Ockham's Razor wrote:
Tyrant,
I generally don’t argue simply for the sake of an argument.
We are diametrically opposed on this issue.
No matter what I say you will counter it with an opposing view, good for you that you have the time to do so.
I am of the view that you (the Club) do all that you can to maintain your dignity during turmoil.
All should be done to correct a position when it is running out of control. There are ways in which this can be achieved without further undermining the fabric/reputation/good name of the Club. From my experience, the best way to achieve this is to agitate for change away from the media spotlight.
Attracting media attention provides competitors with a free opportunity to further denigrate your brand. It allows potential suitors to again query the lack of professionalism of an organisation.
If changes are required, then make them. Agitate for what you believe in by all means, but why do it in such a manner that belittles the Club and also belittles the agitator in the eyes of opposition supporters and those who disagree with the agitator.
regards
Ockham
I was actually asking questions and hoping for some answers... so thanks for your candour.
I take it, therefore, that the main issue here is a "branding one"... that you (and others) believe that excess media on division is a poor reflection on the brand.
Could I assume, therefore, that if Cammo was able to achieve his intention (getting signatures) without it leaking to the media, and presenting it to the board, that that would be ok?
Just asking the question... its not rhetorical... any answers would be appreciated