| The Resurrections Agenda 09:02 - Oct 30 with 10511 views | Darran |
Well it's quite obvious that he's oblivious to what was in The Trust statement from last week anyway,surely if he had read it he'd be 10 times more vociferous about the sellouts than the Trust considering what they've done to the club and Trust.
Summin not right here it's as if he's in cohorts with one of them simply to bring the Trust down.
As I said a couple of days ago anyone that doesn't see the Trust/Huw Cooze business as the lesser of two evils by a country mile must be the as thick as f*ck.
Not to be mentioning the other business considering he's been so critical of Dineen and Jenkins in the past.
Very strange,very strange indeed. |  |
| |  |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:29 - Oct 30 with 1011 views | dobjack2 |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:04 - Oct 30 by TheResurrection |
You and Darran are Phil's biggest enemies and he can't even see this.
Dobjack this is what you call abuse. This poster has posted about me over 20 times and never about the debate or subject, just me.
It's really funny you've not mentioned him.
Agenda?? |
In the post where we talked about abuse when you pointed out that you also are abused I agreed that was also unacceptable.
In another thread I made a comment that all "sides" should stop the abuse so that we can have adult conversations.
A lot of posters overstep the line occasionally. I have been guilty of it and publicly apologised to the poster but for some it has become habitual.
The only way that we can have an adult conversation is if all the abuse, silly name calling and shouting stops. |  | | |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:30 - Oct 30 with 1004 views | icecoldjack |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:23 - Oct 30 by Darran |
Well it's gone exactly the way I had hoped I'm not sure who the some are though,in fact it's probably gone better than I'd hoped in the fact that it's showing people how obsessed with me you are for some weird reason. |
I'm sure it has as your primary task is to bump up Internet traffic for your mate Phil s .
So many cliques on here. huw Cooze syndrome- it goes on and it's wrong but we'll do nothing . |  | | |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:31 - Oct 30 with 997 views | ItchySphincter |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:12 - Oct 30 by Darran |
He doesn't need to close it down he can just hand it over to me like he's promised to do when he's had enough. |
lol |  |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:32 - Oct 30 with 990 views | Murph75 |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:30 - Oct 30 by icecoldjack |
I'm sure it has as your primary task is to bump up Internet traffic for your mate Phil s .
So many cliques on here. huw Cooze syndrome- it goes on and it's wrong but we'll do nothing . |
If that's how you feel why are you still contributing to the site? |  | | |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:34 - Oct 30 with 973 views | icecoldjack |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:32 - Oct 30 by Murph75 |
If that's how you feel why are you still contributing to the site? |
Hi jackfath. | | | |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:36 - Oct 30 with 966 views | TheResurrection |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:10 - Oct 30 by ItchySphincter |
I see your point here, not sure I agree but I see it. Out of nagging curiosity, if you had to choose would you rather Phil step down from his trust role and carry on running the message board or do you trust him to keep his role on the trust and fight the good fight if he were to close down PS? Honestly interested. |
Not sure of the answer but the 2 can't go together.
For example he knows full well who Murph75 is, that he has more than 1 username and yet he allows it.
Because it suits him to have this type of poster do his devious work for him.
It's too easy to manipulate important discussions and this will always remain whilst he's doing the 2 roles.
It's disgusting. |  |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:37 - Oct 30 with 958 views | Darran |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:30 - Oct 30 by icecoldjack |
I'm sure it has as your primary task is to bump up Internet traffic for your mate Phil s .
So many cliques on here. huw Cooze syndrome- it goes on and it's wrong but we'll do nothing . |
So why don't you f*ck off over to nonce then? | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:39 - Oct 30 with 940 views | ItchySphincter |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:19 - Oct 30 by icecoldjack |
Here comes the clique of planet swans , setting the agenda and rounding on objectional posters for years .
same names same games often the same posters with multiple accounts.
this OP hasn't gone quite the way some had hoped. |
Nice to see you keeping your posts short and to the point these days mind. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:40 - Oct 30 with 934 views | TheResurrection |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:16 - Oct 30 by exiledclaseboy |
Surely the best way to effect change is from the inside, not throwing barbs from the sidelines, which isn't constructive and won't achieve anything. You clearly have plenty to offer. Join, stand for election, put your ideas forward and put them into action. I would genuinely vote for you at every available opportunity. But what you're doing now isn't helping anyone.
And before you accuse me of being one of Phil's "acolytes" you know full well that I've been as critical of the Trust as anyone this past week or so. |
I wouldn't accuse you of that mate.
And I would consider it but not when Phil and Jim are allowed to run these sites and be in important Trust positions. Does that make sense to you, a decent poster? | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:41 - Oct 30 with 923 views | dobjack2 |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:26 - Oct 30 by icecoldjack |
Why would i be anything other than "on the straight and narrow " ?
We all love our club, that's the truth, why else post on an Internet forum?
I also have to say that the poster resurrection has been far more critical of huw Jenkins and dineen than he ever has on the trust, the bloke has been proven right on all counts even getting banned from planet swans for being objective.
It adds fuel to the agenda setting fire if nothing else. [Post edited 30 Oct 2016 11:33]
|
Some perceive that the trust has not been on the straight and narrow. It is not enough that an organisation such as the trust is on the straight and narrow it has to be seen and perceived to be on the straight and narrow.
I think that the trust board fell down on governance i.e. showing that it was on the straight and narrow to the members and fans rather than it being corrupt. That is why I believe we need to let them get on with putting their house in order with transparent governance and get on with other things.
If trust members aren't happy with that election time provides the remedy | | | |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:42 - Oct 30 with 922 views | Highjack |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:29 - Oct 30 by dobjack2 |
In the post where we talked about abuse when you pointed out that you also are abused I agreed that was also unacceptable.
In another thread I made a comment that all "sides" should stop the abuse so that we can have adult conversations.
A lot of posters overstep the line occasionally. I have been guilty of it and publicly apologised to the poster but for some it has become habitual.
The only way that we can have an adult conversation is if all the abuse, silly name calling and shouting stops. |
This is correct.
Phil and the other guys in the trust are big enough and experienced enough to take criticism, they've admitted that errors of judgement have been made and we have received a sincere apology. As far as I'm concerned that should draw a line under it and now we need to move on in an adult manner. Others are clearly disagreeing which is fine but we need conversation not argument.
The views of resurrection etc are welcome on this board but people need to be respectful and not resort to personal insults and childish name calling like slumber etc. Let's not drag ourselves down to the veritable smorgasbord of shi t slinging we have been laughing at the Cardiff fans about for what seems like forever. |  |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:44 - Oct 30 with 911 views | TheResurrection |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:17 - Oct 30 by dobjack2 |
The trust has brought harm to itself but there appear to be those that are on a crusade to make that harm fatal rather than keeping a close eye and asking questions to keep it on the straight and narrow. If you fall in the keeping it on the straight and narrow category my apologies.
The resurrection appears to be losing objectivity. He appears to be leading the crusade when he could be doing the important work of being a watchdog. He has told me in another thread that he will give his reasons why he doesn't blame the sellers for getting as much money as they could etc. I look forward to that as I am struggling to understand his motivation as he sees his crusade against the trust as more important than than anything in relation to the sellers and the new majority shareholders |
Let me ask you these...
What have you ever done to help the Swans in their current predicament? Did you see this coming and try to bring it to people's attention?
No?
Well why are you trying to shoot me down that did? Forget abuse or whatever else you want to bring into it to deflect the hard facts. Why? | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:47 - Oct 30 with 895 views | TheResurrection |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:19 - Oct 30 by BigPhilG |
This is the way I see things from my neutral perspective
The trust have admitted the mistakes around Huw Cooze and the appropriate action has already been taken.
The resurrection has asked pertinent questions to be fair but they have been answered and the situation regarding HC has been resolved.
Him telling Phil Sumbler to choose between Planet Swans and Chairman of the trust is in my opinion madness. Mr Sumbler walking away from the trust would be a disaster.
Please cease and desist Resurrection, you've made your point and things have changed but enough is enough.
Now is the time the move forwards and put the trust and the fans first not personal agendas. The place for searching questions is at trust meetings and I look forward to seeing you at the next one |
I know PhilG is a well known poster. I have very strong suspicions on who it is.
So once again. Phil S let's himself down for allowing this to go on stifling the real issues.
So do me a favour Big Phil. Get lost. | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:54 - Oct 30 with 866 views | Darran |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:47 - Oct 30 by TheResurrection |
I know PhilG is a well known poster. I have very strong suspicions on who it is.
So once again. Phil S let's himself down for allowing this to go on stifling the real issues.
So do me a favour Big Phil. Get lost. |
Is it Jackfath too?  | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:54 - Oct 30 with 864 views | NeathJack |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:47 - Oct 30 by TheResurrection |
I know PhilG is a well known poster. I have very strong suspicions on who it is.
So once again. Phil S let's himself down for allowing this to go on stifling the real issues.
So do me a favour Big Phil. Get lost. |
How on earth would you manage as a board member of the Trust if you treated people with differing views from yourself, possibly fellow board members, with such contempt?
Tell me, how would that work? |  | | |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:56 - Oct 30 with 852 views | exiledclaseboy |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:40 - Oct 30 by TheResurrection |
I wouldn't accuse you of that mate.
And I would consider it but not when Phil and Jim are allowed to run these sites and be in important Trust positions. Does that make sense to you, a decent poster? |
No because I genuinely don't see a conflict of interest in running a website and being a Trust officer. There are plenty of other issues that need to be sorted but that isn't one of them for me. For example, I didn't even know that Jim had scfc.co.uk these days. Last time I looked on there Dai Smith was running it after Gary Martin gave it up. I didn't know it still existed to be honest. |  |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 12:00 - Oct 30 with 846 views | TheResurrection |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:54 - Oct 30 by NeathJack |
How on earth would you manage as a board member of the Trust if you treated people with differing views from yourself, possibly fellow board members, with such contempt?
Tell me, how would that work? |
I would make sure I'm speaking with real people like you Paul Thomas. Maybe on Facebook where everyone is more likely to stand by what they say as it's from their own page.
Not here where Darren and chums do Phil's dirty work for him. | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 12:00 - Oct 30 with 844 views | Smellyplumz |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:27 - Oct 30 by perchrockjack |
Plunger.
Come on mun.
Try me.
Ask an intelligent question
Pm me if you like, but not if you ve got your hands down chrissys pants |
Why would I pm you, I can't understand half the stuff you post on here and no I don't have my hands down anyones pants. Serious question for you, do you still think the sale was a great idea like you did in the beginning? [Post edited 30 Oct 2016 12:04]
|  |
|
""Although I cannot promise or predict the future, I can guarantee one thing - the current board of directors will always fight, as we have done over the last 12 years, to work together as one with the Supporters Trust to make 100% sure that Swansea City football club remains the number one priority in all our thoughts and in every decision we make." | | Poll: | Huw Jenkins |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 12:02 - Oct 30 with 835 views | TheResurrection |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:56 - Oct 30 by exiledclaseboy |
No because I genuinely don't see a conflict of interest in running a website and being a Trust officer. There are plenty of other issues that need to be sorted but that isn't one of them for me. For example, I didn't even know that Jim had scfc.co.uk these days. Last time I looked on there Dai Smith was running it after Gary Martin gave it up. I didn't know it still existed to be honest. |
But it genuinely is And and I've explained why wholeheartedly. If we were to take this to an independent arbitration I'd win. I'm sorry but I would.
This place needs to be separate to the Trust to make sure no further accusations can be made. | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 12:04 - Oct 30 with 830 views | exiledclaseboy |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 12:02 - Oct 30 by TheResurrection |
But it genuinely is And and I've explained why wholeheartedly. If we were to take this to an independent arbitration I'd win. I'm sorry but I would.
This place needs to be separate to the Trust to make sure no further accusations can be made. |
But it is separate from the Trust and doesn't purport to be a Trust vehicle. | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 12:07 - Oct 30 with 814 views | ItchySphincter |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 11:23 - Oct 30 by exiledclaseboy |
No flies on you mush. |
Ha! I was about to use the very same words! | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 12:10 - Oct 30 with 785 views | TheResurrection |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 12:04 - Oct 30 by exiledclaseboy |
But it is separate from the Trust and doesn't purport to be a Trust vehicle. |
But that's not the case in reality. | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 12:11 - Oct 30 with 780 views | NeathJack |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 12:00 - Oct 30 by TheResurrection |
I would make sure I'm speaking with real people like you Paul Thomas. Maybe on Facebook where everyone is more likely to stand by what they say as it's from their own page.
Not here where Darren and chums do Phil's dirty work for him. |
I'm sure that was an answer to some question, just not the one I asked. | | | |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 12:17 - Oct 30 with 754 views | perchrockjack |
Ask me nicely smelly.
Why pm
Simple.
It s more personal a spat and others can't .
Now then, how long have you been Chrissy s bitch | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 12:21 - Oct 30 with 743 views | TheResurrection |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 12:11 - Oct 30 by NeathJack |
I'm sure that was an answer to some question, just not the one I asked. |
It's about bringing more reality to debates.
Putting a name to a face and for that face not to hide behind multiple usernames bringing more and more deceit and lies to a debate | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
