TOPIC: Notes from CUSG meeting

Notes from 10th Feb meeting on o/s

mobile.carlisleunited.co.uk//news/articl...of-cusg-2989707.aspx

"Messageboards
Discussed about comments made about CUSAT members that were personal in nature and inaccurate. Cumbrians.net had representation in CUSG via Mike Denovellis, who was not present for this meeting and was handing this over. Agreed for Phil King and Claire to meet with messageboard representatives from Cumbrians.net and Footymad about the purpose of the CUSG."

Haha brilliant, looks like the new mods are going be told to watch what people say about the trust on here.
Can I just say they've ruined this club and have gone against the very thing they're supposed to stand for.

Dunno who went from west coasters??? Invisible man perhaps?

Sent from my GT-I8200N using Tapatalk

Now is the messageboard is being gagged???

Sent from my GT-I8200N using Tapatalk

I've been invited to the next meeting on behalf of Carlisle Mad and there will be representation there from this Board. What needs to be remembered is that we supporters are a broad church with a plethora of views and messageboards exist for those views to be expressed. If comments are inaccurate perhaps someone has been misinformed. So get on the messageboard and sort it out. I won't be sympathetic to requests to police my own board more strongly, just in case someone is over-sensitive, and I suggest that the managers of this place take a similar stance.

Joke but i expected something like this - silencing techniques, they don't like the truth getting out.

If theres something I have posted that someone doesn't like then i'm easily contactable for it to be discussed on here through chat, Facebook, twitter anything as i don't hide behind the username. Your always going to get those that are abusive and hide behind a username but this to me sounds like people are throwing their toys out of the pram.

Instead of being a cry baby come on here and disprove instead of twining to those that can't do much about it.

Can i be put on record as saying CUSAT can F*ck right off and stick their crispy cakes up their collective bumholes. I dont apologise for any offense caused.

If anybody is offended by anything written on here, there are the facilities in place to report it, and if its offensive/libellous, it will be removed. This applies for this thread and in general.

melbourneblues wrote:
CUSAT aren't the Trust (CUOSC).

I'll add to CufcMike's post that we certainly haven't been 'silenced' or 'censored' and there's no chance we will be. This board is used by several hundred and read by probably the same again from the usage counts.

We operate a view that we're completely transparent and any communication will be broadcast on here. We'll be making this clear from the outset to any relevant parties in any future meetings.

As said, personal abuse won't be tolerated (There's a difference between calling someone a 'silly sod' and a 'f**king t**t!) and will be dealt with accordingly.

Apologies I also misread it as the trust and not CUSAT, not me this time ive been as complimentary as i can be to the away travel.

But the principle still stands though, if you have an issue with a post/poster contact them direct on here or sign up and respond. The away travel have their own facebook group to put messages on.

cufcdeano wrote:
You can see how someone may not be able to differentiate when CUSAT wont hand over the domain CUOSC for reasons only known to themselves.

Mullen103 wrote:
Sadly it's a 'private' group, and when I requested to join (Was prepared to draw a line in sand as have been a critic in the past) it was rejected. Didn't come across as accessible to all!

A symptom of the fact I personally feel there's far too many Groups for a Club our size.

The photo makes it look like a meeting of the local church group organising a raffle!

Sometimes folk only see what they want to see and for clarity that aimed at ccu missing the reply.
kitkat75 wrote:

Come off it Dan, you silly sod.

Bumble wrote:
Given on that thread, I'd liked Melbourne's comment after that reply, I never missed it.

Just for clarity...

(High Street still hasn't come to say hello either!)

So you got in touch after Kitkat's reply and were rejected ?

Bumble wrote:
No. I asked to join once originally, the request was rejected. That told me all I needed to know. There's 3 Admin listed for the Group, one of them (I've no idea who I'll add for fairness) has knocked back the request. End of matter for me, hence why I posted at the time on here.

cufcdeano wrote:
Is there any difference?

I love the way they're complaining under the guise of cusat

Great, so the ticketing system has gone from:

cufcdeano wrote:
To:

"Season Ticket Holders had needed a separate ticket for cup-ties this season, the club will be looking to see if the ticketing system can include these games to be added to season tickets, therefore enabling games to be added using the website."

melbourneblues wrote:
Yes, a massive difference. CUSAT is the Supporters Away Travel. None of those involved with the running of CUSAT are involved with CUOSC at board level. Some are Members.

To clarify, there have been absolutely no complains from CUOSC/Trust about the running of/content on either messageboard.

Mike

were they any other threats of solicitors other than Keith Agar?

Nope.

cufcdeano wrote:
I think that says it all - Some in CUSAT are very friendly with him.

cufcdeano wrote:
Are you gonna sell your story to John Colman now your free.

Dancingbear wrote:
Only if the money is right

500k should just about cover it

cufcdeano wrote:
You should of mentioned this was how cuosc were going to get the money, good idea, didn't give you enough credit.

Well I've checked as far as I can CCU and no one I have asked has sent you a rejection email, so don't know what happened there.

I do think this whole thing has been terribly badly handled. and it disappoints me greatly (I mean the notes from the CUSG meeting , not whether CCU has been rejected or not).

I think a little more tact and diplomacy could have been exercised with the wording of the article, which comes over immediately as confrontational
We now have the messageboarders sticking up for their territory and right to say whatever they want, a quite understandable reaction. Although I personally find it impossible to condone some of the personal attacks that have appeared from time to time.

We then, of course, have folk jumping in with all their own old prejudice (yes, including me, but by no means exclusively) and yet again another chasm opens up, CUSG : a meeting of fans groups or another chance to divide and conquer.

It gets harder to believe there is a way forward.

Too many groups, too many factions, too many disagreements. This club's never going to move forward with all the egos and stubbornness.

Notes from a meeting on 10th February posted on 7th March, there's been another meeting in the meantime!

Bumble wrote:
As far as I'm aware, you don't get an email if you're refused into a private Facebook group? It's a simple click of 'Accept' or 'Reject'. I've been in hundreds of groups over the years and never had an email associated. They could of sent me a private message explaining the reason why, but none was received.

I put the request in, checked back a few days later and it wasn't pending any more. If I wanted to click join again it was available, but I wasn't going to go chasing.

Hope that clears it up from my side!

surely you don't expect anything connected to our club to be readily available. the minutes of any meetings will have to be officially approved and most probably censored.
then there is the time delay for us plebs to forget there has been a meeting.

franksidebottom wrote:
A shortened guess of the minutes. It was decided we'd better not rock the boat by asking for our promised seat on the holding board and it was generally agreed that most messageboard members are tossers.

If anybodys offended by anything on here,they need to go and visit the real world.

Erm. Hello....

To be fair,l think some fun was poked at a lass that was too short for her build. Motts are bit sensitive to that sort of thing. Especially if it's rag week.

High Street wrote: Looks like the High Street is getting a bit desperate for footfall. Just face it all those charity shops and bookies aren't going to bring people back.

Trivial as it may sound but the price of a warm can on match days was brushed under the carpet rather quickly! If the buyers can't get cheap drink off Heineken theres something wrong!!!

Dancingbear wrote:
You're getting yourself really confused here. These are notes from the CUSG meeting, absolutely sod all to do with the holdings board. CUOSC have reps at the CUSG meeting, but JN/AJ are not present, and its not the purpose of raising points such as holding board seat.

CUSG, CUOSC, 1921 Board - all are pretty irrelevant really. Of more interest, the club's last AGM was postponed due to the floods. Has the rearranged meeting taken place, or has a date been set?

Been easier folding in the summer and starting again with none of this sh1te and sh1tty owners. We'll end up there anyway at this rate. F_cking shambles. Do they all come under the umbrella of C.U.N.T.S.?

Trying to put into words what i think of everything surrounding the so called wellbeing or our club and can't get away from "unflushable turds".

RonBacardi wrote:

How about letting Phil King get on with Sales & Marketing, the job that he was employed to do!

Phil king is like the bloke who gets taken on at a company as a brickie but ends up doing a bit of joinery a bit of plastering and a bit of sweeping up in fact anything but what he was employed to do.
Phil king =Carlisle Utd's handyman.

cufcdeano wrote:
Deano, these are the same people who have to vote in the EU Referendum as well as other major elections................might as well say it ....Shakes head!!!!!

Wasn't getting confused at all Deano just thought it was summat that might have been mentioned. I never mentioned JN or AJ because I know they wouldn't be there. You suggesting I'm too thick to be allowed to vote now seesaw? That's a bit of a personal attack. I'm considering reporting it to the moderators.

Not sure why it would be mentioned in the CUSG, as I said, that's not the purpose of the group.

It was mentioned at the CUOSC members meeting however, and the comments were taken on board, and discussed again on Saturday at the latest CUOSC board meeting. It's an important matter, and one that shouldn't and won't be dropped.

Alan wrote:
The multifunctional role Phil appears to play at the club is surely setting him up nicely for bigger and better things. The guy is young and probably very ambitious. It will be interesting to see how long he stops around.

cufcdeano wrote:
Perhaps one of the other groups would ask the question? I'd have thought it would be the sort of thing I'd ask. Mind you I should prob be asking if I should Bremain or Brexit questions.