Did part 2 of the PC meeting ever get posted?

In case I missed it.

 

I dont think so; I haven't seen it if it has.

 

Did it eckers.

 

dont think i ever saw Pt 1 tbh

 

You're not a proper fan.

 

Neither did I

I bet it was an eye opener

 

As opposed to the football which has been an eye closer.

 

Be careful Mario!

You'll get a ban posting stuff like that

 

Just out of interest (I'm not someone who has a problem with the club having a quick shufties before you publish) did they ask you to omit/change anything? Obviously, if they did, I realise you can't tell me what that is as that would defeat the object.

 

It's not Chilcott ......... or is it ?!!

 

And join us at 9 after Keeping Up With The Kardashians for The Philpott Inquiries, were journeyman former professional footballer Lee Philpott travels around the country investigating the taking of minutes by lower league football clubs' supporters trusts

 

So this was an official board meeting with you invited where minutes were taken, then distributed to all for comments and rewritten so that everything was changed so not to embarrass anyone? just asking

 

On a serious note I don't see what the issue is here. I've chaired small project team meetings right up to regional forums and the minutes are always circulated to all parties before issue to check for inaccuracies or errors. One person is being trusted to summarise complex, wide-ranging meetings and word correctly what people have said. The sign off of minutes is a chance to make sure they're a true record of events, not a chance for people to change what they said. I don't see any issue with the supporters trust and club doing that.

 

There's a growing 'Wizard Of Oz' feeling about all this. When the curtain's rolled back we'll probably see that the mystical old man has nothing exciting behind it!

 

Agree. When I've interviewed Ben before he's not asked for stuff to be changed, I think he just wanted up front visibility we weren't calling him a lovely person or he'd dropped himself in it.

The agreement was if he said it, we'd print it to which he agreed.

 

Me neither. Although I think we might be guilty of falling in to the same trap as Mr Cryne. On a couple of occasions Mr Cryne has addressed issues that the vast majority don't believe anyway, just a few nutters (we all already know he cares deeply about the club and we don't think anyone other than the manager is picking the team). Maybe we should look at exactly who and how many of them are objecting to what the supporters trust have done here. I think it might be a case of pandering to the extremist minority and I think we do that a lot on here. Maybe we should stop doing that. Maybe we should stop responding.

 

Out of interest who are the extremist minority you are on about?