Pasoti's owner/s ?

Is the question below too difficult ?
......................................................
Tringreen:
Sorry to change the subject briefly guys but I'd like to ask Wozzer, as a Pasoti member with friends in low, I mean high places, if he could tell me who actually owns Pasoti ?
If Woz doesn't know, or chooses not to tell, perhaps a Pasoti member could kindly enquire, as I think it would clarify issues concerning how some posters appear to be more equal than others and can break site rules with impunity.
The ongoing online feuding is largely down to a few individuals and the unhealthy control they seem to wield over Pasoti.

Angryhairybloke:
Start a new thread then. Stop hijacking every thread with anti-pasoti posts. This thread is nowt to do with what you've posted.

Wozzer:
I will answer it here as he won't let go else.

I haven't a clue who owns PASOTI and nor do I care.

Tringreen:
Thank you Wozzer. Any other Pasoti members know the answer, or care enough to ask ?

I think it's rather important and a truthful answer might well explain quite a lot with regard what some more equal members, and their friends, get away with.

Unless they come on here and cause trouble, who does what on PASOTI is none of our business.

pepsipete wrote:

Unless they come on here and cause trouble, who does what on PASOTI is none of our business.

FFS Pete, the truth would almost certainly go some way to explaining why the club's oldest and largest online forum, has seemingly been hijacked and is now the protected mouthpiece of the club and all those feeding, or wannabe feeding at the trough.
Some of us saw it evolving years ago and now it has become a safe haven for officials and the Uriah Heap types , to hold multi user accounts , in order to control the thoughts of trusting Argyle fans.
If there was one honourable Pasoti moderator, they wouldn't tolerate the cheating, the cover ups and the lies.

ps I'm not expecting an honest answer.

It doesn't matter who owns it, they are all scared of the fat controller.

Frank Bullitt wrote:

It doesn't matter who owns it, they are all scared of the fat controller.

Well, we know he's at least 'co-owner' and seemingly untouchable . The bloke is a walking disaster with regard unity and developing the fanbase. If you don't attend regularly and dare to disagree with his views, you are not required at the club at all.

Do you think Brent knows or even cares ?

Clearly Brent was told by his close associates that they could whip up the compliant Avivas with flag waving, drum banging , cringeworthy auctions , fanfests, murals and that Fletch was the man for the job on the pitch What must he be thinking now ? Yet still the Windsor Boys attempt to control an ever dwindling audience.

No class. No integrity. No future............... unless it's non league , where they will be in their element, with England's most village, city club taking 300 to Ebbsfleet. This really is getting beyond a joke.

It does not matter who "owns" it, it is who controls it.

My Dad used to have a saying "They can all go to sea in a teddy basket" and that applies to PASOTI and all it's minions.

seadog wrote:

It does not matter who "owns" it, it is who controls it.

The 'owners' control it.

What I find astonishing is that in most corrupt institutions you usually find one or two honest dissenters and whistleblowers who won't stand for cover-up.

All the mods must know the identity of the Deepthroaters, Windsor Boys, Iddesleigh Greens etc etc but do and say nothing except delete and cover-up.

They are all complicit

Newell co owns it still.

pepsipete wrote:

Unless they come on here and cause trouble, who does what on PASOTI is none of our business.

Respectfully I disagree. We've seen how influential PASOTI can be many times over the years. While the vast majority of the fanbase probably couldn't care less what goes on in t'internet world with all the infighting and bickering between forums, PASOTI has always been perceived as the good guys. The corruption needs to be outed to this vast majority.

Coxside_Green wrote:

pepsipete wrote:

Unless they come on here and cause trouble, who does what on PASOTI is none of our business.

Respectfully I disagree. We've seen how influential PASOTI can be many times over the years. While the vast majority of the fanbase probably couldn't care less what goes on in t'internet world with all the infighting and bickering between forums, PASOTI has always been perceived as the good guys. The corruption needs to be outed to this vast majority.

tis the start of a long road.

Tim Berners-Lee would be turning in his grave...if he was dead. Internet forums are the perfect example of the free legacy of the internet, they should be "owned" by all their contributors.

TBF, I couldn't honestly say who owns this forum. I think Gob set it up initially, does he regard himself as, or even want to be, the owner. The latest URL was either bought with the remains of the sponsorship money or by Frank.

Power in the hands of some individuals undoubtably corrupts and leads them to act above their station, a common trait in almost all forums about everything. This forum has it as good as you can get it, I think. We have a simple constitution, a process to provide oversight with 2 keyholders, put in position by common consent and time limited elected moderators. Nobody can get it 100%, but at least we try. We undoubtably under moderate at times, but that is quite deliberate as the dangers lie in over moderating.

As things evolved last year I think we can now see elections twice a year (at 6 monthly intervals) for mods. Knecht, Chemi and I will have done our stint by April and Yea Man, Mouldy and Mock will have another six months to go.

If you want to keep this forum free of "owners" or "controllers" I would urge all of you who would not normally think of or want to be a moderator to consider standing at the next election. My opinion is that those who don't really want to be mods are the best candidates...and you can feel a moral glow at doing your bit.

who owns asda?,,,i wont sleep untill i have a answer,god i love this site,,

tcm wrote:

who owns asda?,,,i wont sleep untill i have a answer,god i love this site,,

walmart does

It's headed by the Walton family in the USA who own the public company Wal-Mart who own ASDA.
There you go Mike, nighty night.

tcm wrote:

who owns asda?,,,i wont sleep untill i have a answer,god i love this site,,

Andy Clarke is the CEO and President but it's owned by Walmart. S. Robson Walton seems to own Walmart.



Drink some cider and have a snooze.

phewww,,cheers,,

tcm wrote:

who owns asda?,,,i wont sleep untill i have a answer,god i love this site,,

Now you've had your answer about who owns asda,we would love to see you again in a couple of months,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Who owns TCM?

Charlie Wood wrote:

Tim Berners-Lee would be turning in his grave...if he was dead. Internet forums are the perfect example of the free legacy of the internet, they should be "owned" by all their contributors.

TBF, I couldn't honestly say who owns this forum. I think Gob set it up initially, does he regard himself as, or even want to be, the owner. The latest URL was either bought with the remains of the sponsorship money or by Frank.

Power in the hands of some individuals undoubtably corrupts and leads them to act above their station, a common trait in almost all forums about everything. This forum has it as good as you can get it, I think. We have a simple constitution, a process to provide oversight with 2 keyholders, put in position by common consent and time limited elected moderators. Nobody can get it 100%, but at least we try. We undoubtably under moderate at times, but that is quite deliberate as the dangers lie in over moderating.

As things evolved last year I think we can now see elections twice a year (at 6 monthly intervals) for mods. Knecht, Chemi and I will have done our stint by April and Yea Man, Mouldy and Mock will have another six months to go.

If you want to keep this forum free of "owners" or "controllers" I would urge all of you who would not normally think of or want to be a moderator to consider standing at the next election. My opinion is that those who don't really want to be mods are the best candidates...and you can feel a moral glow at doing your bit.

To answer that Charlie, I did set it up but no, I am no longer the owner and I have nil control over ATD and as per our conversations with the mods during the hand over. And no, I wouldn't want control over a forum as such but I do enjoy knocking the things up and I have several others waiting in the wings. One or two are just in case ATD is ever compromised as the old AT was when Newell closed it and those sites can be simply handed over to the present key holders and mods and, there's another one or two for another idea I have that I may let loose one day, if and when the timing is right. If it came about that any of these sites/forums were made public then initially I would have control, but as with ATD, it would only be until that control could be handed over to others.

My opinion for what it's worth is that it doesn't matter who runs or owns these types of sites, it's the agenda of owning and running such a thing that is important. As we've seen with pasoti, they can be used for all sorts of underhand and corrupt dealings. It's been quite shocking and an eye opener considering what the club president and Ian Newell have been up to.

It should be remembered that these sites are just that, they are poxy little forums on a massive Internet and how anyone can claim to have a sense of loyalty to one is a bit odd. To knock up a pretty much identical forum to ATD would take about an 1 hour and pasoti is even more basic than ATD, neither are worth 2 seconds of thought really.

Charlie Wood wrote:

Tim Berners-Lee would be turning in his grave...if he was dead. Internet forums are the perfect example of the free legacy of the internet, they should be "owned" by all their contributors.

TBF, I couldn't honestly say who owns this forum. I think Gob set it up initially, does he regard himself as, or even want to be, the owner. The latest URL was either bought with the remains of the sponsorship money or by Frank.

Power in the hands of some individuals undoubtably corrupts and leads them to act above their station, a common trait in almost all forums about everything. This forum has it as good as you can get it, I think. We have a simple constitution, a process to provide oversight with 2 keyholders, put in position by common consent and time limited elected moderators. Nobody can get it 100%, but at least we try. We undoubtably under moderate at times, but that is quite deliberate as the dangers lie in over moderating.

As things evolved last year I think we can now see elections twice a year (at 6 monthly intervals) for mods. Knecht, Chemi and I will have done our stint by April and Yea Man, Mouldy and Mock will have another six months to go.

If you want to keep this forum free of "owners" or "controllers" I would urge all of you who would not normally think of or want to be a moderator to consider standing at the next election. My opinion is that those who don't really want to be mods are the best candidates...and you can feel a moral glow at doing your bit.

Unless I've missed something......................
The constitution can be amended but as it stands, elected moderators can stand for re election up to a maximum of three years consecutive tenure. Then, if there are insufficient applications, they can continue for another year.................................if they're mad enough.
So, in short, you can all stand for re election this May and I for one think you're doing the job perfectly.