Recent elections don't seem to work like the way OI is suggesting. Dreadful people who are unfit for office like Trump have become more popular the worse they behave. The membership might conclude there is a vendetta against a certain candidate without evidence just because they dislike the view and actions of the other side.

Retro rule 10 opens the door to go fishing on the current DTB

*Aren't held to the highest standard

In my view, if they, the DTB, get through this without being answerable to the membership, then don't be surprised when things that are also constitutional get put through on a nod. In not going through due process, Shane's situation has demonstrated that the constitution means nothing. The membership can demand all they like, but if the DTB are held to the highest standard, then inaction on our part will end with the governance our apathy for the fight deserves.

If Shane is that dreadful, and he could be questioned on the past, during the election, the membership will conclude that he is unfit to be a member of the DTB. I and to my knowledge all other DT members are adults who can examine issues and come to our own decisions. I do not need an unelected, and thus totally unqualified, individual making those choices for me. In fact it is insulting.

It looked like both Stevens and Johnson were being fouled in the penalty incident.

Aideen, thanks - but it can’t be great for Shane two years running to go through this. I have no horse in this race. The way I see it is that Shane did say some really bad things and words do have consequences. However, the way it’s been handled and the pile on froma few people in particular has left a bad taste in my mouth. We’re all fans of the same team, and what we stand for is great. Why can’t we all just get along ??

TM, that is a reasonale question but it is Shane's to answer. If he wants to pursue it then he should and where those of us who agree with him can help, many of us will. My aim now is to make sure the same stunt can't be pulled next year via a resolution that confirms that members are adults capable of deciding for themselves who is and isn't suitable to serve on the DTB.

If TF has the stomach for it (but would completely understand if he just gave up) then I think he should pursue this to teach those that seem themselves as untouchable a lesson. It is in the wider interests (to coin a phrase) to do so. When I read that one DTB member, who promised to scrutinise the management accounts and financial performance shortly after being elected and now sees working hard and being organised as more important, is is hardly surprising how bad our club finances have become.

*Something I don't regret doing.

All volunteers have to sign the code of conduct otherwise they're not allowed to perform their roles. There's stuff in there like not slagging off staff or other volunteers on social media. After I called Phil Clark* out on here a few years ago, no other volunteer group would have me.

TM, I respect your view, I really do, but someone has to stand up to what’s going on. This is bigger than what’s happening with Shane. Hands lots of conversations with people today and this runs deep. Too few people have too much power and are abusing it. This is not ok.

Shane, in the scheme of things, is this something you want to waste time/ effort/ stress on ? Life is short, there’s so much more important things than an oversight football board that has no power really. Let Simon Hood hold them to account

Meadow - read what is there not what you want to read. The minutes explain that an ESG report was shared with the board and some recommendations were made. There is nothing about new election rules being created. No mention of rules or Rule 10. According to the constitution the rules for each election need to be created and approved by the society board. The set of rules for this election have not followed the constitutional rules. I don’t think any of them are valid let alone rule 10. And Rule 10 was created purely for me. And rule 10 seeks to retroactively apply an unofficial code of conduct to a period of time from when every single candidate was born - a code no candidate has signed or has even been sent. It is not a valid rule and it will not stand up to legal scrutiny.

Retroactively subject to. Sorry.

The board accepted some ESG recommendations, including one about retroactively abiding by the Volunteers Code. Not 100% clear what that means b but it isn't the same as approving a set of rules.

Legal options are being investigated.

Shane, they are. I stood up for you today. [Link]

Read it quick Trig before he gets the needle and takes it down 🤣

Cracking result today, well done JJ turn around much needed and he seems to have a panache for doing this (with a pathetically shit budget)

Feb minutes make no mention of election rules.

Page 6 and 7.

No it isn’t Meadow.

The KPI term is semantics, it is the meaning behind them. My point is TBK thinking working hard and being organised is more important than measuring performance. Banks are obsessed by profit and bonuses. If he really thinks any just look at a balance sheet that will not tell you that then he is digging himself into an even bigger hole, which is fine by me.

OI, quite. Possibly one reason why flat hierarchies like Valve's don't use them apparently. Everyone knows each other.