that Q&A is out on general release. Yet still the "reminder" isn't even-handed. Poor show IMO. Fear that the proposal might fail ? 
And I'm wondering what exactly is the criteria that entitles people to cast a vote here. Do you have to be an active member of (contributor to) BtB or is just being a Smisa member enough to qualify ? I am in the latter category (non-contributor) yet I am being invited to vote. Why should I have the same voting rights as those who are shelling out their hard-earned £££ every month ? I have presumed that this is an administrative error and I won't be voting as I feel unqualified to cast a vote. Certainly morally unqualified.
They've seen the vote split so far, and ad predicted are shutting themselves it's not going to send us all to the Kibble. Lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Hiram Abiff said:

As I said, you were negative towards the manager, the players and the club.

Other forum members have the right to not agree with everything as well!

As for Stubbs, it was a mistake in your opinion.

The reality is that he had a more successful League Cup campaign than either Jack Ross or Jim Goodwin managed.

He was sacked after 4 league games, 1 of which he won and 2 of which were away to Rangers and Hearts

In effect, he was sacked on the basis of 1 game - a defeat to Livingston - as they were assumed to be cannon fodder. How wrong was that assumption!

That highlights that you are a negative person in the extreme! 

Sure was 

never claimed they do. 


sure was 

wasn’t the reason I thought he should get sacked, I think most agree it was the right call but you’re right, it’s a matter of opinion. 
 

also wasn’t the reason I wanted him sacked, IMO you’re just looking at situations in isolation. 
 

I disagree, as above you seem to be looking at things in isolation and you’re welcome to that opinion. 
 

no it doesn’t, by your requirements anyone that disagrees with even one decision during their life as a supporter is an ‘extremely negative person’ 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a wee word of caution

all charities are founded with a set of aims and values 

by setting up a close relationship with SMISA kibble will be using the assets of the club in pursuit of theirs

despite repeated attempts at contact, kibble have not responded to my request for a copy of their original trust deed which still governs their operation 

 

if you don’t know their aims then how can you sign up to a partnership with them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am one of the SMISA members who pays their money and takes little other interest in the running of the assoc. However since this is such an important issue I thought I better register and vote . I logged on to the site you vote on. Can I ask that Ms Sturgeon can use a similar site if we have another independence referendum?. Loads of items extolling the virtues of the new deal and only a YES button visible. If you have the temerity to vote NO you have to use a wee drop down box to uncover the NO button. Certainly not an even handed approach. Will there be independent verification of the voting numbers?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am one of the SMISA members who pays their money and takes little other interest in the running of the assoc. However since this is such an important issue I thought I better register and vote . I logged on to the site you vote on. Can I ask that Ms Sturgeon can use a similar site if we have another independence referendum?. Loads of items extolling the virtues of the new deal and only a YES button visible. If you have the temerity to vote NO you have to use a wee drop down box to uncover the NO button. Certainly not an even handed approach. Will there be independent verification of the voting numbers?
 
With a disgraced labour politician on the Kibble bid?
Be lucky if they even bother to check what vote came top.. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lord Pityme said:

Is it?
Continually claiming another person was against giving money to a charity, but never being able to back that up with evidence?
Asking for a friend lol

Late 2018 SMISA vote... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...