FAO John Kukuc

As I said,ask Mullen to set their IT up properly if not already done.

Laffy wrote: As I said,ask Mullen to set their IT up properly if not already done.

Why Mullen?

griff wrote: FFS is this still going? I agree that there was a question to be asked but the chatter has gone way beyond the limits of the any blame that was deserved for a lapse of judgement. This isn’t a smoking gun lads. It’s more just another example of the dreadful decision-making within the Trust. So instead of ploughing this lonely furrow why don’t you start a thread within which these individual examples can be collected. No one thing is going to persuade folk that the Trust are doing a dreadful job, it will more likely be a pile of small things. This poor example of being honest, their failure to match up to the London Branch in raising funds, their failure to stand up to the other board members on ANYTHING. Put them all in one place and let them build, then point Trust apologists towards that one thread and ask whether any fully-functioning organisation could give that many examples of ineptness.

Just a thought.

That's not a bad idea. The Trust apologists do seem to be trying to minimize the email issue and make out it's a bit of an overreaction. But like I said, it's not about the email itself, it's that the Trust have given a story full of holes, refused to account for those inconsistencies, and are still being so evasive about explaining themselves. Is an organization that treats fans like that capable of properly representing our interests?

Kessler wrote:

Laffy wrote: As I said,ask Mullen to set their IT up properly if not already done.

Why Mullen?

Well, anyone, I'm sure I was used as an example, probably because Laffy knows i work in IT.

I'm busy enough as it is with work stuff and dealing/managing/stabilising a new health condition but i'd help out if they asked. We've had promises of new websites/emails etc and its not rocket science really.

I'm sure they co-opted an IT guy onto their board recently, not sure what happened there.

I don't want to be co-opted onto their board or even be a member currently but it looks like they are struggling IT wise, especially web/emails. I'm willing to offer to help out, its whether the trust wants to though!

Putting you on the board of the trust Mullen would be like chucking one hundred firecrackers into the middle of the room. It's the last thing they'd want but it might be the best thing for them.

Mullen103 wrote: I don't want to be co-opted onto their board or even be a member currently but it looks like they are struggling IT wise

Yeah and nobody would have a problem with that, but they've backed themselves into a corner by insisting that "there was no technical problem at CUOSC's end". Admitting they need IT help would expose yet another contradiction.

Out of interest flumeblue if you are still reading, does Jim know about this thread? If so, it seems a bit unfair that he's letting you take all the flak over an issue concerning him, rather than having the decency to come on here and explain himself.

I was going to stand a couple of years ago, but read through their constitution and what happened to Jason and thought I wouldn’t last 5 minutes.

I went for the start again approach, vote of no confidence, but there wasn’t enough for a vote of no confidence, so we were where we were.

I’m not asking/wanting to go on their board, I’m not even wanting to be a member, but truth be told I’m sick of complaining so I’m offering to help with their IT/email/web issues and who knows of the offer gets accepted I may be persuaded to change my mind about them.

As I said above I’m busy and dealing with a new health issue but it shouldn’t take long to make it a bit more professional.

Mullen103 wrote: I was going to stand a couple of years ago, but read through their constitution and what happened to Jason and thought I wouldn’t last 5 minutes.

I went for the start again approach, vote of no confidence, but there wasn’t enough for a vote of no confidence, so we were where we were.

Does anyone here actually have any confidence in the Trust in its current model, that they can properly represent the fans interests? They can't even give a satisfactory explanation for why they didn't reply to Waltero.

Hi thanks for the good wishes earlier this week. I really appreciated your comments.
I come on here as an individual who is also on the CUOSC Board. I rarely comment because of time constraints and being on a Board brings its responsibilities The latter I must admit frustrates me at times. When I do post on here and I speak for myself not the Board and if others do not wish to post then I believe is their prerogative. There are other channels of communication out there.
I am not an IT specialist, far from it, but I believe we are far from backward in that area. However, I believe, as a Board, we need fresh ideas and impetus, which can only come from the involvement of new younger people.
Thank you Mullen I really do appreciate and welcome your offer, the fact that you’ve made it shows, I believe, not a commitment to CUOSC but more to the Fans. And I applaud that. You obviously have concerns about CUOSC (understatement) and I’m not being derogatory when I say certain Board members will be nervous about your involvement. I will, regardless, present your offer to the Board and support it vigorously. Thank you again.

Good reply John and not having a pop at you personally but people feel there isn’t other lines of communication, questions are nearly always ignored when asked on other forms of social media. We all know what happened when young blood tried to infiltrate the trust when Mike tried to bring new ideas in he faced a brick wall.
I know for definite that trust members have been told at times not to post on here, they will probably be cringing at the Waltero email situation and Kessler picking holes in their story, and the reason for their absence on here Is the fact they would get torn to pieces and they don’t like any kind of criticism whatsoever, I think it’s shocking that JM or BA haven’t had the balls to come on here and try and defend themselves so for that fair play to you.

I echo Melbournes post and has it 100% the feeling of the trusts from the supporters.

Hope the op went well John!

Completely understand the nervousness of board members. However we all need to bite the bullet sometimes. Again I don’t want to be on “the board” but just help IT side, new website etc and standard email addresses. The fact people come to it and it hasn’t been updated for 6 months ain’t good.

Again not derogatory but when I see other trusts and how they do things ours is way behind.

I appreciate your support and let’s see what happens.

Well said John and hope you have a speedy recovery

Mullen103 wrote: I echo Melbournes post and has it 100% the feeling of the trusts from the supporters.

Hope the op went well John!

Completely understand the nervousness of board members. However we all need to bite the bullet sometimes. Again I don’t want to be on “the board” but just help IT side, new website etc and standard email addresses. The fact people come to it and it hasn’t been updated for 6 months ain’t good.

Again not derogatory but when I see other trusts and how they do things ours is way behind.

I appreciate your support and let’s see what happens.

I echo what Richard wants to try. CUOSC needs revamped and to represent the fans more, only then will it increase its membership.
I would like to try and help too. Depending on board change at CUOSC.

melbourneblues wrote: I know for definite that trust members have been told at times not to post on here, they will probably be cringing at the Waltero email situation and Kessler picking holes in their story, and the reason for their absence on here Is the fact they would get torn to pieces and they don’t like any kind of criticism whatsoever, I think it’s shocking that JM or BA haven’t had the balls to come on here and try and defend themselves so for that fair play to you.

If there is a legitimate explanation for it then they don't need to worry about that, because their story will check out. John asked if I was calling him and Jim liars. I'm not saying that at this stage, because I don't think I have enough information. But I do have my suspicions about what the Trust are saying happened, simply because their story is full of holes and they can't seem to give an explanation for why that is. You've got to accept that if you give a story which doesn't add up, people are going to question whether they can trust it. I think the longer the Trust drag this email issue on by refusing to provide an explanation, the more people are going to wonder why they are being so obsessive about not answering it, people are going to wonder if they just made up the story about email issues as an excuse to avoid replying to Waltero.

Well done to John for actually coming on here and engaging with people. I appreciate it's up to the individual whether they post on here or not, but I think Jim would look a lot better in all of this if he actually had the decency to come on here and explain himself, rather than let John take all the flak on his behalf. And why don't the Trust want their members posting on here, do they not trust them? Or do they think our opinions on here don't matter?

Kessler wrote:

melbourneblues wrote: I know for definite that trust members have been told at times not to post on here, they will probably be cringing at the Waltero email situation and Kessler picking holes in their story, and the reason for their absence on here Is the fact they would get torn to pieces and they don’t like any kind of criticism whatsoever, I think it’s shocking that JM or BA haven’t had the balls to come on here and try and defend themselves so for that fair play to you.

If there is a legitimate explanation for it then they don't need to worry about that, because their story will check out. John asked if I was calling him and Jim liars. I'm not saying that at this stage, because I don't think I have enough information. But I do have my suspicions about what the Trust are saying happened, simply because their story is full of holes and they can't seem to give an explanation for why that is. You've got to accept that if you give a story which doesn't add up, people are going to question whether they can trust it. I think the longer the Trust drag this email issue on by refusing to provide an explanation, the more people are going to wonder why they are being so obsessive about not answering it, people are going to wonder if they just made up the story about email issues as an excuse to avoid replying to Waltero.

Well done to John for actually coming on here and engaging with people. I appreciate it's up to the individual whether they post on here or not, but I think Jim would look a lot better in all of this if he actually had the decency to come on here and explain himself, rather than let John take all the flak on his behalf. And why don't the Trust want their members posting on here, do they not trust them? Or do they think our opinions on here don't matter?

Ffs , who the [censored] do you , this forum think you are . YOU do not speak for the majority of the fan base. ( hard hat off no incoming) ?

I love jamesphillips wrote:

Kessler wrote:

melbourneblues wrote: I know for definite that trust members have been told at times not to post on here, they will probably be cringing at the Waltero email situation and Kessler picking holes in their story, and the reason for their absence on here Is the fact they would get torn to pieces and they don’t like any kind of criticism whatsoever, I think it’s shocking that JM or BA haven’t had the balls to come on here and try and defend themselves so for that fair play to you.

If there is a legitimate explanation for it then they don't need to worry about that, because their story will check out. John asked if I was calling him and Jim liars. I'm not saying that at this stage, because I don't think I have enough information. But I do have my suspicions about what the Trust are saying happened, simply because their story is full of holes and they can't seem to give an explanation for why that is. You've got to accept that if you give a story which doesn't add up, people are going to question whether they can trust it. I think the longer the Trust drag this email issue on by refusing to provide an explanation, the more people are going to wonder why they are being so obsessive about not answering it, people are going to wonder if they just made up the story about email issues as an excuse to avoid replying to Waltero.

Well done to John for actually coming on here and engaging with people. I appreciate it's up to the individual whether they post on here or not, but I think Jim would look a lot better in all of this if he actually had the decency to come on here and explain himself, rather than let John take all the flak on his behalf. And why don't the Trust want their members posting on here, do they not trust them? Or do they think our opinions on here don't matter?

Ffs , who the [censored] do you , this forum think you are . YOU do not speak for the majority of the fan base. ( hard hat off no incoming) ?

I don't speak for the fans, they speak for themselves. And if you look at what they say, the same kind of things keep coming up. A feeling that the Trust don't listen to us, that they react badly to criticism, that they seem to represent the BOD more than the fans. I think they really need to address those issues, and stop living in denial thinking it's only a few fans who are unhappy with them. If you want actual numbers, then could the board admin please create a poll asking users do you feel the Trust listens to the fans and represents their interests at the moment?

Kessler wrote:

I love jamesphillips wrote:

Kessler wrote:

melbourneblues wrote: I know for definite that trust members have been told at times not to post on here, they will probably be cringing at the Waltero email situation and Kessler picking holes in their story, and the reason for their absence on here Is the fact they would get torn to pieces and they don’t like any kind of criticism whatsoever, I think it’s shocking that JM or BA haven’t had the balls to come on here and try and defend themselves so for that fair play to you.

If there is a legitimate explanation for it then they don't need to worry about that, because their story will check out. John asked if I was calling him and Jim liars. I'm not saying that at this stage, because I don't think I have enough information. But I do have my suspicions about what the Trust are saying happened, simply because their story is full of holes and they can't seem to give an explanation for why that is. You've got to accept that if you give a story which doesn't add up, people are going to question whether they can trust it. I think the longer the Trust drag this email issue on by refusing to provide an explanation, the more people are going to wonder why they are being so obsessive about not answering it, people are going to wonder if they just made up the story about email issues as an excuse to avoid replying to Waltero.

Well done to John for actually coming on here and engaging with people. I appreciate it's up to the individual whether they post on here or not, but I think Jim would look a lot better in all of this if he actually had the decency to come on here and explain himself, rather than let John take all the flak on his behalf. And why don't the Trust want their members posting on here, do they not trust them? Or do they think our opinions on here don't matter?

Ffs , who the [censored] do you , this forum think you are . YOU do not speak for the majority of the fan base. ( hard hat off no incoming) ?

I don't speak for the fans, they speak for themselves. And if you look at what they say, the same kind of things keep coming up. A feeling that the Trust don't listen to us, that they react badly to criticism, that they seem to represent the BOD more than the fans. I think they really need to address those issues, and stop living in denial thinking it's only a few fans who are unhappy with them. If you want actual numbers, then could the board admin please create a poll asking users do you feel the Trust listens to the fans and represents their interests at the moment?

Sorry pal , nothing personal, I actually agree with you . Assumption are made so I act accordingly....... mush

melbourneblues wrote: I know for definite that trust members have been told at times not to post on here

If that's true then it's disgraceful. Among other things CUOSC describes their role as

"giving the fans a voice"

"Aims to strengthen & promote bonds between club and community"

But how can they strengthen bonds if they are instructing their members not to engage with fans? How can they give the fans a voice when they won't actually listen to what our concerns are?

I think if they had the decency to post on here, that by itself would do a lot to strengthen and promote bonds. The fans might actually begin to feel that they are being listened to. If they are worried they'd just be coming into a hostile environment and get shouted down, they don't need to be. The criticism of the Trust on here isn't a personal attack against them, it's genuine concern from fans who are worried about the future of the club and feel they aren't being listened to. If the Trust just put in a bit of effort to engage with us, listen to our concerns, and represent those concerns to the BOD, I think most fans would be happy with that and would be willing to help. In this thread alone, two people have already offered help.

The Trust has a bunker mentally, borne of the fact they do NOT represent the fans, they never have.

The original instigators had a much bigger agenda, way beyond what was deliverable, so they set about the destruction of our Club.

There needs to be a legal challenge to the validity of the Trust share-holding in CUFC, how they came about the shares, who paid for them, and how this has benefited CUFC.

...............they are nothing but dead weight.

thesilentone wrote: The Trust has a bunker mentally, borne of the fact they do NOT represent the fans, they never have.

They are certainly making themselves look that way the longer they drag this on by refusing to explain why their original story was full of holes. I think there's an element of denial as well, same with the BOD, they seem to think it's just a few fans who are unhappy. Of course if they actually bothered to spend time listening to fans, they'd realize it's not just a few.

Mullen, at an informal Board Meeting (attended by all members) last night, your offer of assistance was raised and met with welcoming approval (unanimously). I’d appreciate if you would email CUOSC with your contact details and someone will be in touch.

flumeblue wrote: Mullen, at an informal Board Meeting (attended by all members) last night, your offer of assistance was raised and met with welcoming approval (unanimously). I’d appreciate if you would email CUOSC with your contact details and someone will be in touch.

Excellent

I have emailed

Thanks.

Mullen103 wrote:

flumeblue wrote: Mullen, at an informal Board Meeting (attended by all members) last night, your offer of assistance was raised and met with welcoming approval (unanimously). I’d appreciate if you would email CUOSC with your contact details and someone will be in touch.

Excellent

I have emailed

Get your best cardy dusted off Richard you’ve made the cut.
(I’ll give you a week tops)

melbourneblues wrote:

Mullen103 wrote:

flumeblue wrote: Mullen, at an informal Board Meeting (attended by all members) last night, your offer of assistance was raised and met with welcoming approval (unanimously). I’d appreciate if you would email CUOSC with your contact details and someone will be in touch.

Excellent

I have emailed

Get your best cardy dusted off Richard you’ve made the cut.
(I’ll give you a week tops)

It’s an offer of IT help, if I can do a new site that’s easy to update and keeps everyone updated then it’s a start.

I don’t want to be on the trust board, co opted etc just help out. I’m maybe mad etc but I’m sick of complaining and it’s maybe a start to get more people involved in the trust and make it how fans want it. I’ve probably done a full 360 here but if you don’t try you’ll never know.

The trust could of said no, and I wouldn’t of blaimed them, considering I’ve called them useless etc. I appreciate them looking past that and giving an “outsider” and a critic a go. Hopefully it’ll benefit all.

Well done Richard! This is the most positive thing the Trust has done since I became a member.

Dont worry Mullen..you go ahead and do their work for them..but be prepared for being shat upon and discarded like rubbish afterwards...thats how things are

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

markredfox73 wrote: Dont worry Mullen..you go ahead and do their work for them..but be prepared for being shat upon and discarded like rubbish afterwards...thats how things are

Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk

Maybe so and if it does so be it - I don't think it will though and if it did, you know me I wouldn't keep quiet anyway.

All I plan on doing is building/creating a new site that's easy to update and keeps people updated. The responsibility will lie on the trust to update it and if they don't people can quite rightly get on their backs. And look at their email system and improve if necessary.

Flume summed it up well in that it's not a vote of confidence in cuosc but more the wider fan base. Both the trust and I are doing something out of our comfort zone and probably unthinkable a few weeks ago. It could be a disaster but lets see what happens, its a start.

I think this is good news and hopefully marks a turning point. It won't fix all the issues, but keeping the website updated might go some way to rebuilding bridges and making people feel included.

Mullen103 wrote: All I plan on doing is building/creating a new site that's easy to update and keeps people updated. The responsibility will lie on the trust to update it and if they don't people can quite rightly get on their backs. And look at their email system and improve if necessary.

Make sure they know that. Don't want them getting the wrong idea that you will handle everything website related. As we could end up in a similar position next year where the site hasn't been updated for months, and the Trust say they thought Mullen was supposed to be handling that.

Mullen103 wrote: Flume summed it up well in that it's not a vote of confidence in cuosc but more the wider fan base. Both the trust and I are doing something out of our comfort zone and probably unthinkable a few weeks ago. It could be a disaster but lets see what happens, its a start.

I agree. Give it a go, it's small steps at first but this does seem to be a step in the right direction.

And get that bloody data protection link fixed. Blue text on a blue background is rubbish lol

We’ve made contact, the trust are going to get some requirements together - which is good as I’m busy the next two weeks with work/holiday.

It’s nearly lasted a week, so progress!

Carriage clock coming your way Richard lad.