Chief said:
A thread post appeared today on the SI forum regarding former trust board member's actions. Seems pretty random timing and is an unfamiliar username from what I can see.
As I know trust personnel post on this forum, I thought I'd bring it to your attention as the poster doesn't seem to have posted their queries over on this forum.
If you want me to I can copy and paste.
But your thoughts on the content of the post (and motives/ timing are welcomed?)
Hi Chief, am sure I don't need to point it out but it's just one of the latest pseudonyms. I've upset him on Twitter previously when he took offence to my comment about clickbait sites and seems to have taken it personally.
I've no interest in posting over there.
Bringing Stu into this is particularly vile. He served for well over a decade, often spending most of his time down the stadium to help out on certain projects. As an SD he was excellent, getting the info we needed, particularly financially. True he wasn't online much, but that's a Trust failing in terms of comms, not just one person. I knew he was retiring some time before he was. He was semi retired, and yet was doing more than when he worked full time what with that and a couple of other voluntary gigs. He's earned his break IMO as nobody has done more.
As for me, I did over 7 years and they coincided with a lot of upheaval, which took up a lot of time up for me and mine, often at critical times. Holidays, birthdays, even New Years one year if you remember the Huw Jenkins interview and our response. I've long thought the Trust should have a regular turnover of board members and thought 4 years is a good number. I did 5 and then we had the second members consultation, after the Yanks reneged on the first one. As we recommended legal action at that time I felt I had it appropriate we stayed on to progress that. In 2021 it seemed it was sufficiently funded over the line to step away, but even then I (and several others such as Lisa, Cudey and Dai) offered to stay as part of the legal subgroup to keep that ticking over. Sadly, that subgroup didn't go so well.
People forget the Trust is voluntary. Cheap shots about a previous SD aside, nobody ever gets a bean. It took up a ton of time, offline and online, especially the legal stuff, and that took a toll on me and my family., personally and professionally. I put them through two more years than I originally wanted to, and I didn't think it fair to do that again. No more, no less.
That and as I thought the legal case was about to be initiated, it seemed a logical time. Didn't occur to me that the new board would simply change tack without speaking to the members. Maybe it should have, who knows. Either way, as one vote, it seems like I would have had to resign if the board wanted to progress than deal anyway. Funnily enough, for all the flaws of the 2017 deal, we would have been much better off now with that in place, and while some may want to pretend otherwise, I wasn't that far off back then when I talked about the pros and cons of the legal case. The real shame was us being excluded in 2016 though, and we all know why that was.
I do hope people don't give up on the Trust though, and get involved this summer. It's ours, not any group of 10 or 12's.
