How long have we got left of all this dons trust talk highjack of wup ? 😂 .

I think probards has improved recentlyto be fair. More people are using it and there are plenty of discussions going on, mostly civil too! Helped recently by the election candidates joining and engaging, which I hope they continue to do once elected.

* Fill, not Gill. Don't tell others, not Don't others. On what the implications are, not the implications are.

Post what you like Spit. I don't care and really don't monitor what you post. Gill your boots with links to twitter if that is what you like doing. My point, which you have conveniently ignored, is I don't others to post topics they are not interested in somewhere else, possibly because they don't feel front and centre of the debate because they don't want to contribute. Pro Boards is futile. Hardly anybody uses it and when they do posts that challenge the status quo are removed.

I said a steer Stu. I think, happy to be corrected, that since 2005 or so we have only hit 50% once and strangely that was in the days of the ballot box with nothing online. So to me 50% would suggest real engagement from new members and old.

This simply couldn't of waited for the new board to be elected in a few weeks...

We need more guidance on the voting behaviours than just a simple turnout number OI, imo. We could have many old members no longer interested and we also know that voting for general elections etc rarely hit over 50%.

I can only use examples of people I know who were not members last year. One person I know was asking me what it was all about and the documentation sent was so long and confusing - They asked me for a simple breakdown. Then I had many last season who were ST holders on my tours and I had to give them a breakdown of what the Trust does and what say they could have if they joined. It’s where one group asked me where in the ground they could get some more information etc. They were surprised when I said we had nothing in the stadium for them to read etc.

The election may give us a steer on engagement. If the turnout is lower than in previous years, then the new members are probably not engaged, if it is up then perhaps they are showing great enthusiasm. Persnally I'd love it to hit 50% for the first time in a number of years.

Stu - I meant unengaged in the sense of "doesn't have the history/context for a lot of these decisions and therefore particularly needs really clear, unambiguous comms" not the sense of "doesn't care".

My biggest concern is we don’t promote the DT at PL enough. That is how you make all members engaged and informed imo. ST’s go to game so make them engaged by signage etc at PL. It was only on Tuesday night that I realised where the DT Kiosk was and its on the side of the ground with the least people. Why do we not have the DT Kiosk at the front of the stadium where the statues are. Then have other pop-up points in each stand with other DTB people. Matchday is the best time to be present and engaging with the members by them imo.

Nicander, I have an issue with the impression the new members are unegaged. I accept it was the wrong time to bring it in potentially with such a big RA going through, however it should have happened at some point. Would be great to know the split of new vs previous DT members in terms of people voting.

Personally I suspect the phrase "grew Trust membership to record highs, creating the largest fan-ownership body in the UK" will be appearing on a number of CVs.

Stu D - and why do we have over 6,000 members, mostly new, many unengaged, brought in right before critical votes? They cannot say they weren't warned about possible issues before the membership changes, because many of us warned them.

And that's appreciated Spit.

Thanks Trigger, absolutely the vote has to go ahead but the Super RAs were at least tangentially linked to 50%+1. As 50%+1 now needs to be looked at again and hopefully brought forward by the next DTB in a way that achieves the required majority, it would make sense to look at Super RAs again in conjunction with that. Once we pass the Super RAs it is virtually impossible to rethink them as you'd need 90% turnout (unless Russ's loophole works).

6mdm, special,obviously you have not noticed that I've only put one X link on here in 12 days and that was football releated .after meadow and Naz advise. Hope that helps with your enjoyment of wup.

You can’t stop a vote that had such a high YES vote. We would all go mad if that happened to something we were in favour off.

The vote COULD be stopped on the grounds that the proposal doesn't achieve it's purpose due to inconsistencies with other RAs. Easy enough to say "We made a mistake and will reconsider wording."

Let’s be clear the SRA only impacts 3 key areas around the renaming of the club and stadium freehold. My concern is that this passes and then other members want use the SRA for other category A issues.

The biggest challenge is we have over 6k members we are asking to vote on serious issues and the expression of too many cooks comes to mind. The more members you have, the better and clearer the comms has to be from the DTB. Blaming the DTB for everything is becoming tiresome to be honest as I don’t think this is an easy time for anyone at the club with us kicking our financial issues down the road.

Let it be said OI didn’t suggest pulling the vote, just some clarity from the DTB* that a yes result on the bungled Super RA may well be the worst thing that’s happened to the club since 2002.

The whole RA system has the weakness that it far easier to up requirements than reduce them. This needed 75%/50% (and second vote) to implement but would need 90%/90% to rescind, unless Russ's loophole works. Any change to levels should need a vote of the higher of the current level and proposed level.

So if this SRA goes through...fast forward 50 years and Plough Lane is flooding every year, putting up protections against this flooding is not viable. We have an opportunity to build a new stadium elsewhere in Wimbledon area. We can't because 50 years ago a bunch of people decided that we can never move no matter what the circumstances?

Given 50.01 failed and (to my knowledge - appreciate a fact check) no current or prospective DTB candidate publicly supports Super RA, it does feel a little bit wild that they aren't doing a bit more to urge caution/vote against - but I agree with Nicander, you cannot stop the process now, it has to be won on arguments not skulduggery.