Match Preview/Thread - Morton vs Inverness (11th December) - Page 9 - General Morton Chatter - TheMortonForum.com Jump to content
TheMortonForum.com

Match Preview/Thread - Morton vs Inverness (11th December)


Admin

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, TRVMP said:

It just occurred to me, actually - is the vote restricted to those who have paid the full amount?

Doesn't seem so, I only signed up at the end of last season but I still received the email with both candidates (rather dull) statements and mentioned that I would get the ballot email on Friday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 173
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Just watched latest vlmanager interview and Derek Anderson actually had the cheek to say that the boys looked tired as they'd had 5 games in two weeks and that a lot of people forget that. 

You didn't make a single substitution midweek Derek and then played the exact same team on the Saturday so you don't get to have a go at the fans for not taking in to consideration their tiredness. Get these fucking excuses out of our club it's rotting us from the inside out. 

Just now, port-ton said:

Just watched latest manager interview and Derek Anderson actually had the cheek to say that the boys looked tired as they'd had 5 games in two weeks and that a lot of people forget that. 

You didn't make a single substitution midweek Derek and then played the exact same team on the Saturday so you don't get to have a go at the fans for not taking in to consideration their tiredness. Get these fucking excuses out of our club it's rotting us from the inside out. 

 

Good people will do good things, bad people will do bad things, but only with religion do good people do bad things!

 

32.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jamie_M said:

 

I copied the address directly from this tweet, sent it, then got the failed message because it's "mortonclibtogether." Just another little thing they don't bother checking.

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once I sent the mail to the correct address I did, in fairness, get a response in minutes with a link to the form.

The rules of voting weren't clear to me. I voted for one of the candidates but as the instructions say you are free not to vote... what does that mean in practice? The scenario I raised was: what if 30% of the membership voted for person A, 30% for person B, and 40% either abstained on principle or couldn't be bothered or never knew it was happening? Given the wording of the notice - that not casting a vote is equivalent to not choosing a candidate - I'd think then that neither would be appointed. But I've asked for clarity on that.

The cynic in me suggests that this is a non-binding vote and regardless of percentages, the MCT Board will decide.

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I received a response on the same day, which was nice - the Articles (which I had to go to Companies House to dig up, since they're not on the website) come into play here. Long story short, it's first past the post. Of the two named candidates, one will get the spot, the one with the most votes, regardless of how many people vote.

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, TRVMP said:

I received a response on the same day, which was nice - the Articles (which I had to go to Companies House to dig up, since they're not on the website) come into play here. Long story short, it's first past the post. Of the two named candidates, one will get the spot, the one with the most votes, regardless of how many people vote.

Why would it be anything other than the candidate with the most votes? If you don’t vote, you aren’t necessarily saying you don’t want either of them; you might just know nothing about them and not be bothered who gets in. In most elections nobody expects a 100% turnout, and apart from a few loony brexiteers trying to claim that Scotland voted leave cos every non voter was a closet leaver, nobody co-opts non-voters to their side.

"Any nation given the opportunity to regain its national sovereignty and which then rejects it is so far beneath contempt that it is hard to put words to it."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, the issue from MCTs perspective is that if it becomes a glorified bowling club committee (hardly likely!) but with 900-odd members still allowed to vote, then nobody could ever be elected to a position. 

It would be better if there was a 'none of the above/reopen nominations' option for members to choose as well though. 

The site is supposed to be a place for the extended 'family' of Morton supporters - having an affinity with people that you don't know, because you share a love of your local football club. It's not supposed to be about point scoring and showing how 'clever' or 'funny' you are, or just being downright rude and offensive to people you don't know, because you can get away with it. Unfortunately, it seems the classic case of people who have little standing/presence in real life, use this forum as a way of making themselves feel as if they are something. It's sad, and I've said that before..

 

So, having been on Morton forums for about 15 years I guess, I've had enough... well done t*ssers, another Morton supporter driven away. You can all feel happy at how 'clever' you are

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, vikingTON said:

Yep, the issue from MCTs perspective is that if it becomes a glorified bowling club committee (hardly likely!) but with 900-odd members still allowed to vote, then nobody could ever be elected to a position. 

It would be better if there was a 'none of the above/reopen nominations' option for members to choose as well though. 

This.

There's a storm on the horizon

And for that I can't see the sun

For I'll keep a waiting on the pavement

For the ice cream van to come

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, vikingTON said:

Yep, the issue from MCTs perspective is that if it becomes a glorified bowling club committee (hardly likely!) but with 900-odd members still allowed to vote, then nobody could ever be elected to a position. 

It would be better if there was a 'none of the above/reopen nominations' option for members to choose as well though. 

Yes, the wording of the invitation to vote was a bit clumsy. Can't be bothered checking back, but the word that was needed was "neither".  Which, as there was no option to express an opinion, meant not voting was the only third choice.

"Any nation given the opportunity to regain its national sovereignty and which then rejects it is so far beneath contempt that it is hard to put words to it."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Alibi said:

Why would it be anything other than the candidate with the most votes? If you don’t vote, you aren’t necessarily saying you don’t want either of them; you might just know nothing about them and not be bothered who gets in. In most elections nobody expects a 100% turnout, and apart from a few loony brexiteers trying to claim that Scotland voted leave cos every non voter was a closet leaver, nobody co-opts non-voters to their side.

Because of your next reply. The vote for neither part completely threw me. 

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...