Jambo-Fox Posted February 24, 2020 Share Posted February 24, 2020 Anyway this vote confirms that 75% ( if approved) is the correct decision .... because it actually shows how hard it might be to get something that makes sense to the majority approved by 75% or more!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poseidon Posted February 24, 2020 Share Posted February 24, 2020 3 minutes ago, Jambo-Fox said: That surely can’t be correct? It must be possible to instruct the chairperson of the meeting to vote on your behalf as you want ...... surely? if not democracy is dead ... You can instruct someone else to vote on your behalf at the meeting by filling in the form. The proxy form had to be filled in pretty exactly last time and if in any doubt then the chairperson can cast the vote as he or she sees fit IIRC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pettigrewsstylist Posted February 24, 2020 Share Posted February 24, 2020 (edited) 28 minutes ago, Saint Jambo said: You did vote in a survey. It hasn't simply been decided. The issue now goes forward for a formal vote at a meeting g of members (date TBC). It will require 75% of votes at that meeting to pass. There will be some sort of provision to cast your vote without attending In the past they allowed for both online voting over a reasonably long period and voting in person. Not really clear that the issue is voting facilities. Much more likely is that for whatever reason many members are not choosing to vote. Some probably aren't even opening the email, while others open it and decide it is to boring to spend their time on. I checked back and the vote on diverting funds to the new stand only attracted 3,800 votes. With that in mind and given this was a technical governance issue, I'm amazed they got over 1000 votes. Have you read the recent email? Your comments seem at complete odds with the course of action it describes. Presume you mean they are including proxy votes as having attended. Im no expert on such matters. Edited February 24, 2020 by pettigrewsstylist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo-Fox Posted February 24, 2020 Share Posted February 24, 2020 Just now, Poseidon said: You can instruct someone else to vote on your behalf at the meeting by filling in the form. The proxy form had to be filled in pretty exactly last time and if in any doubt then the chairperson can cast the vote as he or she sees fit IIRC. That makes sense, how it should be and how I thought it would be! The FOH communicators need to stop ambiguous messages that can be misread and misunderstood and they should not assume that people know the obvious! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo-Fox Posted February 24, 2020 Share Posted February 24, 2020 (edited) 7 minutes ago, pettigrewsstylist said: Have you read the recent email? Your comments seem at complete odds with the course of action it describes. Perhaps it does but SaintJambo is correct! A vote can be cast by the chairperson on behalf of a member. It’s nothing new and has been happening in the FOH since inception ... I always vote at meetings BUT never attend them!! Edited February 24, 2020 by Jambo-Fox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pettigrewsstylist Posted February 24, 2020 Share Posted February 24, 2020 4 minutes ago, Jambo-Fox said: That makes sense, how it should be and how I thought it would be! The FOH communicators need to stop ambiguous messages that can be misread and misunderstood and they should not assume that people know the obvious! Agreed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pettigrewsstylist Posted February 24, 2020 Share Posted February 24, 2020 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Jambo-Fox said: Perhaps it does but SaintJambo is correct! A vote can be cast by the chairperson on behalf of a member. It’s nothing new and has been happening in the FOH since inception ... I always vote at meetings BUT never attend them!! Good stuff, thanks. Presumably announced clearly at calling notice for GM. Edited February 24, 2020 by pettigrewsstylist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Section Q Posted February 24, 2020 Share Posted February 24, 2020 13 minutes ago, Jambo-Fox said: Anyway this vote confirms that 75% ( if approved) is the correct decision .... because it actually shows how hard it might be to get something that makes sense to the majority approved by 75% or more!! And also how a small band of nutters can go off rail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o1djambo Posted February 24, 2020 Share Posted February 24, 2020 13 minutes ago, Jambo-Fox said: Anyway this vote confirms that 75% ( if approved) is the correct decision .... because it actually shows how hard it might be to get something that makes sense to the majority approved by 75% or more!! Also could be an indication of less members required to be in favour of selling out if only the 75 per cent are needed instead of the 90 per cent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o1djambo Posted February 24, 2020 Share Posted February 24, 2020 4 minutes ago, Section Q said: And also how a small band of nutters can go off rail. I must agree with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poseidon Posted February 24, 2020 Share Posted February 24, 2020 In the unlikely event I am able to go to the meeting I'm happy to vote on behalf of others against the proposal if they are unable to attend and happy to fill in the form naming me as their proxy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o1djambo Posted February 24, 2020 Share Posted February 24, 2020 Interestingly I had a conversation at the last home game about the Foh email and out of six members I was the only person who had reacted and cast a vote. Rather worrying as the club could be sold owing to lethargy of our support. People must pay attention in class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted February 24, 2020 Share Posted February 24, 2020 7 minutes ago, o1djambo said: Interestingly I had a conversation at the last home game about the Foh email and out of six members I was the only person who had reacted and cast a vote. Rather worrying as the club could be sold owing to lethargy of our support. People must pay attention in class. ...or not be sold owing to lethargy in our support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted February 24, 2020 Share Posted February 24, 2020 1 hour ago, Jambo-Fox said: That surely can’t be correct? It must be possible to instruct the chairperson of the meeting to vote on your behalf as you want ...... surely? if not democracy is dead ... PS it surely means 75% of the votes cast at the meeting including those proxied to the chairperson in advance of the meeting? You would think so, but the email doesn't make that clear. I think getting a quorum may be the bigger issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sac Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 Poll result in Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 2 minutes ago, sac said: Poll result in Peebles? 😄 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pettigrewsstylist Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 9 hours ago, Poseidon said: In the unlikely event I am able to go to the meeting I'm happy to vote on behalf of others against the proposal if they are unable to attend and happy to fill in the form naming me as their proxy. May well PM you once calling notice is out 👍 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tasavallan Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 For me, 90% or 75% was never the issue. It was, as proved, the %age that actually voted. How many of the 8000+ FOH members are actually members of JKB and were aware of the vote. How many FOH members have incorrect contact details and were never contacted. A 20% turnout is very low but maybe it reflects poor administration by FOH. Has FOH sent an email out to all its members recently to obtain updated contact details. I only found out about the vote through the thread on JKB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo-Fox Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Tasavallan said: For me, 90% or 75% was never the issue. It was, as proved, the %age that actually voted. How many of the 8000+ FOH members are actually members of JKB and were aware of the vote. How many FOH members have incorrect contact details and were never contacted. A 20% turnout is very low but maybe it reflects poor administration by FOH. Has FOH sent an email out to all its members recently to obtain updated contact details. I only found out about the vote through the thread on JKB. You obviously never got the e mail ..... which would suggest they do not have the correct one for you (or perhaps it went to your junk mail). I’d also suggest the individual is responsible for ensuring personal details are correct rather than the organisation holding them. Edited February 25, 2020 by Jambo-Fox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 55 minutes ago, Tasavallan said: For me, 90% or 75% was never the issue. It was, as proved, the %age that actually voted. How many of the 8000+ FOH members are actually members of JKB and were aware of the vote. How many FOH members have incorrect contact details and were never contacted. A 20% turnout is very low but maybe it reflects poor administration by FOH. Has FOH sent an email out to all its members recently to obtain updated contact details. I only found out about the vote through the thread on JKB. If FoH have the wrong/old email address then the member won’t get any email anyway to get new email details. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ToqueJambo Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 21 hours ago, o1djambo said: Interestingly I had a conversation at the last home game about the Foh email and out of six members I was the only person who had reacted and cast a vote. Rather worrying as the club could be sold owing to lethargy of our support. People must pay attention in class. They didn't send out a reminder email as far as I can recall. People need prodded to do things like this. Generally, communication seems poor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Dee Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 This doesn’t sit well with me. We did all this to be a fan owned Club -the idea of another nut job owner getting their hands on us, is worrying. It’ll be interesting to see how this pans out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ToqueJambo Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Mister Dee said: This doesn’t sit well with me. We did all this to be a fan owned Club -the idea of another nut job owner getting their hands on us, is worrying. It’ll be interesting to see how this pans out. It's not done and dusted yet, but anything that makes it easier to sell the club should be a big worry IMO, especially if we get relegated as "investors" might sense they can get us at a cutdown price and fans might be worried enough to chance it. Edited February 25, 2020 by ToqueJambo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo-Fox Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 23 hours ago, o1djambo said: Interestingly I had a conversation at the last home game about the Foh email and out of six members I was the only person who had reacted and cast a vote. Rather worrying as the club could be sold owing to lethargy of our support. People must pay attention in class. People have VERY short memories... I was once involved with training 350 people over a 48 hour period on safety ... 24 hours later we were audited and only 15% of those interviewed said they had received any safety training over the previous 6 months!! 😂 People 🤷♂️ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.