Questions for the PASB

Guest

Mrrapson wrote:

Andy_Symons wrote:

Retrospective action against Tony Hooper by the other GASBoard members will be difficult; but it's imperative that some form of sanction is available if 'the electorate' (whoever that may be) is dissatisfied with the conduct or performance of a Board member. Maybe a 'recall' form could be made available, and if, say, 50 'constituents' signed this recall form, then that member faces an automatic vote of no confidence at Board level. Lose the confidence vote and you're off. This is by no means being put forward as a panacea for the problems of misconduct by GASBoard members, more as a point for discussion.

On the current question of Hooper's behaviour - the man clearly has no scruples, no standards and doesn't even have sufficient honour to even announce that he will be asking for his conduct to be be debated and voted upon at the first gathering of the GASBoard. The loss of confidence in him, across the Boards has been spectacular. His position, in my eyes, is untenable. If he hasn't the decency to resign and tries to brazen it out, he'll be booted off the Board at the next ballot. He's let the genie out of the bottle; nothing he does can see it put back.

How easy would it be to remove a person from the board if they set up for a 4 year tenure as Tony suggested? Short of a Clintongate type escaped sure Barack ohooper would be there for the long haul like the rest of them?

To be fair Leigh, these are all questions that should have been answered before an election was even looked at - length of tenure, conduct, remit, terms of reference. When I went along to the first couple of meetings at the club with the learned Professor and The Supreme Leader, I did so because I thought these were the things that would be discussed; that they weren't is what has sewn the seeds of the cluster-f*ck that the GASBoard has become. What we've had is people being elected to a Board not knowing how long they'd be serving, how they were supposed to act, what they were and weren't going to be doing, and club members voted for them blissfully unaware also.

However, that doesn't excuse Tony's behaviour - even if he weren't a GASBoard rep, his post on pasoti about the jokes on here was beyond the pail on a number of levels. The fact that he basically abused a collective of just under 400 people - including many who post here uncontroversially - who he's supposed to be representing, shows him to be unfit for the role. And, given that he's mentioned on a number of occasions that he's a Parish Councillor in the area he lives, that means he has even less excuse for behaving as he did.

Subject: Re: Questions for the PASB Sat Oct 27, 2012 8:11 pm

GOB wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

It seems to me that ATD will eventually, inevitably evolve into a slightly different version of Pasoti because it will face similar but different challenges to those that Pasoti once faced. As it does it will decide upon different but similar responses to those challenges. New precedents will be set and a new norm will be established at which point ATD2 will be started and it will all begin again. It's a bit like how all fish are essentially the same shape and slimy. They have to be like they are to thrive in their environment. The same sort of thing will happen to PASB. It has now reached the stage where they have what will become a steering committee. Once that committee takes shape it will establish protocol including rules, procedures and so forth just as the Trust has articles and a constitution the so too will PASB. These will be similar but different to those already adopted by the Trust. Both will "keep an eye on the club". Both will offer a channel for supporters to communicate to the club. I honestly can't for the life of me see how the PASB will be any different to the Trust or why we need it at all. Why are we reinventing the wheel? What are they afraid of?

As far as ATD is concerned it's something that I have given a hell of a lot of thought to, You may or may not be right, maybe it's natural human behavior over a period of time? ATD has got off to a very different start than pasoti did and it'll take more than one person to change that as things stand. Also, there's no money involved with ATD, there's no profit. This will hopefully at least delay any Mk2 version of today's pasoti. As you say, if it does then it'll be hello ATD Mk 2. At present neither do we have owners or moderators with such nasty streaks or egos to milk, characters with those qualities are not easy to find...hopefully!

It is only a recent development that there has been any money involved with Pasoti. The need for it to meet costs comes with increasing popularity and is one of the eveolutionary stages that will happen if ATD becomes popular enough and breaks out of it's niche.

Penzance wrote:

That's a very pessimistic view of all things ATD from Sir Francis, and one I can't share. No room for evolution in his logic there, and nothing more than an everlasting bankrupt distopia. Frankie is obviously no Darwinian, but then he wouldn't be, never having heard of him yet. Frankie was never known for his enlightenment, just another cannon ball swanning around the seven seas.

Some of us move on, and change in light of the history of things. There's no reason whatsoever for ATD to follow the Pasoti thing, save the wrong people rocking up and trying it on and infiltrating this site's admin, as has happened in the past.

ATDs core democratic principles will leave it open to infiltration. IJN was voted in as a Pasoti mod and look at what he has done.

Rickler wrote:

Can you clarify please?

Who is actually going to kick Hooper out? His fellow PASB members? Under what authority?

And no recognition of the PASB by who? The fans or the trust? Who and how would the new pasb be formed?

The ejection of Hooper from PASB following his election just can't happen. There is no framework to allow it. There could be should be a vote of no confidence but if he decided to sit tight then what? Nothing. It just depends on how thick skinned he is and my money is on very.

Czarcasm wrote:

Yea Man wrote:

Even if ATD ended up with a group of Pasoti type mods, the keyholders remain the safety net and they are there to ensure ATD remains how it was intended.

I think the keyholders are more there to ensure no skullduggery ensues, rather than influence the direction the site takes from a posting point of view.

The problem with the 'Democratic' ethos of this site, is that there is a (albeit remote) risk that over a course of time, the site could be infiltrated by dark forces. That's why we're in good hands with Pete and Frank as oversee(ers) - if thats even a word!

The way I see it, if Pasoti continues to be a mouthpiece for the club, ATD will continue to thrive.

That thriving is the biggest danger that ATD faces. The problem for the keyholders ejecting elected mods is identical to the one PASB has of ridding itself of Hooper.

Posts: 578 Join date: 2011-12-23

Dougie wrote:

And p.s. Damon I know you must love me but in your post at the top of this page I'm sure you mean Dingle.

Oops - apologies to you both.

Guest

Andy_Symons wrote:

even if he weren't a GASBoard rep, his post on pasoti about the jokes on here was beyond the pail on a number of levels. The fact that he basically abused a collective of just under 400 people - including many who post here uncontroversially - who he's supposed to be representing, shows him to be unfit for the role. And, given that he's mentioned on a number of occasions that he's a Parish Councillor in the area he lives, that means he has even less excuse for behaving as he did.

Totally true, Andy. Plus, as you've posted on the other thread, he still refuses to answer perfectly legitimate questions about his role in 'investigating' Jock - questions which have now been repeated by people who post over there more than they do on here.

That's why I said what I did about not needing any rules in this instance (much as it's important that all that stuff gets clarified asap). Hopefully a majority of PASB members, having been made aware of the facts, will refuse to work with him.

Subject: Re: Questions for the PASB Sat Oct 27, 2012 9:53 pm

Peggy wrote:

Andy_Symons wrote:

even if he weren't a GASBoard rep, his post on pasoti about the jokes on here was beyond the pail on a number of levels. The fact that he basically abused a collective of just under 400 people - including many who post here uncontroversially - who he's supposed to be representing, shows him to be unfit for the role. And, given that he's mentioned on a number of occasions that he's a Parish Councillor in the area he lives, that means he has even less excuse for behaving as he did.

Totally true, Andy. Plus, as you've posted on the other thread, he still refuses to answer perfectly legitimate questions about his role in 'investigating' Jock - questions which have now been repeated by people who post over there more than they do on here.

That's why I said what I did about not needing any rules in this instance (much as it's important that all that stuff gets clarified asap). Hopefully a majority of PASB members, having been made aware of the facts, will refuse to work with him.

And The Deep Throater. How could you possibly trust either or expect them to respect confidentiality after what they have done so far?

Posts: 6451 Join date: 2011-10-02

What is more significant: Mr Hooper's alleged role as a PI employed to track down a fellow fan & his family; or his complaint about a thread on here - the complaint which has almost unanimously condemned by all & sundry?

Personally, I have no problem at all with his complaint about the Saville thread. His first approach was via direct contact with the mods (although so many clearly spoof complaints come in that it has become very hard to discern which ones are real and need taking seriously). That's an appropriate course to take. I didn't agree with his complaint but that's life! I really find his alleged further complaints to local councillors and the club laughable and hardly worth bothering about. Though I'd point out that, as far as I'm aware, we only have Mr Hooper's word for it that he has made such contact - in this world of story, half-story & downright lies how are we mere mortals to tell the truth? I suspect the club's present view of ATD is well established. I don't think any 'complaint' from Mr Hooper will make any significant difference at all.

The issue I do feel strongly about is the allegation about the investigation into Jock and his family (which actually appears to have been bungled anyway). To be fair, we are not a court of law or an investigating body - we only have Jock's view of it and that is clearly strongly held! It is apparent that 'something' went on. It has been suggested that at least four people were in on the whole thing - either in the pre-planning or after the event. For what it's worth, my view is that this should either have become a police complaint or let it drop. I thought that many weeks ago.

However, if the PI & PASB representative did have an involvement, his position as member of a body representing Argyle fans is TOTALLY untenable. Similarly if the others (and it has been alleged that they include Messrs Newell, Jameson & Webb in some roles or other plus probably more) have been involved then the continuing acceptance of these people in their positions of privilege at the club is highly dubious as is Mr Jameson's position with the PASB.

The questions that Mr Hooper answered on pasoti were all about the Saville argument. To be honest I couldn't give a toss about those. Mary Whitehouse lives on. He can complain to whoever he likes. He could complain to forummotion, the police, David Cameron or anyone. That's up to him. The questions he didn't answer were the more unsavoury ones to do with the investigation it is alleged he was involved in. That's what should be taking our focus.

It is a bugger how the PASB has been set up. They have no working rules of conduct or established disciplinary procedures. Who are they answerable to? Their (so-called) electorate and that doesn't include lots of us! It is hard to see ultimately what they could do if Mr Hooper dug his heels in except to propose a vote of no confidence and hope that, if passed, he would bow to such pressure. On the other hand, that brings us back to how they might assess any quasi-evidence put in front of them. They also aren't a court of law. I'm not sure what could be done at that point.

Posts: 2700 Join date: 2011-10-23

knecht wrote:

The issue I do feel strongly about is the allegation about the investigation into Jock and his family (which actually appears to have been bungled anyway). To be fair, we are not a court of law or an investigating body - we only have Jock's view of it and that is clearly strongly held! It is apparent that 'something' went on. It has been suggested that at least four people were in on the whole thing - either in the pre-planning or after the event. For what it's worth, my view is that this should either have become a police complaint or let it drop. I thought that many weeks ago.

Thing is, one person hiring a PI to investigate another, isn't unlawful, so a Police complaint would be largely pointless.

It's the immorality of the whole situation that is so outrageous. For that reason more than any other, I don't agree that Jock should have let it drop. In fact, I think he's actually showed a good deal of restraint.

Posts: 6451 Join date: 2011-10-02

Czarcasm wrote:

......
Thing is, one person hiring a PI to investigate another, isn't unlawful, so a Police complaint would be largely pointless.

It's the immorality of the whole situation that is so outrageous. For that reason more than any other, I don't agree that Jock should have let it drop. In fact, I think he's actually showed a good deal of restraint.

I'd certainly agree that the immorality contained in the allegations is crucial. We actually don't know the details (and I'm most definitely not saying Jock is lying) but, whilst the PI activities aren't illegal at all, it may be the wider picture where Jock and his family were allegedly threatened is the most important aspect. And, to repeat myself, it is here that the club and the PASB, in my view, need to take a stand. And it is here that questions need to be asked and answered. The Savillegate nonsense pales into insignificance compared to that saga.

Posts: 4999 Join date: 2012-02-21

I think you have it all pretty accurate Knecht. Serious accusations that involve those involved with the club, could and should be investigated by the club at the very least. It will not drop and it isn't going to go away!

Posts: 2110 Join date: 2011-05-10 Location: Ipswich

Jameson paid for a PI to get Jock's home address so that he could send a solicitors letter to him. Somehow "Greenman" got hold of this information and used it to make threats of violence against Jock.

Between those 2 events the names of Hooper, Webb, Newell and Sean Rapson are all implicated. They all deny any wrongdoing, but how did the info get from Jameson to Greenman?

Guest

Frank Bullitt wrote:

Jameson paid for a PI to get Jock's home address so that he could send a solicitors letter to him. Somehow "Greenman" got hold of this information and used it to make threats of violence against Jock.

Between those 2 events the names of Hooper, Webb, Newell and Sean Rapson are all implicated. They all deny any wrongdoing, but how did the info get from Jameson to Greenman?

Maybe that information didn't have to travel very far to get from one to the other?

Subject: Re: Questions for the PASB Sun Oct 28, 2012 12:45 pm

Frank Bullitt wrote:

Jameson paid for a PI to get Jock's home address so that he could send a solicitors letter to him. Somehow "Greenman" got hold of this information and used it to make threats of violence against Jock.

Between those 2 events the names of Hooper, Webb, Newell and Sean Rapson are all implicated. They all deny any wrongdoing, but how did the info get from Jameson to Greenman?

The greenman business is a bit weird. He started off having a general pop at anyone and then got really pissy when I made a joke about his mother, funny as he had been pretty abusive to anyone on here. Obviously liked dishing it out but couldn't take it.

Then i got the piss taken out of me over looking after my son, but he complained to the mods when I gave him some stick back.

While all this was happening Dane Bunney was telling Newell on twatter that he was sticking up for him and fighting his corner on ATD.

At the time we had two new accounts, greenman and highwayman, and after highwayman posted something I accused him wrongly of being Dane .

That really only left greenman who could've been Bunney, or Dane had an older account.

I could see it being Dane, especially as greenman had a pop at Andy too, and this was around the time that Newell, daz and Bunney were involved in the Adt stuff.

I can imagine Newell not being man enough to threaten me himself in case it ever got out, and Dane is enough of a fuckwit to do it for him, because whoever did it had knowledge of the private investigator.

Maybe it was daz? I don't know what he's like except I get the impression that he's a Newell wannabe. Always saying he's given up being a mod or even posting on Pasoti, then shown up as w fuckin idiot when he is using Pasoti still and still a mod.

Whoever it was either knew Hooper, Jameson or most probably Ian Newell, as they had shown him evidence about my mother on the GT'S coach to Morecambe.

What I don't get is Newell and webb blaming someone for greenman, and then naming Hooper and Jameson for the P.I. part, and yet these people are all still friendly with each other scratch

Lee Jameson was pretty upset on the phone when I confronted him, and admitted hiring the P.I. but wouldn't name them.

He was upset that Newell and Webb had dropped him in it, when they're supposed to be his friends. He also said that he had told them he has had enough with Argyle and was going to concentrate on his career, but someone or something changed his mind, possibly the promise of a seat on the PASB? The day I spoke to him he was living with Newell and Webb for naming him and also for calling him a drama queen for wanting out of all the crap happening online.

Almost like calling him a coward. Maybe he was sent a white feather as well? Whatever happened then, it made Jameson perform a u-turn and want back in.

These are all people connected with Argyle and each other, who keep cropping up when some kind of shit happens, usually with dirty tricks aimed at this site or the people who use it.

If the GT'S don't advocate these events then they seem to be another group who let Newell cause chaos. Sure he's raised pots of money, but so did Jimmy Savile, doesn't excuse his behaviour, tell him to get lost if he's dragging down their good name?

The club don't seem too perturbed by Newells behaviour, in fact I'd say the rumours about him being given a proper title and permanent place in the directors box may well already be true? He was dressed appropriately at Cheltenham.

Lee Jameson has questions to answer as well, but he's deleted his account on here and deleted me on Facebook. Wonder why lol!

Posts: 4999 Join date: 2012-02-21

Jock remember, some people's idea of friendship is a very, very different thing to what you and I would consider as friendship.

Guest

knecht wrote:

What is more significant: Mr Hooper's alleged role as a PI employed to track down a fellow fan & his family; or his complaint about a thread on here - the complaint which has almost unanimously condemned by all & sundry?

Personally, I have no problem at all with his complaint about the Saville thread. His first approach was via direct contact with the mods (although so many clearly spoof complaints come in that it has become very hard to discern which ones are real and need taking seriously). That's an appropriate course to take. I didn't agree with his complaint but that's life! I really find his alleged further complaints to local councillors and the club laughable and hardly worth bothering about. Though I'd point out that, as far as I'm aware, we only have Mr Hooper's word for it that he has made such contact - in this world of story, half-story & downright lies how are we mere mortals to tell the truth? I suspect the club's present view of ATD is well established. I don't think any 'complaint' from Mr Hooper will make any significant difference at all.

The issue I do feel strongly about is the allegation about the investigation into Jock and his family (which actually appears to have been bungled anyway). To be fair, we are not a court of law or an investigating body - we only have Jock's view of it and that is clearly strongly held! It is apparent that 'something' went on. It has been suggested that at least four people were in on the whole thing - either in the pre-planning or after the event. For what it's worth, my view is that this should either have become a police complaint or let it drop. I thought that many weeks ago.

However, if the PI & PASB representative did have an involvement, his position as member of a body representing Argyle fans is TOTALLY untenable. Similarly if the others (and it has been alleged that they include Messrs Newell, Jameson & Webb in some roles or other plus probably more) have been involved then the continuing acceptance of these people in their positions of privilege at the club is highly dubious as is Mr Jameson's position with the PASB.

The questions that Mr Hooper answered on pasoti were all about the Saville argument. To be honest I couldn't give a toss about those. Mary Whitehouse lives on. He can complain to whoever he likes. He could complain to forummotion, the police, David Cameron or anyone. That's up to him. The questions he didn't answer were the more unsavoury ones to do with the investigation it is alleged he was involved in. That's what should be taking our focus.

It is a bugger how the PASB has been set up. They have no working rules of conduct or established disciplinary procedures. Who are they answerable to? Their (so-called) electorate and that doesn't include lots of us! It is hard to see ultimately what they could do if Mr Hooper dug his heels in except to propose a vote of no confidence and hope that, if passed, he would bow to such pressure. On the other hand, that brings us back to how they might assess any quasi-evidence put in front of them. They also aren't a court of law. I'm not sure what could be done at that point.

As ever, very true and wise, Herr Ruprecht. But ... (where's the cheeky, twinkly smiley when I need it?) we're not talking about two separate things here.

See, Hooper was perfectly prepared to post on here when he thought he might get a few extra votes out of it. Only we kept on asking about his role in the investigation of Jock, so he sloped off, hoping we'd forget about it. But we didn't forget, and kept on demanding answers.

So Hooper wanted to get even with Jock for talking about it such a lot. He couldn't do it during the election campaign, but as soon as the results were in he went for it. Jock (as I understand it) posted at least some of the Savile stuff, so Hooper thought he'd found his weapon. That's why his behaviour and response over the Savile stuff has been so inconsistent - if he was really concerned about it, he'd also be up in arms about the fansfest, the chanting and so on.

You have to be very clever to devise and carry out a plan to silence your 'enemies' without them realising what's going on. Hooper's just another protagonist who's not really up to it.

#educatedwankers

Subject: Re: Questions for the PASB Sun Oct 28, 2012 4:14 pm

My comments in the Herald online feature about the PASB probably didn't impress him either.

He really, really doesn't want to answer questions about his involvement in jockgate.

Posts: 1980 Join date: 2011-05-10 Location: Inside the mind

Greenjock wrote:

He really, really doesn't want to answer questions about his involvement in jockgate.

Actually, he gave you his answer about Jockgate - he denied being involved - but you don't believe him.

You prefer to believe Newell instead. Fair enough.

Jameson is the one who should be put under pressure. He does know, but refuses to say!

As Knecht (and I) and may I hasten to add, Tony Cholwell himself said.... You should have gone to the police!

Posts: 4252 Join date: 2011-12-21

Has Lee Jameson ever actually named the PI?

_________________
Webb out. Larrieu for president.

Posts: 6451 Join date: 2011-10-02

Frank Bullitt wrote:

Jameson paid for a PI to get Jock's home address so that he could send a solicitors letter to him. Somehow "Greenman" got hold of this information and used it to make threats of violence against Jock.

Between those 2 events the names of Hooper, Webb, Newell and Sean Rapson are all implicated. They all deny any wrongdoing, but how did the info get from Jameson to Greenman?

If Frank is right about this, then any PI was only being paid for doing a pretty easy job (though, as I said above, it seems it wasn't done very well as it seems that Jock's address was wrongly given) and that is all. If the PI - or anyone else - knew that the details found would have been used to make threats of violence then that changes the situation. In addition, the allegation is that the details of Jock's mother were also found and passed on. That is plain wrong and unacceptable by any measure.

As Frank says, somewhere between somebody asking a PI for Jock's address to be found and the apparent extension of that into his family and threats of violence is where the important story lies.

Posts: 4252 Join date: 2011-12-21

So......

1) Either Greenman was one of Jameson, Webb, Newell or Rapson jnr.

2) Greenman was infact a deepthroat and was used by a couple of people. Looking at the IP's it could be possible.

3) Somebody has overheard conversations and took it upon themselves to threaten Jock (like Newell said of Sean.)

4) I'm talking sh't and actually don't know what i'm on about.

_________________
Webb out. Larrieu for president.

Posts: 4999 Join date: 2012-02-21

Wasn't Greenman one of Newell's many usernames on the old Argyle Talk site?

Subject: Re: Questions for the PASB Sun Oct 28, 2012 6:18 pm

Greenjock wrote:

My comments in the Herald online feature about the PASB probably didn't impress him either.

He really, really doesn't want to answer questions about his involvement in jockgate.

Mine probably didn't as well. Smile

_________________
I'm one of the common people so says the wife!
(A true GSG Girl)

Posts: 4252 Join date: 2011-12-21

GOB wrote:

Wasn't Greenman one of Newell's many usernames on the old Argyle Talk site?

Did he like using the term "Slyman" a lot too?

_________________
Webb out. Larrieu for president.

Subject: Re: Questions for the PASB Sun Oct 28, 2012 10:06 pm

Rickler wrote:

Greenjock wrote:

He really, really doesn't want to answer questions about his involvement in jockgate.

Actually, he gave you his answer about Jockgate - he denied being involved - but you don't believe him.

You prefer to believe Newell instead. Fair enough.

Jameson is the one who should be put under pressure. He does know, but refuses to say!

As Knecht (and I) and may I hasten to add, Tony Cholwell himself said.... You should have gone to the police!

You are right Rickler, I should have involved the police as soon as it happened, but I didn't want my partner getting worried about it.

I'm sure if I did straight away they would have got to the bottom of it, so I wish I had now.

The reason I believed Newell, and Chris Webb, is because they both confirmed it over and over and added details like Lee Jameson showing Newell the piece of headed notepaper which had my mothers details on it.

Having said that, they both assured me over and over again who greenman was and Newell added loads of detail to that too. The person they named has categorically stated it wasn't him over and over again, but wont reveal why he's accepted their explanation of why they kept naming him.

Maybe they're both denying that they said it was him and are calling me a liar, but then where did I get all the groupie details from? Oh and I've got an email from Newell saying he wishes I hadn't used the term groupie. Anyone can have w copy if they like.

Lee Jameson has never divulged who the Pi was, but he admits he hired one. He also said he was pissed off with Newell and Webb for dropping him in it again when they're supposed to be his mates.

Why I believe Webb and Newell is that I confronted Ian Newell at tiverton because Hooper the snooper had denied it and Ian Newell assured me he would repeat the claim to Tony's face in front of me, and for some strange reason I thought that the club president wouldn't be involved in setting someone up.

I don't know but when I put it to Tony again he ran off and stopped posting on here, but he did say Newell had it in for him because Tony had seen q photo of Newells wife in a bikini and thought he fancied her, or something like that.

So I don't know. Is Tony Hooper a serial liar? Or was it a set-up by Ian Newell and the club president?

Is the fact that some of the greenman posts came from London a pointer to Lee Jameson?

Very murky indeed whichever it is and certainly taints either the PASB or people directly linked to the club itself.

Maybe you could ask Tony, Rickler? You seem convinced he's telling the truth?

I would like to think that Chris Webb can ne trusted but I'm not sure he can.

Posts: 190 Join date: 2012-04-18

The shocking news of the redundencies will be a good test for the PASB.

I think it will show whether Brent is serious about fan engagement. I would like to see the PASB ask the Board to justify the redundencies, go through the reasoning and outline the staff plan going forward.

The answers the PASB get will be very telling.

If they get fobbed off with corporate speak then we can assume that the PASB will be a toothless, pointless waste of time.

One hopes that the answers given (assuming the PASB are allowed to ask the questions) will be full, frank, reasoned, respectful and compassionate towards the unfortunate staff who face the axe, and also made public by way of here, Pasoti, Club, Trust and supporter group websites, BBC, 'erald etc to reach the widest possible audience.

Subject: Re: Questions for the PASB Wed Nov 07, 2012 8:27 am

SirCumfrance wrote:

The shocking news of the redundencies will be a good test for the PASB.

I think it will show whether Brent is serious about fan engagement. I would like to see the PASB ask the Board to justify the redundencies, go through the reasoning and outline the staff plan going forward.

The answers the PASB get will be very telling.

If they get fobbed off with corporate speak then we can assume that the PASB will be a toothless, pointless waste of time.

One hopes that the answers given (assuming the PASB are allowed to ask the questions) will be full, frank, reasoned, respectful and compassionate towards the unfortunate staff who face the axe, and also made public by way of here, Pasoti, Club, Trust and supporter group websites, BBC, 'erald etc to reach the widest possible audience.

Exactly. I would like to know where the average gate figures tweeted by the club president came from? And did they really expect an average of over 8300, more than most League 1 clubs, to watch the shit being served up at the moment?

» Questions For The GM
» Some weird questions..
» 10 Questions for Daisuke's fan
» Questions about the game
» Before you post your questions, pls read me!

Questions for the PASB

Questions for the PASB

Similar topics

Similar topics