Unita Fortior Fans Group

Quoted from Mullen103 on Monday, 16 May 2022

MM has admitted wrong doing and has now resigned.

Right decision - you can’t mislead members.

Beat me to it Mullen - can't see how he had any choice tbf. He deliberately mislead members

Why would anyone want to join that shit show of an organisation? CUOSC are clearly a useless toothless outfit

What about the Chairman, who allowed the proposal ?

Quoted from thesilentone on Monday, 16 May 2022

What about the Chairman, who allowed the proposal ?

The issue wasn't about the co-opting (I mean, co-opting someone without asking them, the mind boggles but whatever), the issue was MM deliberately chose to mislead the members he was elected to represent regardless of his reasoning for doing so.

Quoted from Armo on Monday, 16 May 2022

Quoted from thesilentone on Monday, 16 May 2022

What about the Chairman, who allowed the proposal ?

The issue wasn't about the co-opting (I mean, co-opting someone without asking them, the mind boggles but whatever), the issue was MM deliberately chose to mislead the members he was elected to represent regardless of his reasoning for doing so.

No dog, no bone.

If procedures had been followed, no misleading Tweet required.

A member can be co-opted without asking the members or by election, however it maybe wise to speak to the proposed co-opted in advance, and hey-presto, all this could have been avoided.

Mark Middling can't take criticism. To quote from Jon Colman's article 'He added, meanwhile, that "increasing criticism from certain detractors" in the fanbase was "becoming unbearable" and affecting his mental health. And he said if "loud detractors" put themselves forward for CUOSC board positions they would realise that much of the criticism they face is "unnecessary and unfair."

This seems like a swipe at Unita Fortior. MM should realise if you do anything in the public domain you will get criticism. If you can't take it or it affects your health you shouldn't get involved. Much has been said that being on the board of CUOSC is very demanding In terms of the commitment needed. I think there must be something wrong with the way it is being run. Maybe certain individuals have their own agenda which they are pushing which creates work for the other board members. Anyway I am looking forward to the CUOSC AGM this July to use my votes.

Good post carwash, I’m of the same thinking.

There’s no need to bear bait anymore, but the accusations of personal criticism of MM is ridiculous. People on socials firstly complained about the briefing notes and then the tweet by MM on the trust and personal account which did not make sense. They was no personal criticism just of the decision.

It’s irks me about the volunteer part, I’ve volunteered for organisations where If I didn’t do my job people would die. I also share carwash opinion in that they supposedly spend all this time yet very little appears to be done. They maybe have their own projects like ND has but generally nothing gets done.

It’s sad to see anyone struggling with MH but there’s genuine issues people have. It’s not specifically about this issue but it’s being used repeatedly in society at the moment whenever someone makes a mistake - irks me a little.

Before you take up a quarter ownership of a Football Club, you must accept the workload that is part of the package, and how that would be funded. Also, what your objectives are, short, medium and long-term.

Conflict should be avoided at all cost, and a positive relationship established, and lines in the sand for who is responsible for what (Club/Trust), when, how ,why and where. Once this is clear, and documented, then "Git on wid it "

All CUOSC appear to do is lurch from one PR disaster to the next.

Anyone who joins that lot has a slate loose.

I’ve heard some murmurs today that some trust members are unhappy with certain individuals, mainly UF for influencing MMS resignation, plus Colman for highlighting/running with it.

I think they are right for once! If people on socials didn’t highlight the co opting statement in the briefing and the clear misleading tweet he probably wouldn’t have resigned - the trust own undoing highlighted by people, correctly imo.

There was a bit in MMs statement about having to defend and spending time on that. Simple solution - don’t dig holes for yourself.

It seems the trust are very good at blaming everyone else apart from pointing the finger and looking at themselves.

It’s simple, cut the controversy and private agendas and power grab.

I suppose you just had to read MMs leaving statement to know the feelings towards some sections of the trusts membership/supporters that I dare say wasn’t just shared by him, but a few in the trust.

I think it’s dancingbear on here that’s said the trust should give up and give their shares up - to be honest, it’s a ridiculous suggestion, but doesn’t look so bad at the moment.

Hopefully some new people will stand, and there’ll have my support. We need a functioning trust fit for 2022, unfortunately the current trust board, not entirely their fault aren’t up to it.

The suggestion of non fundraising, for a trust, beggars belief really but I don’t think with the current personel they know how to raise significant cash, but can anyone else?

Mainly though, to begin with members just want truth and to feel involved something which imo has failed miserably.

I’d be upset if they weren’t disappointed with the Twitter fiasco. That doesn’t mean it was a witch hunt type vendetta, mind.

Sometimes just saying yeah you know what we’ve messed up is fine. Folk respect honesty.

CUOSC didn’t need to include info in the briefing that was false.

Mark Middling didn’t need to fabricate that cover up he later admitted was false. He didn’t even need to tweet from his own account at all, the comment to clear the situation could’ve and perhaps should’ve been from the CUOSC account. I was pretty shocked he resigned and wasn’t exactly gunning for him, but I did tweet on the thread.

CUOSC seem to be painting a picture of UF as nasty pasty bully boys (and women) who have personal vendettas and criticise unfairly. That couldn’t be further from the truth IMO. There’s been no personal attacks, no criticism of people - just the CUOSC entity and its achievements (or lack of).

If anybody within CUOSC thinks the carry on (mainly the continued dishonesty) that played out through Twitter and the briefing was unfairly questioned I think that is more of a reflection on their standards not being the best. Mark Middling is off the top of my head the fourth or fifth person to join the board then leave. Maybe that’s a sign that there are problems within CUOSC that need addressed and it isn’t the best it could be?

Quoted from Mouldy on Friday, 20 May 2022

I’d be upset if they weren’t disappointed with the Twitter fiasco. That doesn’t mean it was a witch hunt type vendetta, mind.

Sometimes just saying yeah you know what we’ve messed up is fine. Folk respect honesty.

CUOSC didn’t need to include info in the briefing that was false.

Mark Middling didn’t need to fabricate that cover up he later admitted was false. He didn’t even need to tweet from his own account at all, the comment to clear the situation could’ve and perhaps should’ve been from the CUOSC account. I was pretty shocked he resigned and wasn’t exactly gunning for him, but I did tweet on the thread.

CUOSC seem to be painting a picture of UF as nasty pasty bully boys (and women) who have personal vendettas and criticise unfairly. That couldn’t be further from the truth IMO. There’s been no personal attacks, no criticism of people - just the CUOSC entity and its achievements (or lack of).

If anybody within CUOSC thinks the carry on (mainly the continued dishonesty) that played out through Twitter and the briefing was unfairly questioned I think that is more of a reflection on their standards not being the best. Mark Middling is off the top of my head the fourth or fifth person to join the board then leave. Maybe that’s a sign that there are problems within CUOSC that need addressed and it isn’t the best it could be?

You’re right Mouldy.

Again I didn’t see any personal criticism. You and others within UF and others not were entirely correct to question the situation.

I think MM had to resign and had no choice especially as it was reported by the news paper and the official statement contradicted him.

He did come in as a finance expert and to be fair properly did have to divert away from his “trust projects” but that’s the way it was.

I don't think there was anything unfair about the posts by any UF members regarding what happened with the co-opting of PH and I am baffled as to how they can be annoyed by a journalist doing his actual job and reporting on it. Does suggest there's a very insular view taken of the fanbase by the Trust board at times.

Can only speak for myself but I don't think anyone in UF was demanding MM to resign and I was actually quite shocked by it. He'd made a mistake and I'm pretty sure an apology and them sorting out the mess would have been fine, but going by his resignation statement I don't think he was particularly happy in the role. If it's getting in the way of family life then he's absolutely right to do what's best for himself.

A shame really, though I have to say one thing that is perplexing is that we're four days on from him quitting and there hasn't been a peep about it from the CUOSC board.

There’ll probably put it in their briefing, but yeah you’d have thought they’d have put a little statement out.

I’ll also add, whilst it may have been folk involved in UF (amongst others) who did some of the questioning, it was from personal accounts as paid up Members of CUOSC.

As Members, all we expect is honesty and transparency surrounding important things that happen in the running of the Trust. The events of Weds/Thurs and what came out in the Briefing on Sun and the fall out from it all were anything but and nothing short of a complete shambles…

I actually think that everyone involved just wants what's best for the club. As a member of CUOSC (Just a member for some reason people think I'm more , definitely wouldn't want to either) and someone who watches UF hoping it helps to drive change for the club .

I just see the whole situation as a mess , that to even try and help with any project means you are stepping on egg shell. As fans are very happy to shoot you down at the nearest opportunity.

In this case it was quite rightly pointed it that a mistake had been made , a big one, for me the criticism didn't appear to be personal .

The ownership needs to change , the trust needs to change although if the trust does make that change it needs to eradicate that stigma otherwise we will just go round In circles again.

Genuinely astounded that this weeks Briefing made zero mention of the fact that a Board Member has stood down.

Absolutely incredible…

Quoted from ccu on Sunday, 22 May 2022

Genuinely astounded that this weeks Briefing made zero mention of the fact that a Board Member has stood down.

Absolutely incredible…

I'm not.

Quoted from ParcelPete on Sunday, 22 May 2022

Quoted from ccu on Sunday, 22 May 2022

Genuinely astounded that this weeks Briefing made zero mention of the fact that a Board Member has stood down.

Absolutely incredible…

I'm not.

Me neither

Their improvement, in communication, they said they would improve at the last two meetings is showing great signs of success.

Time to let others have a go.

Quoted from ccu on Sunday, 22 May 2022

Genuinely astounded that this weeks Briefing made zero mention of the fact that a Board Member has stood down.

Absolutely incredible…

To be fair to CUOSC, MM has probably submitted a letter of resignation but it is up to the CUOSC board to note the resignation and then comment on it thanking him for his service etc. They are probably waiting for the next scheduled CUOSC board meeting to do the necessary. It's not important enough to warrant having a special meeting.

Au contraire. Said resignation means the CUOSC Board is currently operating at one below the minimum needed according to their own Model Rules which form their Constitution.

Some excerpts:

CONSTITUTION OF BOARD

57. The Society shall have a Board of Directors comprising not less than 8 and not more than 12 persons.

65. The Society Board may at any time co-opt any Member of the Society or the representative of an organisation which is a Member to fill a casual vacancy in the Board of Directors, provided that at no time shall more than one-third of the members of the Society Board be co-opted members. A casual vacancy shall be deemed to exist if the number of Directors should drop below the minimum prescribed in these Rules or below the number elected at the preceding Annual General Meeting.

67. In the event that the size of the Society Board should drop below the minimum number of members prescribed in these Rules, the Directors may act to increase their number or to call a General Meeting of the Society, but for no other purpose.

Currently the number is 7. So something or someone needs to be put in place pronto!

CCU, it was late when I posted so I think I was unclear. MM's resignation does not take effect as soon as he says I quit. The resignation letter has to be presented to the CUOSC board at a meeting at which point it is considered under an agenda item and then accepted. If there needs to be additional board members co-opted to the board then that will be discussed at the same meeting. You can't expect a mutual board to need to react quickly to a board member resigning. Limited company boards can run for a period of time with fewer directors than their articles state. These things happen in life. As I said it isn't urgent but it needs to be addressed. MM could even change his mind on reflection. CUOSC will find your post helpful in reminding them that they should keep the number of board members at a minimum of eight. Maybe you'll get an invitation!

Quoted from carwash on Monday, 23 May 2022

CCU, it was late when I posted so I think I was unclear. MM's resignation does not take effect as soon as he says I quit. The resignation letter has to be presented to the CUOSC board at a meeting at which point it is considered under an agenda item and then accepted. If there needs to be additional board members co-opted to the board then that will be discussed at the same meeting. You can't expect a mutual board to need to react quickly to a board member resigning. Limited company boards can run for a period of time with fewer directors than their articles state. These things happen in life. As I said it isn't urgent but it needs to be addressed. MM could even change his mind on reflection. CUOSC will find your post helpful in reminding them that they should keep the number of board members at a minimum of eight. Maybe you'll get an invitation!

Or, as whole affair has potentially brought them into disrepute, a formal procedure and action maybe being considered.

More chance me winning EuroMillions Carwash!

Quoted from Mullen103 on Friday, 20 May 2022

I suppose you just had to read MMs leaving statement to know the feelings towards some sections of the trusts membership/supporters that I dare say wasn’t just shared by him, but a few in the trust.

I think it’s dancingbear on here that’s said the trust should give up and give their shares up - to be honest, it’s a ridiculous suggestion, but doesn’t look so bad at the moment.

Hopefully some new people will stand, and there’ll have my support. We need a functioning trust fit for 2022, unfortunately the current trust board, not entirely their fault aren’t up to it.

The suggestion of non fundraising, for a trust, beggars belief really but I don’t think with the current personel they know how to raise significant cash, but can anyone else?

Mainly though, to begin with members just want truth and to feel involved something which imo has failed miserably.

Strangely Mullen despite now being a member I still firmly believe they should give the shares back and completely disband. It’s been a complete failure from day 1.