Stan A. Einstein wrote:
In my view I think of the present board Kevin Ward would seem to have the skills necessary to make the board a cohesive unit. That is not to say that there are not other candidates who would not have the required attributes.

Would that be the same Kevin Ward who along with Rob Santwris and others, promised transparency and much improved communication with supporters, and since their election nothing?

The only benefit of a ridiculously sized Board of Directors, now comprising 12 members I believe, is that there will be a wider circle of mates who can be kept in the 'know'. Stan, it seems that you too now have the inside track from a particular source, something that you were once vehemently against when it was clear others had similar privileged sources and you didn't!
All this 'nod and wink' nonsense is why the Trust model is destined to fail and is more suited to non league football at best.

Taunton Iron Cider wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:
In my view I think of the present board Kevin Ward would seem to have the skills necessary to make the board a cohesive unit. That is not to say that there are not other candidates who would not have the required attributes.

Would that be the same Kevin Ward who along with Rob Santwris and others, promised transparency and much improved communication with supporters, and since their election nothing?

The only benefit of a ridiculously sized Board of Directors, now comprising 12 members I believe, is that there will be a wider circle of mates who can be kept in the 'know'. Stan, it seems that you too now have the inside track from a particular source, something that you were once vehemently against when it was clear others had similar privileged sources and you didn't!
All this 'nod and wink' nonsense is why the Trust model is destined to fail and is more suited to non league football at best.

I am aware that since the new directors have been in place that the silence has been maintained. Which I have to say is disappointing. Nonetheless I am as always of the view that the new board should be given the opportunity to assess the situation. If there is still silence by the end of the month then I would agree entirely with you.

Moving on I will post up the details contained within the tribunal bundle. I accept that you believe that the Trust model doesn't work. I disagree. My view being that it is the way forward for clubs like County. However I do think that this model relies on the Trust having the support of the fan base and the trust of the fan base. This requires an openness. Any individual myself included will not agree with every decision made but without knowing what the decision is that trust is impossible.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:[

I am aware that since the new directors have been in place that the silence has been maintained. Which I have to say is disappointing. Nonetheless I am as always of the view that the new board should be given the opportunity to assess the situation. If there is still silence by the end of the month then I would agree entirely with you.

Why is it disappointing? What do the board have to answer to? Why should they have to answer to an unofficial message board like this one? They answered questions at the recent meeting and i'm sure they will at the next official club meeting.

Willthiswork wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:[

I am aware that since the new directors have been in place that the silence has been maintained. Which I have to say is disappointing. Nonetheless I am as always of the view that the new board should be given the opportunity to assess the situation. If there is still silence by the end of the month then I would agree entirely with you.

Why is it disappointing? What do the board have to answer to?
They answered questions at the recent meeting and i'm sure they will at the next official club meeting.

Chairman didn't !

Also they answer to the electorate and have so far failed to honour many of their previous commitments. Remember the promise to provide notes post Board Meetings, that was short lived wasn't it?

Taunton Iron Cider wrote:

Willthiswork wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:[

I am aware that since the new directors have been in place that the silence has been maintained. Which I have to say is disappointing. Nonetheless I am as always of the view that the new board should be given the opportunity to assess the situation. If there is still silence by the end of the month then I would agree entirely with you.

Why is it disappointing? What do the board have to answer to?
They answered questions at the recent meeting and i'm sure they will at the next official club meeting.

Chairman didn't !

Also they answer to the electorate and have so far failed to honour many of their previous commitments. Remember the promise to provide notes post Board Meetings, that was short lived wasn't it?

Does it matter who does answer - that's the point of a board. GF was absent from the last meeting (reasons clearly explained in previous thread(s)). Maybe the Board Notes will be provided upon request, but after a sensible time limit as not to influence any potential issues?

Taunton Iron Cider wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:
In my view I think of the present board Kevin Ward would seem to have the skills necessary to make the board a cohesive unit. That is not to say that there are not other candidates who would not have the required attributes.

Would that be the same Kevin Ward who along with Rob Santwris and others, promised transparency and much improved communication with supporters, and since their election nothing?

The only benefit of a ridiculously sized Board of Directors, now comprising 12 members I believe, is that there will be a wider circle of mates who can be kept in the 'know'. Stan, it seems that you too now have the inside track from a particular source, something that you were once vehemently against when it was clear others had similar privileged sources and you didn't!
All this 'nod and wink' nonsense is why the Trust model is destined to fail and is more suited to non league football at best.

+1, so accurate it’s laughable.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

Taunton Iron Cider wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:
In my view I think of the present board Kevin Ward would seem to have the skills necessary to make the board a cohesive unit. That is not to say that there are not other candidates who would not have the required attributes.

Would that be the same Kevin Ward who along with Rob Santwris and others, promised transparency and much improved communication with supporters, and since their election nothing?

The only benefit of a ridiculously sized Board of Directors, now comprising 12 members I believe, is that there will be a wider circle of mates who can be kept in the 'know'. Stan, it seems that you too now have the inside track from a particular source, something that you were once vehemently against when it was clear others had similar privileged sources and you didn't!
All this 'nod and wink' nonsense is why the Trust model is destined to fail and is more suited to non league football at best.

I am aware that since the new directors have been in place that the silence has been maintained. Which I have to say is disappointing. Nonetheless I am as always of the view that the new board should be given the opportunity to assess the situation. If there is still silence by the end of the month then I would agree entirely with you.

Moving on I will post up the details contained within the tribunal bundle. I accept that you believe that the Trust model doesn't work. I disagree. My view being that it is the way forward for clubs like County. However I do think that this model relies on the Trust having the support of the fan base and the trust of the fan base. This requires an openness. Any individual myself included will not agree with every decision made but without knowing what the decision is that trust is impossible.

The irony of someone privy to confidential information regarding Mike Flynn mentioning the word trust is certainly not lost on me. Perhaps the breach of trust is affecting the manager more than we know.

Willthiswork wrote:
Why is it disappointing? What do the board have to answer to?
They answered questions at the recent meeting and i'm sure they will at the next official club meeting

Does it matter who does answer - that's the point of a board. GF was absent from the last meeting (reasons clearly explained in previous thread(s)). Maybe the Board Notes will be provided upon request, but after a sensible time limit as not to influence any potential issues?

As you know I think that you have close connections to the Club, therefore your defence of the status quo is understandable. However for you to question why it should matter if the Chairman fronts a meeting with supporters is slightly disingenuous, because as you well know his absence was not just at the last meeting.
As for the Board Meeting notes, I did ask why they suddenly stopped and was told it was an oversight and that their issue would recommence, since when, nothing. Mind you, what I am hearing is we cannot even communicate properly with valued sponsors, so on that basis supporters have no chance!

Regarding the mole.
We have 12 directors I believe who have families and friends.
We have Flynny and his team who have family and friends
We have players ditto
We have employees ditto
Talking hundreds of people here.
Have they all signed some official secrets act?
I have friends who know people on that huge list.
I get told things which are 100% accurate but they are not for this forum.
Its ridiculous contributors coming up with a "weasel director" who should be named and shamed.
Things come out in innocent conversations.
Fact or Gossip that's life.
Why some on here resort to schoolyard insults is ridiculous.
A forum is just that to express a view hopefully without an insulting reply as we see on most threads unfortunately.
Clearly some on here maybe directors or employees or even players so what!

jollysuperstar wrote:Regarding the mole.
We have 12 directors I believe who have families and friends.
We have Flynny and his team who have family and friends
We have players ditto
We have employees ditto
Talking hundreds of people here.
Have they all signed some official secrets act?
I have friends who know people on that huge list.
I get told things which are 100% accurate but they are not for this forum.
Its ridiculous contributors coming up with a "weasel director" who should be named and shamed.
Things come out in innocent conversations.
Fact or Gossip that's life.
Why some on here resort to schoolyard insults is ridiculous.
A forum is just that to express a view hopefully without an insulting reply as we see on most threads unfortunately.
Clearly some on here maybe directors or employees or even players so what!

I am glad someone has seen that which to me seems blindingly obvious.

jollysuperstar wrote:Regarding the mole.
We have 12 directors I believe who have families and friends.
We have Flynny and his team who have family and friends
We have players ditto
We have employees ditto
Talking hundreds of people here.
Have they all signed some official secrets act?
I have friends who know people on that huge list.
I get told things which are 100% accurate but they are not for this forum.
Its ridiculous contributors coming up with a "weasel director" who should be named and shamed.
Things come out in innocent conversations.
Fact or Gossip that's life.
Why some on here resort to schoolyard insults is ridiculous.
A forum is just that to express a view hopefully without an insulting reply as we see on most threads unfortunately.
Clearly some on here maybe directors or employees or even players so what!

is that you harps? have to disagree, feeding stan confidential info in order to stir trouble is harming the club.

and they are cowardly to not bring just ring there grievances up with the rest of the board. also stan is such a hypocrite about tranoarancy and the mole is.

I wouldn't call them a mole I would call them a rat.

Jimmy Exile wrote:

I wouldn't call them a mole I would call them a rat.

I can't help thinking that this gets more and more like an episode of The Soprano's every day.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

Jimmy Exile wrote:

I wouldn't call them a mole I would call them a rat.

I can't help thinking that this gets more and more like an episode of The Soprano's every day.

Forgettaboutit!

Jimmy Exile wrote:

jollysuperstar wrote:Regarding the mole.
We have 12 directors I believe who have families and friends.
We have Flynny and his team who have family and friends
We have players ditto
We have employees ditto
Talking hundreds of people here.
Have they all signed some official secrets act?
I have friends who know people on that huge list.
I get told things which are 100% accurate but they are not for this forum.
Its ridiculous contributors coming up with a "weasel director" who should be named and shamed.
Things come out in innocent conversations.
Fact or Gossip that's life.
Why some on here resort to schoolyard insults is ridiculous.
A forum is just that to express a view hopefully without an insulting reply as we see on most threads unfortunately.
Clearly some on here maybe directors or employees or even players so what!

is that you harps? have to disagree, feeding stan confidential info in order to stir trouble is harming the club.

and they are cowardly to not bring just ring there grievances up with the rest of the board. also stan is such a hypocrite about tranoarancy and the mole is.

I wouldn't call them a mole I would call them a rat.

Nope.
Just saying information comes out naturally via friends, family etc.
No idea what info Stan has.
One fact or numerous but is that really harming recent club results?
If not what's the problem
Just one contributors opinion.

Just in case anyone is wondering the Email thread which Jimmy would love to see has been moved to anything else. It has also been tagged on to the perspective thread.

Don't know why. It was not abusive, contained only information in the public domain and is about Newport County.