The Chad
Well-known member
Pick away.thank you for taking the time to present your thoughts in such a neatly structured format.
You are right that it will make it easier for everyone to dismantle your arguments one bullet point at a time.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Pick away.thank you for taking the time to present your thoughts in such a neatly structured format.
You are right that it will make it easier for everyone to dismantle your arguments one bullet point at a time.
As a forum content creator, you really should expect this level of audience interaction, Chad. Some of us are only here for your plot twists.Well, you've just proven a lot of what I've been saying.
Get on board the company line or get ready to be abused without controls in place.
You and I are friends. I agree with everything you say. At least publicly. I simply facilitate discussion between you and the wider group. I'm trying to help you!Pick away.
I'm not that interesting.As a forum content creator, you really should expect this level of audience interaction, Chad. Some of us are only here for your plot twists.
I know that. (Didn't expect to know so much in one day).You and I are friends. I agree with everything you say. At least publicly. I simply facilitate discussion between you and the wider group. I'm trying to help you!
Actually, it's one position we could have more depth..I think WTs have enough hookers.
Now you know how criminal defense lawyers feel.I'm not that interesting.
But what IS interesting is that it appears to be perfectly acceptable for a large number of people to join in on a mob mentality of 'pick on the weaker number' if the opinion doesn't exactly match the company line.
Call people what you like, if they don't agree with the majority.
In fact, make an open suggestion to ban those posters for having a contrary opinion.
And nobody calls it out.
Are people hoping that the financiers of the club are rubbed out all together?Most of the time I ignore his posts but sometimes you can't help but bite, they are so annoying
What material will he turn to if they are rubbed out that will be interesting.
They get paid.Now you know how criminal defense lawyers feel.
Perhaps I could put it into perspective?I know that. (Didn't expect to know so much in one day).
I try real hard not to tell people they are 'wrong'. I do try to give an alternative view point. I think you get that. Not everyone can see through the mock self-induce rage over things out of their control.
It has to do with concentration of power to unelected individuals.Are people hoping that the financiers of the club are rubbed out all together?
I've actually offered very few viewpoints. Just questions.Perhaps I could put it into perspective?
You're trying to offer an obscure viewpoint to people that have had their club systematically destroyed over a 10 year period. Maybe you're super chilled about everything, but I know you're smart enough to realise that you'd be in the minority.
All this at a time when the latest balls up is not only fresh, but developing and getting more outrageous with every news report.
if you were expecting people to engage in a rational and unemotional way to a contrarian viewpoint, that some may argue was stirring the pot, then perhaps you need to lower your expectations a little.
Sounds almost like what you're asking for is a balanced, even board. One where 2 sides offer similar input & the onus isn't on one side to prop up the other, potentially leading that side to feeling like they probably deserve a bigger say...It has to do with concentration of power to unelected individuals.
It's why all these dramas keep happening.
HBG as an entity isn't really the issue, it's the governance structure that is the issue. If that goes, HBG begins to operate like a normal club with member voting and things change completely. You wouldn't need protests, you'd just cast your member vote at the AGM if you felt strongly one way or another.
The pitchforks are out this time Chad. They're not having it.I've actually offered very few viewpoints. Just questions.
You're right- the 'reports' are outrageous. Almost, some might suggest, inflated beyond any kind of reality.
But that's kind of the point. "Reports". The reaction has been hysterical (not funny) over some 3rd hand 'reports'. And any alternative view is unacceptable.
I am chilled out. Some "Troll-like" version of me (that was a name I missed on my roll call) enjoys trying to get people thinking in a different way. And yeah- some people are probably descended too far into the rainbow coloured mist (I'd say red mist, but want to be more inclusive) to contemplate a different view.
But if that isn't what a forum is about....I'll be damned. If I had known I was signing up for a propaganda machine instead, I'd have lowered my expectations as suggested.
That doesn't change any point made.The pitchforks are out this time Chad. They're not having it.
It'll swing back around....
Nope...I think this is where a lot of the confusion and arguments start.Sounds almost like what you're asking for is a balanced, even board. One where 2 sides offer similar input & the onus isn't on one side to prop up the other, potentially leading that side to feeling like they probably deserve a bigger say...
If ONLY someone had suggested as much previously.
Those debenture holders get 1 seat on the board.Nope...I think this is where a lot of the confusion and arguments start.
The board of the wests tigers is not what people are talking about fundamentally, although it is ultimately affected.
It is 20 unelected debenture holders at HBG.
it's not more complicated than that.
If people could vote for their chosen Wests Ashfield candidates each year to make up the owners board, like every other club, they'd be happy.
Bad management can be punished and good management rewarded.
Yes thats True, but at any moment the board of Wests Ashfield can dismiss the board of Wests Tigers as they just did. So regardless of what it's 27000 members think, only 5 debenture holders that sit on the Wests Ashfield board get a say in how Wests Tigers is run even if it is against the wishes of it's members and the community which they are obligated to serve.Those debenture holders get 1 seat on the board.
They also finance both the Wests side of the JV & the Balmain juniors.
20 holders could be 50,000. It's still only 1 seat. If we got bought out by Laundy or whoever, they'd have a seat too. Pretty sure Nick Politis has a seat at the Roosters.
What you're arguing is the make-up of Wests Ashfield, who also hold 1 seat. That should be a different forum.
I know right because our recent history with people under contract is so reliable.They will pump up his $, extend him and think that will take the heat off them and maybe lock bula and jerome in. What the reality will be is that they will add performance clauses that look achieveable and once the dust settles they will white ant him with shit decisions and leaks to the media so he fails and they punt him.