I have been barred from standing in the elections for Club 1872

Status
Not open for further replies.
They are only applying the rules as they are and those tweets are largely indefensible these dates.

Rather than making it a personal issue, perhaps it is the rule that is disagreeable to some?
 
mdingwall said:
Dear Mark,



In response to your email requesting further details of social media posts that were reviewed as part of the Club 1872 election process, please note the following links.



https://twitter.com/x/status/734515166822424576



https://twitter.com/x/status/929510675071762432



https://twitter.com/x/status/1141702643674505216



https://twitter.com/x/status/937115575981047808



https://twitter.com/x/status/916774729507377152



You also asked for the name of the Independent Adjudicator. Your application was reviewed by the Club 1872 board and Alan Russell of Supporters Direct. We have copied Alan into this email.



Please note the following section of the Articles



"All candidates for election must disclose all social media accounts operated by them. In the event that any racist, sectarian, obscene or abusive posts are published on these or any other accounts directed by a candidate, at any time, that candidate may, at the discretion of the independent adjudicator, be removed from the elections."



https://club1872.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Club-1872-Articles-December-2019.pdf



As checks of your social media accounts found posts which were homophobic, ableist, obscene and abusive, the decision was taken in line with Schedule 3, point 8 to remove you from the election process.



Regards,



The Club 1872 Board
Click to expand...
All seem reasonable tweets imo
 
Paulski55 said:
One of the biggest shareholding’s in the club operates from a dingy office on the second floor of Copland house, which is equally as dingy.

The place and those who operate therein don’t think like a big shareholding, and certainly don’t operate like one by the sounds of it. The level of transparency required from a large shareholding of a group of this type is clearly lacking in terms of who runs it and what it’s aims are.

By the sounds of it, if you don’t pay in to it and/or they don’t like you then your stuffed. They won’t speak for the main support.

Not a huge fan of this group, and that’s been the case since day one. The group will only get worse as it grows it’s shareholding.
Click to expand...
The shareholding will always get diluted.
Its obvious someone wants on the main board.
 
Tweets are poor and offensive at any time but given the current way of the world even more so.

People actively look to be offended and this is an example that you couldn't argue a case for unfortunately.

The media already have an absolute field day with us over anything so they would slaughter C1872 over them.

As for C1872, I am not a member but from what I have seen and read they don't inspire me to ever become one.
 
RFC_Champions said:
The slandering of c1872 on here comes across as quite sinister at times.

It often goes beyond a standard debate/discussion of opinions.

Seems sinister and personal. I don’t know what went on in the Rangers Supporters Trust, Association, Rangers First, any other guises it’s gone under in the past or who shat in who’s kettle. But it would sure make good reading I someone could spare the time to enlighten us. :cool: :))
Click to expand...
Yip there’s obviously some anger on both sides.
 
My biggest gripe with C1872 is they don’t really do anything when we are getting slaughtered from every corner. They very rarely defend us. I have been paying £10 odds since the beginning but have been considering cancelling for a while now due to their lack of fight for the fans.
 
A kind of blue said:
Instead of which they get paid by our beloved impartial national broadcaster.
Click to expand...
Therefore paid by the many people they demonize, people who are on here at the moment.

I'm not having a go at people paying, but at the arrogance of the people in charge. They depend on the public to operate, yet have no problem in using their position to suit their views.
 
fourbus said:
My biggest gripe with C1872 is they don’t really do anything when we are getting slaughtered from every corner. They very rarely defend our corner. I have been paying £10 odds since the beginning but have been considering cancelling for a while now due to their lack of fight for the fans.
Click to expand...
Not a peep from them about George Sq etc,an absolute disgrace
 
Not that I’m offended, but I’d expect tweets of that nature to be deemed problematic these days.

That said, is Chris Graham not heavily involved in Club 1872?

If so, how can this be given his past misdemeanours on social media?

Can’t be one rule for you, @mdingwall ,and another for someone else.
 
SM™ said:
Sorry. I let the missus use my account when I was in the hospital.

Found out she was banning people for punching the missus if the tea was cold when the user got in from the pub.

Have now sawn off her fingers to avoid a repeat.

Sorry you were caught in the crossfire, Bro.
Click to expand...

brilliant thanks
 
I would have thought it was up to the membership to decide on your suitability rather that the board. It’s a very worrying situation that people who are themselves elected are judging the suitability of who is allowed to stand.
 
I’ll be honest Mark, there are three of those tweets I don’t think you should “stand behind”, and I think some people could justifiably object to the language used.

However, as a C1872 member, I object to the current directors deciding who is allowed to stand for member vote. The issue of the Tweets is not a matter of fact, it’s a matter of opinion. In my view it is for the members to decide whether the contents of the tweets make you unfit to serve as a director.

The issue over the non-payment of dues (and therefore valid membership) is a matter of fact and you have to assume is accurate, in which case I’d be happy to stand in for that individual and propose you. On the basis of those tweets, I wouldn’t necessarily vote for you, but the whole purpose of a members organisation is that decisions are available to members and not unilaterally decided by an executive.
 
fourbus said:
My biggest gripe with C1872 is they don’t really do anything when we are getting slaughtered from every corner. They very rarely defend us. I have been paying £10 odds since the beginning but have been considering cancelling for a while now due to their lack of fight for the fans.
Click to expand...
This thread might spur them into action. :rolleyes:
 
Not that I find any one of them tweets offensive or in fact even disagree I can understand why such position wouldn’t want the scrutiny of such social media posts may bring on them.

Maybe it’s more than that but that’s just how I see it it’s sad the way the world goes these days.
 
I'll play devil's advocate here, if you were elected this would see you swiftly hounded out. That's how it is. Happened to Chris Graham would happen to you.
 
Shengus Malengus said:
I got an FF ban for posting a photo of Kim un-Jong waving outside a backdrop of Harrow station.
Apparently for racism.:))
Click to expand...
Actually that’s a good point.

I’ve been barred for numerous things i thought were hilarious (plus one I thought was just so extreme that everyone would know it was a piss take).

My 4th account persona though is pretty tame nowadays

I still think Mark should be allowed to stand but maybe admin should bear this post in mind when they get the ban hammer out
 
mdingwall said:
I stood in response to an email plea from a member which disclosed very worrying information about the operation of Club 1872.
Click to expand...

If you (or said member) could bring such worrying information to light - then maybe other members will take note and vote with their feet (ie money)!
 
Living in a world where people live and die by social media posts, sadly.

Good on you asking to stand and, dare I say, good on you for sticking by your opinions. No point in apologising insincerely and then still being told 'no'.
 
NorthLanBear said:
If anything they are protecting yourself and the club.

Club 1872’s aim is to own the club. If a board member is talking about “poofs” etc then that isn’t a good look from an organisation running a football club like Rangers.
Click to expand...
You're missing the point. Both were clearly of a humorous nature.

And as for advising Mr Corbyn to join Sinn Fein - I can see no circumstances in which anyone other than a terrorist sympathiser would find that offensive.
 
mdingwall said:
Dear Mark,



In response to your email requesting further details of social media posts that were reviewed as part of the Club 1872 election process, please note the following links.



https://twitter.com/x/status/734515166822424576



https://twitter.com/x/status/929510675071762432



https://twitter.com/x/status/1141702643674505216



https://twitter.com/x/status/937115575981047808



https://twitter.com/x/status/916774729507377152



You also asked for the name of the Independent Adjudicator. Your application was reviewed by the Club 1872 board and Alan Russell of Supporters Direct. We have copied Alan into this email.



Please note the following section of the Articles



"All candidates for election must disclose all social media accounts operated by them. In the event that any racist, sectarian, obscene or abusive posts are published on these or any other accounts directed by a candidate, at any time, that candidate may, at the discretion of the independent adjudicator, be removed from the elections."



https://club1872.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Club-1872-Articles-December-2019.pdf



As checks of your social media accounts found posts which were homophobic, ableist, obscene and abusive, the decision was taken in line with Schedule 3, point 8 to remove you from the election process.



Regards,



The Club 1872 Board
Click to expand...

Your tweets do not offend me in the slighted, however I would respectfully ask GS - would you ban anyone from FF who posted on here what you have tweeted?
 
NorthLanBear said:
If anything they are protecting yourself and the club.

Club 1872’s aim is to own the club. If a board member is talking about “poofs” etc then that isn’t a good look from an organisation running a football club like Rangers.
Click to expand...
They have person working in the background who was kicked off the Rangers board for alleged racism.
How do you square that one?
 
St Andrews Bear said:
The corbyn tweet is absolutely bang on the money. He is a terrorist supporting khunt who ruined the Labour Party
Click to expand...
I honestly think Mark is a little too hesitant in his truth-seeking.

Other people I really like are, in my opinion, totally wrong about the war on the native poor.

But it takes all sorts, and I utterly despise this, "You said X in 2008 so you're on a leftist equivalent of the Sex Offenders Register."
 
mdingwall said:
1/ that one, or perhaps more, of my proposers had not been paying for six months continuously into Club 1872.


I asked for the name(s) of the ineligible proposer(s) and examples of the social media posts.

They did not give me a note of the ineligible proposer(s)
Click to expand...
To be honest that concerns me more as their own systems can't tell you who has been paying - the money has been going out my bank account every month, but according to their website I haven't paid since 2017. When I queried this (more than a year ago) I was told they were wiating to have their systems update/corrected. I work in IT and something like that shouldn't take that long to sort.

I was always concerned about the merger, as the other organisation lacked the campaigning nature of the RST, and that has been carried forward into C1872. It perhaps needs members to get together and propose a vote of no confidence in the people at the top of the organisation
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top