Fans Forum

[Yellowcoat]

I still do not understand why so many of the usual clique on here expect an organisation, which they are unwilling to actually join, to take up problems for them without making any effort themselves. Why should STAR have to canvas opinions from outside their membership even if they often do so?

[Green]

Can I just say fair fooks to Dirk for putting his POV across here, seemingly the last member of STAR willing to do so and as such he's facing a barrage but it's appreciated (by me at least).

[Green]

I still do not understand why so many of the usual clique on here expect an organisation, which they are unwilling to actually join, to take up problems for them without making any effort themselves. Why should STAR have to canvas opinions from outside their membership even if they often do so?

That question has been asked and indeed answered several times over the last few pages.

Short answer - because it's one of their stated aims to do so.

[Hoop Blah]

I still do not understand why so many of the usual clique on here expect an organisation, which they are unwilling to actually join, to take up problems for them without making any effort themselves. Why should STAR have to canvas opinions from outside their membership even if they often do so?

Because it's one of their stated aims to represent the wider fan base.

How can they do that if they don't know what that wider fan base thinks?

How do they grow the membership base in order to reflect a wider range of supporter types if they don't engage with them or try to appeal to them?

[Yellowcoat]

In that case you should join to ensure that they reflect your views.

[Green]

*Bangs head against wall*

Anyway, welcome to the thread I guess yellowcoat.

[STAR Liaison]

Good post Croydon Royal.

This comes back to the point I made yesterday that there are so few people "running" STAR, and I'm not sure they "get" Internet 2.0 and social media. I think it certainly is a mistake to not interact with HNA in any way whatsoever, but then again the number of trolls, WUMs and attention-seekers on HNA don't make that easy - it's virtually a a full-time job. So again, with so few people doing everything, why should they spread themselves so thin?

I personally don't have a problem with STAR's policy that they'll take anything to the club as long as they're contacted directly (by email) by whoever is raising the concern - ensuring that they're acting on behalf of a real person, rather than someone behind an anonymous ID, doesn't seem too much to ask to me.

Regarding the FF last year, I'm completely sure it was a genuine cock-up - STAR forgot to inform people about the "terms of reference - Chatham House Rules" for the event. But the problem came when Cypry posted in good faith, and STAR then completely buggered up the response to it and subsequent damage limitation - almost an object lesson in how *not* to communicate with people over social media. It was handled really badly, but it was a genuine cock-up, rather than the "control -freakery conspiracy" that many on here would so love it to be.

I think your first para is the most important, both in terms of what gets done but also the perceived clique of the STAR Board. There are so few active participants, but it can be rewarding to help (yes I know a lot of you don't think we do but I have helped many people in my time involved) so that it is not surprising that many of the volunteers are friends of those already involved, as they will appreciate the benefits. The more others are willing to get involved the less possible it is to have a clique as the members will decide who will represent them rather than anyone who offers.

As to the last para I have and will again apologise to Cypry for my reaction at the time - as some of you will know I have had a hell of a year with both my mother and husband dying, and at that time they were both ill, so I was not thinking as clearly as I might. Not an excuse but sometimes you post on here too quickly without thinking of the consequences.

[Hoop Blah]

In that case you should join to ensure that they reflect your views.

As I've said before, I've been a member and I didn't see the point and I don't think the organisation does much to address a failing against it's stated aims.

According to their aims, they want to represent the likes of me and other non members. I don't need to be a member to point out that they're failing on that front and I don't need to want to put it right to have an opinion on their effectiveness.

[Royal Lady]

Good post Croydon Royal.

This comes back to the point I made yesterday that there are so few people "running" STAR, and I'm not sure they "get" Internet 2.0 and social media. I think it certainly is a mistake to not interact with HNA in any way whatsoever, but then again the number of trolls, WUMs and attention-seekers on HNA don't make that easy - it's virtually a a full-time job. So again, with so few people doing everything, why should they spread themselves so thin?

I personally don't have a problem with STAR's policy that they'll take anything to the club as long as they're contacted directly (by email) by whoever is raising the concern - ensuring that they're acting on behalf of a real person, rather than someone behind an anonymous ID, doesn't seem too much to ask to me.

Regarding the FF last year, I'm completely sure it was a genuine cock-up - STAR forgot to inform people about the "terms of reference - Chatham House Rules" for the event. But the problem came when Cypry posted in good faith, and STAR then completely buggered up the response to it and subsequent damage limitation - almost an object lesson in how *not* to communicate with people over social media. It was handled really badly, but it was a genuine cock-up, rather than the "control -freakery conspiracy" that many on here would so love it to be.

I think your first para is the most important, both in terms of what gets done but also the perceived clique of the STAR Board. There are so few active participants, but it can be rewarding to help (yes I know a lot of you don't think we do but I have helped many people in my time involved) so that it is not surprising that many of the volunteers are friends of those already involved, as they will appreciate the benefits. The more others are willing to get involved the less possible it is to have a clique as the members will decide who will represent them rather than anyone who offers.

As to the last para I have and will again apologise to Cypry for my reaction at the time - as some of you will know I have had a hell of a year with both my mother and husband dying, and at that time they were both ill, so I was not thinking as clearly as I might. Not an excuse but sometimes you post on here too quickly without thinking of the consequences.

I didn't realise your husband had died, may I send you my sincere condolences. x

[Yellowcoat]

According to their aims, they want to represent the likes of me and other non members. I don't need to be a member to point out that they're failing on that front and I don't need to want to put it right to have an opinion on their effectiveness.

Yes but by continuing to snipe on here it seems you expect your views to be considered over and above paid up members whilst having a free ride yourself. Is that a reasonable position to take?

[STAR Liaison]

In that case you should join to ensure that they reflect your views.

As I've said before, I've been a member and I didn't see the point and I don't think the organisation does much to address a failing against it's stated aims.

According to their aims, they want to represent the likes of me and other non members. I don't need to be a member to point out that they're failing on that front and I don't need to want to put it right to have an opinion on their effectiveness.

If you feel like that maybe you should point out to STAR how they are failing. The lack of communication can (and does) work in both directions.

[Hoop Blah]

According to their aims, they want to represent the likes of me and other non members. I don't need to be a member to point out that they're failing on that front and I don't need to want to put it right to have an opinion on their effectiveness.

Yes but by continuing to snipe on here it seems you expect your views to be considered over and above paid up members whilst having a free ride yourself. Is that a reasonable position to take?

I'm not continuing to snipe, I'm expressing my opinion on a organisation that wants to represent me during a discussion about that organisation. I certainly don't want my views to be considers over and above paid up members, if you think I have perhaps you can point out where I've made any such suggestion explicitly or just implied.

Your attitude and your apparent inability to take on board any of the comments I've made does you no favours in what's been an otherwise pretty grown up discussion on this thread. Perhaps you can keep that in mind before coming in with your bullish and defensive responses.

[Yellowcoat]

I am not even a member so perhaps I can see both sides of the discussion (which you might also consider).

[Hoop Blah]

In that case you should join to ensure that they reflect your views.

As I've said before, I've been a member and I didn't see the point and I don't think the organisation does much to address a failing against it's stated aims.

According to their aims, they want to represent the likes of me and other non members. I don't need to be a member to point out that they're failing on that front and I don't need to want to put it right to have an opinion on their effectiveness.

If you feel like that maybe you should point out to STAR how they are failing. The lack of communication can (and does) work in both directions.

Absolutlely agree that lack of communication can work in both directions. What I would say is that over the years I've made many constructive comments regarding STAR on these pages and, as is perhaps the point of the discussion, none of those have really been picked up on or discussed in a similarily constructive way.

The challenge for STAR is to embrace the ways it's potential members interact and to absorb the constructive comments from places like HNA and twitter in order to address that lack of communication (both ways). It seems to me that STAR has an issue in listening and interacting with the wider fan base. That may be one reason why there's a lack of diversity on the board because the board and organisation as a whole is failing to appeal to the wider audience. It seems ironic that you say it's limited but then Royal Lady's offer for being a go-between was turned down. Wouldn't that type of offer be a good way to wider the net and find alternative volunteers?

[Hoop Blah]

I am not even a member so perhaps I can see both sides of the discussion (which you might also consider).

I'd suggest you're struggling with either viewpoint let alone both.

Feel free to point out where I've suggested STAR should be taking my views over and above anyone elsee though, you seem to have missed that side of the discussion again.

[Hoop Blah]

Can I just say fair fooks to Dirk for putting his POV across here, seemingly the last member of STAR willing to do so and as such he's facing a barrage but it's appreciated (by me at least).

I'd echo that sentiment. Dirk and I rarely agree on most subjects (we do on some though!) but it's always worth having a discussion with him on most topics because he'll take on board opinions and properly discuss them.

[Green]

And in a similar vein, welcome back to the board starliaison.

[STAR Liaison]

Absolutlely agree that lack of communication can work in both directions. What I would say is that over the years I've made many constructive comments regarding STAR on these pages and, as is perhaps the point of the discussion, none of those have really been picked up on or discussed in a similarily constructive way.

The challenge for STAR is to embrace the ways it's potential members interact and to absorb the constructive comments from places like HNA and twitter in order to address that lack of communication (both ways). It seems to me that STAR has an issue in listening and interacting with the wider fan base. That may be one reason why there's a lack of diversity on the board because the board and organisation as a whole is failing to appeal to the wider audience. It seems ironic that you say it's limited but then Royal Lady's offer for being a go-between was turned down. Wouldn't that type of offer be a good way to wider the net and find alternative volunteers?

If I had had nothing else to do but act for STAR I would have willingly taken on board a lot of suggestions on here, but I found when I was vice-chairman and then chairman that STAR took enough of my spare time that it was not possible to look for more to do in these pages. This is why RL offered, and I would have taken her up on her offer, but I can still see why the current Board did not.

I would seriously say that direct communication is not only taken more seriously but is also harder to ignore/overlook.

I would also say that those I know involved now do not have the jobs that mean they can spend time on HNA? during the day. I only have sporadic access depending on my workload, so it is not constructive to think a post on here will be seen let alone considered.

[melonhead]

Didn't I offer to be a sort of go-between between STAR and HNA - where I could wheedle out the fishermen/wind up merchants and put any proper criticisms/concerns etc to STAR on their behalf etc and didn't STAR REFUSE to deal with anyone from HNA - despite some of STAR's own members also being on HNA?

always about you aintit

[melonhead]

• to encourage the Club to take proper account of the interests of its supporters and the community it serves in its decisions and to honour the contribution made by the community in the past to the life of the club

Do I think it does that? No, not really. I think it puts a much higher priority on having close and cosy links with the club and being its unofficial PR and and free events support team. I don't think one organisation can be as cosy as STAR appear to strive for but militant enough to effectively stand up for the supporters rights when needed.

i agree- and think this aim should be higher on their priority list, but it is true that they can have it as an aim, and work towards it, while still having other aims that are given more focus