| Vote of no confidence thread. 18:21 - Dec 15 with 27609 views | E20Jack |
Not a member but will happily join again if this was to get off the ground.
Any members have any ideas how to do this?
Looks like the only way of stopping this deal now. I have asked several times what are the benefits of this deal, it cannot be continuing to have a voice as conceding drag rights will probably mean the Trust survives as an organisation for a shorter period than if it was to go legal. They are not long term owners.
...those who recommended the deal still have not answered.
Swans Trust,
12 Dynevor Avenue,
Neath,
SA10 7AG
I, the undersigned member, believe the current committee no longer represents the wishes of this organisation's members. I would like to register a vote of no confidence and ask you to call and extraordinary meeting of all Trust members so that we can be heard. We would like to table a motion that the following committee members should stand down and call an election at the earliest opportunity.
Alan Lewis
Stuart McDonald
Viv Brooks
Ron Knuszka
Cath Dyer
Viv Williams
Sian Davies
Yours,
................................
** any Trust members for the deal I have missed out feel free to add or any I have included that are against it then again feel free to omit. [Post edited 15 Dec 2017 20:43]
|  |
| |  |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 22:53 - Dec 15 with 1731 views | dobjack2 |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 21:51 - Dec 15 by Neath_Jack |
I'm not sure if you're being deliberately dull here but i'll humour you, tell me then, you think the Trust is in a good place yes? You must do by that reply?
I don't believe the independent thing is right either, no. Phil and the other chap should have stayed inside the Trust to affect change from a position where they could have. The Trust mob wouldn't get behind another group of this kind just a couple of weeks ago, but now, because Phil is involved, everyone thinks it's great? I'll tell you something Marky boy, if i see that it's going to be worthwhile, then i'll jump on the bandwagon.
Now, going by all your willy waving over it, i'm guessing that you are part of the new group? So come on, enlighten me what you are doing as a passionate jack within this group? PM if you wish? |
Take on board your points but the resignations have brought things to a head which is what I suspect the point was. |  | | |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 22:54 - Dec 15 with 1731 views | E20Jack |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 22:48 - Dec 15 by Darran |
You’re right I agree. Look at the OP.
“Not a member but will happily join again if this was to get off the ground”
What the actual fuçk is that all about. If the Trust threw it open for another vote next week all the dull çunts that aren’t members won’t have a vote. They’re too fuçking dull to realise that for the sake of a tenner untill the end of the season.
The same ones going on and on about another vote,E20,Swanzay,Max etc all saying there should be another vote and when the vote goes the same way and they haven’t voted they’ll start posting the same old shit all over again.
It is actually quite bizarre. |
It would help if you read the thread...
''It may be better for the current members to do the ousting, and then the disenfranchined ex members to re join to vote on the deal. '' | |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 22:55 - Dec 15 with 1721 views | Darran |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 22:54 - Dec 15 by E20Jack |
It would help if you read the thread...
''It may be better for the current members to do the ousting, and then the disenfranchined ex members to re join to vote on the deal. '' |
Yes but if they announce a vote for current members somewhere along the line dopey twáts like you won’t be able to vote for the sake of ten fuçking pounds |  |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 22:57 - Dec 15 with 1722 views | E20Jack |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 22:55 - Dec 15 by Darran |
Yes but if they announce a vote for current members somewhere along the line dopey twáts like you won’t be able to vote for the sake of ten fuçking pounds |
Nothing to do with the money dopey, its the principle. I am not supporting an organisation that does not care to represent the views of its members. If members get ousted then I will re-join. You cannot call a re-vote with only 5 board members. | |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 22:57 - Dec 15 with 1722 views | chad |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 22:33 - Dec 15 by Phil_S |
Isn't it a simple case of just stating that you want to call an EGM and the reasons why.
The only thing I would add is that the AGM is coming ( at a guess based on what Uxbridge posted earlier) either 8th or 15th January.
If you want to do it then check the timescale of when it has to be carried out (EGM) after it is called. It maybe just a case of being at the AGM will be quicker? Just a thought |
Yep Shaky mentioned this a while back and did suggest that the numbers criteria to get things carried was less onerous at the AGM - hope I haven't misquoted
But did also say the timescales were tight for the notice required so would need to check this out - contained in the rules on the website |  | | |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:02 - Dec 15 with 1705 views | dobjack2 |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 22:33 - Dec 15 by Phil_S |
Isn't it a simple case of just stating that you want to call an EGM and the reasons why.
The only thing I would add is that the AGM is coming ( at a guess based on what Uxbridge posted earlier) either 8th or 15th January.
If you want to do it then check the timescale of when it has to be carried out (EGM) after it is called. It maybe just a case of being at the AGM will be quicker? Just a thought |
Sound words- but if people are unhappy about certain board members and they are not up for re-election then a subsequent EGM would also be an option | | | |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:03 - Dec 15 with 1689 views | Darran |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 22:57 - Dec 15 by E20Jack |
Nothing to do with the money dopey, its the principle. I am not supporting an organisation that does not care to represent the views of its members. If members get ousted then I will re-join. You cannot call a re-vote with only 5 board members. |
Yeah of course it’s the principle. | |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:06 - Dec 15 with 1683 views | E20Jack |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:03 - Dec 15 by Darran |
Yeah of course it’s the principle. |
Glad we agree. The first time you have made any sense. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:19 - Dec 15 with 1651 views | longlostjack |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 22:57 - Dec 15 by E20Jack |
Nothing to do with the money dopey, its the principle. I am not supporting an organisation that does not care to represent the views of its members. If members get ousted then I will re-join. You cannot call a re-vote with only 5 board members. |
Mmmm normally you talk sense but ..... |  |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:30 - Dec 15 with 1634 views | E20Jack |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 23:19 - Dec 15 by longlostjack |
Mmmm normally you talk sense but ..... |
Makes perfect sense. Some may not agree, they are entitled to that opinion. Many upstanding members of the Trust left it (some are noe board members) and I do not intend on returning until I feel it is an organisation I want to be involved in. That begins with the removal of half of the current board. I have drafted a letter for all to repllicate and send on, so have done more than most and this was done from the outside - once that happens, I will join. If it doesn't then I won't. | |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 08:35 - Dec 16 with 1556 views | Uxbridge |
I'm staying out of this, for obvious reasons, however I have to say the following.
Motions of no confidence, forcing the existing board out is all well and good. Perfectly achievable I would even go so far as to suggest. However, what is your plan then?
What do you want to happen, beyond a broad "stop the deal" concept? Is it legal action, with all that entails, or strengthen your presence and stake in the club?
Who is going to stand for the new board? What are their goals and objectives? Who will be the new Chairman and SD?
I ask these questions, because I care deeply about the Trust and the role it should have (although I share many frustrations about the role it does have, frustrations not all of the Trust's making). I see a lot of destruction planned, but precious little construction.
What is the plan? What is the goal? Why is it better than now? Why is it better than the current direction?
I'm being genuine here, as I'm open to being convinced one way or the other. I don't pretend to have all the answers, but the problem I have is nobody is presenting a compelling alternative, beyond merely abolishing the current model. That's fine for what it is, but it's not very helpful beyond that initial act. There needs to be a plan. |  |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 08:49 - Dec 16 with 1525 views | ItchySphincter |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 22:48 - Dec 15 by Darran |
You’re right I agree. Look at the OP.
“Not a member but will happily join again if this was to get off the ground”
What the actual fuçk is that all about. If the Trust threw it open for another vote next week all the dull çunts that aren’t members won’t have a vote. They’re too fuçking dull to realise that for the sake of a tenner untill the end of the season.
The same ones going on and on about another vote,E20,Swanzay,Max etc all saying there should be another vote and when the vote goes the same way and they haven’t voted they’ll start posting the same old shit all over again.
It is actually quite bizarre. |
True. It's just another 'look at me thread'.
Crazy sh!t. |  |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 08:54 - Dec 16 with 1511 views | Jackfath |
You could write a letter and possibly get another vote, good value for £10. |  |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 09:09 - Dec 16 with 1495 views | Phil_S |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 22:54 - Dec 15 by E20Jack |
It would help if you read the thread...
''It may be better for the current members to do the ousting, and then the disenfranchined ex members to re join to vote on the deal. '' |
Its your call on what you do however what I would say is that after Wednesday there may be some discussion about another vote (I don't know but the reaction in the room wont have been ignored after the event and completely bypassed)
Now lets say that discussion did lead them to go back to another vote then the vote would be announced with the cut off date for membership being the date of the announcement. Waiting to see if people get "dethroned" first seems to go against what you would achieve
Given your very vocal and clear support on this, for the sake of £10 I would join up immediately and make your views known to the board as a member as you would be entitled to do. The best way to even have a chance of effecting change is to be in the organisation you want the change to happen in. Just as many people on here have tried to do. Kudos to them |  | | |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 09:13 - Dec 16 with 1485 views | Gowerjack |
This is an excellent idea.
I cannot for the life of me understand why we need to set up an alternative supporters organisation.
Surely all we need to is take back control of the existing one?
We already have sufficient expertese and experience among the posters on this site to run the trust much better than at present.
I'm willing to help collate the letters and deliver.
This is important we are at the sharp end here so could the usual suspects refrain from derailing this thread. |  |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 09:25 - Dec 16 with 1455 views | Shaky |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 22:57 - Dec 15 by chad |
Yep Shaky mentioned this a while back and did suggest that the numbers criteria to get things carried was less onerous at the AGM - hope I haven't misquoted
But did also say the timescales were tight for the notice required so would need to check this out - contained in the rules on the website |
Correct.
Other than that it is important to understand that a motion of no-confidence has no meaning in terms of company law.
If there is a motion of no-confidence in the government in parliament, it must resign due to a complex but well established body of largely unwritten constitutional law.
No such unwritten laws exist for companies. instead it is all stated in the statutes, and they don't say anything about no-confidence motions.
Furthermore you should not be calling for board members to stand down, but tabling resolutions to remove them based on a vote of the members present and entitled to vote at the meeting in accordance with their powers and rights as set out in the company by-laws.
Also it is not really on to block vote an entire board off. You have to afford each member some element of due process. That means individual resolutions on each individual board member you are seeking to remove.
Other than that I agree with Uxbridge. It is easy to tear down, and much harder to replace with something constructive.
As a minimum you need to have people standing by and ready to fill vacant board positions, and preferably named in advance in appropriate appointment resolutions to be tabled at the meeting in the event the removal of existing directors is successful.
Otherwise you are just paralysing the organisation. [Post edited 16 Dec 2017 9:35]
|  |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 09:34 - Dec 16 with 1425 views | whoflungdung |
Talking and squabbling while the club incinerates
It really could only be Swansea | |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 09:38 - Dec 16 with 1413 views | ItchySphincter |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 09:09 - Dec 16 by Phil_S |
Its your call on what you do however what I would say is that after Wednesday there may be some discussion about another vote (I don't know but the reaction in the room wont have been ignored after the event and completely bypassed)
Now lets say that discussion did lead them to go back to another vote then the vote would be announced with the cut off date for membership being the date of the announcement. Waiting to see if people get "dethroned" first seems to go against what you would achieve
Given your very vocal and clear support on this, for the sake of £10 I would join up immediately and make your views known to the board as a member as you would be entitled to do. The best way to even have a chance of effecting change is to be in the organisation you want the change to happen in. Just as many people on here have tried to do. Kudos to them |
Easier to come on here and get someone else to do it.
It's the principle see. | |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 09:44 - Dec 16 with 1397 views | E20Jack |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 09:38 - Dec 16 by ItchySphincter |
Easier to come on here and get someone else to do it.
It's the principle see. |
Get someone else to do what? You do realise I was the one that constructed this template yes?
If you like I will also print it off and send it so my workload exceeds that of everyone else, but it will of course be a spoiled request.
Happy? Or are you happier being in the snide corner? If you have no imput into this then clear off. Cheers. [Post edited 16 Dec 2017 10:16]
| |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 09:48 - Dec 16 with 1391 views | exhmrc1 |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 08:35 - Dec 16 by Uxbridge |
I'm staying out of this, for obvious reasons, however I have to say the following.
Motions of no confidence, forcing the existing board out is all well and good. Perfectly achievable I would even go so far as to suggest. However, what is your plan then?
What do you want to happen, beyond a broad "stop the deal" concept? Is it legal action, with all that entails, or strengthen your presence and stake in the club?
Who is going to stand for the new board? What are their goals and objectives? Who will be the new Chairman and SD?
I ask these questions, because I care deeply about the Trust and the role it should have (although I share many frustrations about the role it does have, frustrations not all of the Trust's making). I see a lot of destruction planned, but precious little construction.
What is the plan? What is the goal? Why is it better than now? Why is it better than the current direction?
I'm being genuine here, as I'm open to being convinced one way or the other. I don't pretend to have all the answers, but the problem I have is nobody is presenting a compelling alternative, beyond merely abolishing the current model. That's fine for what it is, but it's not very helpful beyond that initial act. There needs to be a plan. |
To answer some of your questions.
1 The current board can be replaced on a temporary basis by the people who applied for co-option.
2 It would be for that body to organise new elections.
3 The new board would decide who would hold what posts.
4 If the vote was overturned and legal action was taken there would be no need for a supporters director.
You ask whether it would be better than the current board. It could hardly be any worse. The new board will hopefully act within the trust rules unlike the current one.
The new members will not abuse members in the way current board members allegedly have done.
The new board will be rid of all the people who are responsible for the lack of confidence that currently exists in the trust and will make the trust more meaningful to all fans. | | | |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 10:03 - Dec 16 with 1368 views | E20Jack |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 09:09 - Dec 16 by Phil_S |
Its your call on what you do however what I would say is that after Wednesday there may be some discussion about another vote (I don't know but the reaction in the room wont have been ignored after the event and completely bypassed)
Now lets say that discussion did lead them to go back to another vote then the vote would be announced with the cut off date for membership being the date of the announcement. Waiting to see if people get "dethroned" first seems to go against what you would achieve
Given your very vocal and clear support on this, for the sake of £10 I would join up immediately and make your views known to the board as a member as you would be entitled to do. The best way to even have a chance of effecting change is to be in the organisation you want the change to happen in. Just as many people on here have tried to do. Kudos to them |
If that happens then I will happily admit my error and will have to live with that. As it stands my belief is that there will be no vote until the balance is tipped in the other favour, when the balance gets tipped I will join, not a second before. I do not want to contribute to the organisation in it's current form in terms of support, numbers or money. | |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 10:10 - Dec 16 with 1345 views | Darran |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 10:03 - Dec 16 by E20Jack |
If that happens then I will happily admit my error and will have to live with that. As it stands my belief is that there will be no vote until the balance is tipped in the other favour, when the balance gets tipped I will join, not a second before. I do not want to contribute to the organisation in it's current form in terms of support, numbers or money. |
“I do not want to contribute to the organisation in it's current form in terms of support, numbers or money”
Pointless talking about it then you dozey twát. . | |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 10:11 - Dec 16 with 1341 views | E20Jack |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 08:35 - Dec 16 by Uxbridge |
I'm staying out of this, for obvious reasons, however I have to say the following.
Motions of no confidence, forcing the existing board out is all well and good. Perfectly achievable I would even go so far as to suggest. However, what is your plan then?
What do you want to happen, beyond a broad "stop the deal" concept? Is it legal action, with all that entails, or strengthen your presence and stake in the club?
Who is going to stand for the new board? What are their goals and objectives? Who will be the new Chairman and SD?
I ask these questions, because I care deeply about the Trust and the role it should have (although I share many frustrations about the role it does have, frustrations not all of the Trust's making). I see a lot of destruction planned, but precious little construction.
What is the plan? What is the goal? Why is it better than now? Why is it better than the current direction?
I'm being genuine here, as I'm open to being convinced one way or the other. I don't pretend to have all the answers, but the problem I have is nobody is presenting a compelling alternative, beyond merely abolishing the current model. That's fine for what it is, but it's not very helpful beyond that initial act. There needs to be a plan. |
I think a stopping of this deal is of uppermost importance over structure concerns of an organisation failing us at every level.
If a car was free wheeling toward the edge of a cliff, the main goal is to stop that car. Fixing the car to stop it going of course again can be done after.
The Trust had 15 candidates apply for the recent posts, I am sure there will be no shortage of offers to correct this mess. | |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 10:18 - Dec 16 with 1320 views | E20Jack |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 10:10 - Dec 16 by Darran |
“I do not want to contribute to the organisation in it's current form in terms of support, numbers or money”
Pointless talking about it then you dozey twát. . |
No it isn't which is why it clearly states "in it's current form". Keep up snidey. | |
| |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 10:21 - Dec 16 with 1314 views | Darran |
| Vote of no confidence thread. on 10:18 - Dec 16 by E20Jack |
No it isn't which is why it clearly states "in it's current form". Keep up snidey. |
People are clearly laughing at you Dim Dims. Go listen to Hanson and bang your supermodel girlfriend or summin instead. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
