2016 AGM and Digital Forum

[_RT_]

This wasnt a ti alone list

This is the stuff the superior supporters to us pathetoc sheep have been telling is is F.A.C.T. for the past weeks

He might not have started some of those comments but happily runs with the as fact, then when it's shown it isn't factual acts like he never made reference to them.

 

[TigerImposter]

He might not have started some of those comments but happily runs with the as fact, then when it's shown it isn't factual acts like he never made reference to them.

PROVE IT OR I CALL BULL DUST
I DID NOT RUN WITH THESE AS FACTS NOW CUT THE BULL SHIT OUT AND GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT. I ONLY RAN ON ONE OF THOSE POINTS WITH POTENTIAL REVENUE USED, WHICH WAS CORRECT.

I will always try to provide links to statements or some form of evidence and not tow along with the company line of SPIN like yourself.
Were you aware in the history of the rfc that 100 signatures has never been used to trigger an EGM? Yet you're peddling bs that there are reasons for it as it could cost the club ETC ETC ETC

 

[Punt rd end]

Have no idea who BTR is, so forget him. I have also no idea if it has ever been acted on, but that is not the point of which you missed. You don't leave policy up in the air with no recourse, and having a provision for the future is a right, however in this modern social media time, you could get 100 in a heartbeat with any real threat. If we don't think its ever going to be instigated then why don't we just remove the whole provision entirely. We know we cant do that, and imo just having 100 is a by gone era number. In other words we are being proactive to the needs of the future, and who knows, there maybe 10 challengers in the next 25 years, so this should be tidied up for genuine problems that may occur.

The big richo is a sack everyone dickhead on Yellow and Black, no one really listens to him.

 

[Helen Wheels]

When you challenge a p.o.v its debate, when everyone else does it to you, they are trolls. Go figure.

Difference between a genuine point of view and trollish provocation.
https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=179139

 

[Punt rd end]

Difference between a genuine point of view and trollish provocation.
https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=179139

The shoe fits a few here

--Definition----

An "Internet troll" or "Forum Troll" is a person who posts outrageous message to bait people to answer. Trolls delight in sowing discord on the forums. A troll is someone who inspires flaming rhetoric, someone who is purposely provoking and pulling people into flaming discussion. Flaming discussions usually end with name calling and a flame war.

A classic troll tries to make us believe that he is a skeptic. He is divisive and argumentative with need-to-be-right attitude, "searching for the truth", flaming discussion, and sometimes insulting people or provoking people to insult him. A troll is usually an expert in reusing the same words of its opponents and in turning it against them.

While he tries to present himself as a skeptic looking for truth ... his messages usually sound as if it is the responsibility of other forum members to provide evidence that what forum is all about is legitimate.

]He (and in at least 90% of cases it is he) tries to start arguments and upset people.

Sometimes, he is skeptical, trying to scare people, trying to plant fear in their hearts. Sometimes, Internet troll is trying to spin conflicting information, is questioning in an insincere manner, flaming discussion, insulting people, turning people against each other, harassing forum members, ignoring warnings from forum moderators

 

[_RT_]

PROVE IT OR I CALL BULL DUST
I DID NOT RUN WITH THESE AS FACTS NOW CUT THE BULL SHIT OUT AND GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT. I ONLY RAN ON ONE OF THOSE POINTS WITH POTENTIAL REVENUE USED, WHICH WAS CORRECT.

I will always try to provide links to statements or some form of evidence and not tow along with the company line of SPIN like yourself.
Were you aware in the history of the rfc that 100 signatures has never been used to trigger an EGM? Yet you're peddling bs that there are reasons for it as it could cost the club ETC ETC ETC

I'm not wasting my time trawling through your posts to find times when you have ran with some of those comments as being factual, you know as well as I and many others know that it has happened.

Whether the 100 signatures clause has been used or not is not the real issue here. What is the real issue is that people like yourself bitch and moan about the club wasting money on a range of issues, but seem happy to have a clause in place where the club with 70k members, of which 2/3 are eligible to vote, can have an EGM called on the basis of getting 100 people to sign a petition. It was reported in the media that the cost for an EGM can be up to $100k.

So I'll put it to you simply, do you think it is a good thing that 0.002% of 50000 voting members can force the club into an EMG because they are pissed off. You could find 100 pissed of members on Big Footy if you tried hard enough and get an EGM up if you really wanted to. In this day and age where we have so many members eligible to vote surely it makes sense to require say 5-10% of eligible voters to sign a petition to force an EGM. At least that way you know there is a real basis behind the movement, when you consider less than 10% voted in the board election I think it is a reasonable provision to have put in place so that it protects the club from unnecessary costs being incurred. But alas it was defeated and now if things don't go well in 2017 we could once again see a group like FOF jumping up and taking the club to an EGM because they aren't happy with how things are going.

 

[TigerImposter]

I'm not wasting my time trawling through your posts to find times when you have ran with some of those comments as being factual, you know as well as I and many others know that it has happened.

Whether the 100 signatures clause has been used or not is not the real issue here. What is the real issue is that people like yourself bitch and moan about the club wasting money on a range of issues, but seem happy to have a clause in place where the club with 70k members, of which 2/3 are eligible to vote, can have an EGM called on the basis of getting 100 people to sign a petition. It was reported in the media that the cost for an EGM can be up to $100k.

So I'll put it to you simply, do you think it is a good thing that 0.002% of 50000 voting members can force the club into an EMG because they are pissed off. You could find 100 pissed of members on Big Footy if you tried hard enough and get an EGM up if you really wanted to. In this day and age where we have so many members eligible to vote surely it makes sense to require say 5-10% of eligible voters to sign a petition to force an EGM. At least that way you know there is a real basis behind the movement, when you consider less than 10% voted in the board election I think it is a reasonable provision to have put in place so that it protects the club from unnecessary costs being incurred. But alas it was defeated and now if things don't go well in 2017 we could once again see a group like FOF jumping up and taking the club to an EGM because they aren't happy with how things are going.

And that's your opinion and not mine so stop accusing people of things you may have perceived them saying if you don't have facts .
Even rfc74 told you I didn't say all that bs , yet you dragged it on.

 

[TigerImposter]

The shoe fits a few here

--Definition----

An "Internet troll" or "Forum Troll" is a person who posts outrageous message to bait people to answer. Trolls delight in sowing discord on the forums. A troll is someone who inspires flaming rhetoric, someone who is purposely provoking and pulling people into flaming discussion. Flaming discussions usually end with name calling and a flame war.

A classic troll tries to make us believe that he is a skeptic. He is divisive and argumentative with need-to-be-right attitude, "searching for the truth", flaming discussion, and sometimes insulting people or provoking people to insult him. A troll is usually an expert in reusing the same words of its opponents and in turning it against them.

While he tries to present himself as a skeptic looking for truth ... his messages usually sound as if it is the responsibility of other forum members to provide evidence that what forum is all about is legitimate.

]He (and in at least 90% of cases it is he) tries to start arguments and upset people.

Sometimes, he is skeptical, trying to scare people, trying to plant fear in their hearts. Sometimes, Internet troll is trying to spin conflicting information, is questioning in an insincere manner, flaming discussion, insulting people, turning people against each other, harassing forum members, ignoring warnings from forum moderators

Sounds like you

 

[TigerImposter]

The big richo is a sack everyone dickhead on Yellow and Black, no one really listens to him.

Yes , but he quotes facts ,sticks to the topic , proves people wrong with evidence and has no bull shit about him unlike your recent posts.
So if you think he's a DH I would hate to think what you may be.

 

[Punt rd end]

Yes , but he quotes facts ,sticks to the topic , proves people wrong with evidence and has no bull shit about him unlike your recent posts.
So if you think he's a DH I would hate to think what you may be.

Other members send private messages about him all the time, the guy isn't always right, misquotes and is a jerk

 

[TigerImposter]

We

Other members send private messages about him all the time, the guy isn't always right, misquotes and is a jerk

well it must get corrected bc I only read all his stuff that is fact.

 

[Punt rd end]

We

well it must get corrected bc I only read all his stuff that is fact.

Well good for you

 

[TigerImposter]

Well good for you

Yep it feels good Rosie.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Im sorry i even started this thread