Makes for interesting reading after last night's initial meeting if you're not already a member and haven't seen it.
Not really my place to say as it's not my information, however the group appears to have credibility, are serious with their intentions but will go about it in a professional manner and perhaps the most pertinent point, there is the claim a viable alternative (anonymous) is available should this regime leave.
I’d appreciate someone posting the context on here. I’m not on Facebook and have no intention to join so my Barnsley fix is on here and on here alone
I don't think the intention is secrecy ( in that anyone who wants to join can) but I think private groups on FB make it easier to moderate and not fall foul of the few rules FB implement.
I think a lot of people fail to realise that regardless of who owns the club, it still needs to make money. We'll still sell players to meet that budget. A trillionaire can't (or shouldn't) be allowed to buy us and just throw money at us.
Which rules would they potentially fall foul of? Do they have a swear jar? years since I came off facey
I've just had my initiation and waiting for them to get back to me. I've had to join face ache. (Which is something I didn't want to do.) Just a basic account won't be putting any photos or owt on.
I think the group needs as much transparency as possible in order to help their cause. Otherwise it comes across that they have something to hide. I'd imagine individuals would get banned rather than the whole group, and if derogatory or slanderous comments are being made - bad enough to ban people - then the intentions of the group should be questioned anyway. I am for the group as I think these owners need to answer and be accountable in a way that hasn't yet been forthcoming. But I don't agree with how they've gone about things thus far. A bit lowbrow from what I've seen, and the removal of Gally without warning for example was very shady and unwarranted.