Jon B and Tony Hooper

JonB wrote:

Hi all,

I had initially decided to ignore this tosh; to avoid giving it credibility by responding.

But as can often happen on the internet, a lack of response to a even the most ridiculous of allegations can appear to give them credence.

So for clarity, the allegations relating to the inappropriate passing of emails by Tony Hooper & I are false. That said, this allegation may have been craftily worded to avoid any subsequent action as of course, Tony & I have emailed several people at Argyle (including James Brent) quite properly on a number of occasions.

I suspect that an overheard conversation or a (less than) half-truth has led to 2+2 equalling 10 here. Absolutely nothing to do with me (or Tony though).

In relation to my knowledge of / professional relationships / friendships with senior people at the Club (both current & previous) I took great care to disclose this in the PASB pre-election pieces that I wrote (on here & elsewhere). I also explained why in my view this wouldn't cause a conflict. I also stated that these relationships would continue, should I be voted onto the PAS Board.

I explained the full detail of this to anyone who cared to ask. Nothing has changed.

I am my own man, for good or for bad, but of course I understand that this won't please everyone.

As for this thread (& others) & its author, one of us is a proven, serial liar & an internet fraudster. The other is me.

Why on earth is someone with a history as odious as his able to spread such bile on here?

Maybe if you had explained what you were doing next to Newell in the directors box at Rochdale better it might have been challenged a bit more.

To be fair to Jon, he did have the following in his 'PASB election stuff':

Quote :

Both currently & in the past I have had friendships & professional relationships with senior figures at our club; indeed I am hoping to sound out an ex Chief Exec of ours over a coffee regarding his thoughts on the developing relationship between the PASB & the legal Board in the near future. I would retain these relationships, but stress the point above that this is the type of environment that I work in on a day to day basis; there would be no conflict nor favours given by me. Within my work I am known to be fair, friendly, but when needed completely robust.

found [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]...

I found that whilst skittling through his posts after seeing 'the picture'...

I think if it were known just how close these friendships/relationships were with 'senior figures' at the club, and those relationships would lead to Directors Box invites, then the PASB Election results may have differed slightly.

I happen to agree with Jon when he says this...

Quote :

Why on earth is someone with a history as odious as his able to spread such bile on here?

However, I think that Jon should give the vast majority of the users of ATD the credibility to distinguish between the comments of the user that started this thread and the antagonistic nature of his character.

Maybe Jon should consider that users of ATD have formed an opinion for other reasons and not for the comments from the thread creator.

I do understand what you're saying, Gob.

And re your penultimate paragraph, I can assure you that I very much do.

Regards

Long live the Plymouth Argyle Sycophantic Board !

Created by Brent, for Brent.

The Trust helped him get the property development opportunities but now has to be sidelined because it is independent from and not part of the club and has the temerity to ask questions and challenge his version of transparency in a community led club.
The only thing that is transparent is the owner's unwillingness to spend anything on the club in return for the personal, get rich development opportunities.
He only consults with a section of his so called supporters' board and often prefers to bypass the board altogether over such trivial things as the stadium development, season tickets etc.

Corporate governance my arse ! It's brent's way or the highway.

Those who pretend otherwise are self promoting toadies .

Dane was allowed back on after certain restrictions and conditions were placed on him and his account.

Yea Man wrote:

Dane was allowed back on after certain restrictions and conditions were placed on him and his account.

If someone has told Dane that Jon B and Hooper are letting Jones or Brent in on private e-mails then I would say that he has been told this, probably by Daz, who he is friends with.

Whether it's true or not I don't know but somebody gave Jones John Petrie's Facebook pages for Joneses "dossier" and despite his protestations I still believe it was Hooper as he was one of JP's Facebook friends and it's the kind of anti-trust ass-licking thing he would do.

Maybe Jon could confirm whether or not there had ever been PASB emails that the club would benefit from seeing in advance? Given their history so far I would doubt very much if there had been.

If there were private emails floating around that showed anyone in the PASB as a trouble-maker or loose cannon then it would definitely be about Damon and then I can imagine Jones and Brent being interested and Hooper being more than happy to supply them.

Disband the PASB, throw your support behind the AFT and their alternative plans and leave Hooper crying outside with his clipboard and badge not required any more. Then he would've outlived his usefulness and won't ever be having dinner with Brent and Newell again.

All together now, aw didums.

Jock, I havnt seen spoke to daz in about a year to 18 months.

Jon did you travel to rochdale with James Brent and Peter Jones ?

My internet history is exactly that. Since my return to this site i have behaved as well as anyone else and done everything that was asked of me by the mods

That will continue, However.... Ive been passed this info about you and hooper and i was asked to bring it to the attention of this forum

Greenjock wrote:

Yea Man wrote:

Dane was allowed back on after certain restrictions and conditions were placed on him and his account.

If someone has told Dane that Jon B and Hooper are letting Jones or Brent in on private e-mails then I would say that he has been told this, probably by Daz, who he is friends with.

Whether it's true or not I don't know but somebody gave Jones John Petrie's Facebook pages for Joneses "dossier" and despite his protestations I still believe it was Hooper as he was one of JP's Facebook friends and it's the kind of anti-trust ass-licking thing he would do.

Maybe Jon could confirm whether or not there had ever been PASB emails that the club would benefit from seeing in advance? Given their history so far I would doubt very much if there had been.

If there were private emails floating around that showed anyone in the PASB as a trouble-maker or loose cannon then it would definitely be about Damon and then I can imagine Jones and Brent being interested and Hooper being more than happy to supply them.

Disband the PASB, throw your support behind the AFT and their alternative plans and leave Hooper crying outside with his clipboard and badge not required any more. Then he would've outlived his usefulness and won't ever be having dinner with Brent and Newell again.

All together now, aw didums.

Punchdrunk likes this

Dane. wrote:

Jock, I havnt seen spoke to daz in about a year to 18 months.

Jon did you travel to rochdale with James Brent and Peter Jones ?

My internet history is exactly that. Since my return to this site i have behaved as well as anyone else and done everything that was asked of me by the mods

That will continue, However.... Ive been passed this info about you and hooper and i was asked to bring it to the attention of this forum

Well unless you're going to divulge your source that's pretty much the end of it. You claim it's true, Jon B claims it isn't

No point in asking Hooper because he's a proven lying cnut.

All move along. Nothing to see here.

For me I want this guy's answer about the jolly to Rochdale, seems quite shy, can't think why!

While I have reservations about Jon's thoughts on the usefulness of a PASB, and see it no more than a long grass pay and display car park, I have every sympathy with his comments regarding Dane.

Dane has proved himself time and time again to be what he is, and I see no reason to believe his position has changed one jot.
It's a game, without a cause, and I find it hard to understand why two banned posters have been allowed back on here. Why ?
Don't give me the old "keep your enemies close" routine".

Hugh Watt wrote:

JonB wrote:

Hi all,

I had initially decided to ignore this tosh; to avoid giving it credibility by responding.

But as can often happen on the internet, a lack of response to a even the most ridiculous of allegations can appear to give them credence.

So for clarity, the allegations relating to the inappropriate passing of emails by Tony Hooper & I are false. That said, this allegation may have been craftily worded to avoid any subsequent action as of course, Tony & I have emailed several people at Argyle (including James Brent) quite properly on a number of occasions.

I suspect that an overheard conversation or a (less than) half-truth has led to 2+2 equalling 10 here. Absolutely nothing to do with me (or Tony though).

In relation to my knowledge of / professional relationships / friendships with senior people at the Club (both current & previous) I took great care to disclose this in the PASB pre-election pieces that I wrote (on here & elsewhere). I also explained why in my view this wouldn't cause a conflict. I also stated that these relationships would continue, should I be voted onto the PAS Board.

I explained the full detail of this to anyone who cared to ask. Nothing has changed.

I am my own man, for good or for bad, but of course I understand that this won't please everyone.

As for this thread (& others) & its author, one of us is a proven, serial liar & an internet fraudster. The other is me.

Why on earth is someone with a history as odious as his able to spread such bile on here?

Maybe if you had explained what you were doing next to Newell in the directors box at Rochdale better it might have been challenged a bit more.

exactly

is it me or is jon sounding more and more like chris webb these days on here?

Like 99% of the users of this site and one other, I have formed an opinion regarding Jon's allegiances but I had formed that opinion long before Dane started to spout his usual rubbish.

Personally, I think ATD would be a better forum if he was vanished.

GOB wrote:

Like 99% of the users of this site and one other, I have formed an opinion regarding Jon's allegiances but I had formed that opinion long before Dane started to spout his usual rubbish.

Personally, I think ATD would be a better forum if he was vanished.

And what thrilling contribution do you make which makes your existence worthwhile

GOB wrote:

Like 99% of the users of this site and one other, I have formed an opinion regarding Jon's allegiances but I had formed that opinion long before Dane started to spout his usual rubbish.

Personally, I think ATD would be a better forum if he was vanished.

That one.

Dane. wrote:

GOB wrote:

Like 99% of the users of this site and one other, I have formed an opinion regarding Jon's allegiances but I had formed that opinion long before Dane started to spout his usual rubbish.

Personally, I think ATD would be a better forum if he was vanished.

And what thrilling contribution do you make which makes your existence worthwhile

He comes around for the weekly mod party and does an amazing full monty.

If you get elected you'll be able to see for yourself.

worried of penzance wrote:

While I have reservations about Jon's thoughts on the usefulness of a PASB, and see it no more than a long grass pay and display car park, I have every sympathy with his comments regarding Dane.

Dane has proved himself time and time again to be what he is, and I see no reason to believe his position has changed one jot.
It's a game, without a cause, and I find it hard to understand why two banned posters have been allowed back on here. Why ?
Don't give me the old "keep your enemies close" routine".

Your principles I can understand, the fact that you are either, annoyed, threatened or compromised by Dane and I presume Coathy posting on here confuses me. I get annoyed by several posters on here, but then I get annoyed by wankers that pollute my earspace in my local pub, at the end of the day we have to ignore some people, at least here you have an ignore feature to use.

Iggy wrote:

worried of penzance wrote:

While I have reservations about Jon's thoughts on the usefulness of a PASB, and see it no more than a long grass pay and display car park, I have every sympathy with his comments regarding Dane.

Dane has proved himself time and time again to be what he is, and I see no reason to believe his position has changed one jot.
It's a game, without a cause, and I find it hard to understand why two banned posters have been allowed back on here. Why ?
Don't give me the old "keep your enemies close" routine".

Your principles I can understand, the fact that you are either, annoyed, threatened or compromised by Dane and I presume Coathy posting on here confuses me. I get annoyed by several posters on here, but then I get annoyed by wankers that pollute my earspace in my local pub, at the end of the day we have to ignore some people, at least here you have an ignore feature to use.

Do we ???? I have my own 'ignore facility' when I see certain users appear in a thread. No doubt others do the same ?

Dane has a history of being a wind up merchant but I think in this instance he has been used in a Rapsonesque sort of way. As Jock says, name the source or nothing to see.

Coxside_Green wrote:

Dane has a history of being a wind up merchant but I think in this instance he has been used in a Rapsonesque sort of way. As Jock says, name the source or nothing to see.

He has on the vote Dane thread.