Dont forget the 1802 train back home tom or your buggered

Hah! I have too addictive a personality....don't want to enter that hole!

75000-1 Hash 👀

Dundonald, angle brackets are converted to parentheses to prevent naughty people injecting HTML tag codes via their posts.

Barrow 4-4 Wimbledon

Morning Naz! Barrow 0 Wimbledon 0.

That would make sense DD. Probably hard to introduce now.

For ")" read "more than" - it seems the pointy ) key doesn't work on here.

It is a slightly unfortunate oddity of Restricted Actions that people who are against an issue should face that dilemma. Arguably, it would be fairer to have just two tests, i.e. )X% of votes to be in favour and )Y% of members to have voted in favour, and to drop any requirements of )Z% of members to have voted at all. Instinctively, I prefer to be in the position of casting a vote (FTR I voted for the first RA and against the Super-RA) rather than having to game that calculation of overall participation.

The issue for me with restricted action votes is that not voting can be a deliberate choice just as voting for or against is. Either all figures about choices should be available or (my preference) none of them.

FFS Ian, can you take your continual “ trolling and strange patterns of behaviour” (your words) of Trigger of this site, it’s all becoming extremely boring and I’m sure most people on this site are as fed up with it as I am, when you talk football it’s interesting and positive but this is becoming an obsession with you. Contact him and have a face to face to bring this to closure.

And not to forget to mention the chap whose name escapes me....

Actually, I correct my previous post slightly as the wording in the Constitution on the role of the Secretary and Associate Secretaries has been changed at some point, but my point still stands. Also, I think the issue of access to voting data on board elections is completely different to the issue of a poll of members relating to a vote on a substantive issue. The DTB is making a recommendation on a Restricted Action and will need to take ongoing actions (whether we agree with their recommendation or not) to drive it through to success. Personally, I don't see anything improper in the DTB having access to voting data on that issue so that they can continue to drive participation etc. Think about a less contentious Restricted Action that everyone wanted to agree and the fallout for the DTB if they didn't spot that participation numbers were low and take action accordingly.

So, nothing to worry about Alan 👀

DunDonald, I think the access issue pertains to during an election... This was raised when the password failed and the then DT Chair had changed them on PB, if I recall correctly. However the issue arose following the Meet the DTB from Wednesday evening, When James L confirmed he had no access to the voting numbers but the Secretary and vice-Secretary both had access to the vote split and the latter certainly, have/are bombarding membership (Spamming) people to vote on the 50%+01

What is he trying to achieve? I doubt that anyone in here with an understanding of what is right or wrong will be convinced that Shane's application should not have been accepted.

Trigger: Whilst (based on the facts you've conveyed) your exclusion seems harsh, I don't see anything wrong with Matt's reply to you. Unless you want the Trust to outsource our electioneering services (which we could do, but I suspect isn't cheap), then it seems right to me that the Chair of the ESG and a member of the Trust secretariat* have access to the voting system.

Quick thing about London Irish. It would seem the strongest rumour is if the sale goes through it’s likely they’ll be looking to go back to Brentford.

You’re on to a loser, Biggles. If/when Trigs stands, he’ll come top of the voting - in part due to pathetic little small dick vendettas like yours.

Day 2 of the hustings for Shane Bellamy/Trigger/Triggerfish. I am not on twitter but you are. I have been shown screenshots of some of your vexatious attacks, not only to individual AFCW fans and the DT, but also to the accounts of some journalists, the Football Supporters Association and, incredibly, some other clubs. If elected, would you stop this behaviour or continue?

Thanks Trig. I'm really surprised that the head of the election steering group is a former dons trust chair and mates with some other former dons trust board members and current.

🚨New episode available now🚨 Danny Baker, myself and guest Shane Bellamy aka Triggerfiish linktr.ee/womblesdream Like, share and let us know what you think.

Great podcast WHAD and Shane, I think you can hold your head high, when you listen to how this is panned out, it really drives home how poor this exclusion decision really is. Great sign off too! Laughed at that. For balance, would love to hear the voices from ESG and DTB and hear their side, genuinely intrigued how their side of the story is played out.

If you want a fair election you have to fight for it now. What we have now is not fair.

“I find it interesting that you contact me over a topic where you actually refer to the libellous statement you made on a public forum about me. For the record I was not involved with the electronic voting system in any way at all before this year, let alone provided inappropriate access to Kris Stewart at a previous election. I'm not as litigious as you seem to be so will ignore your defamation for now. Also for the record, the DTB Chair does not have access to the voting system and will not have it. Only two people do, the Assistant DT Secretary and myself. Matt Kind regards Matthew Breach (Elections Steering Group)”