|
|
Post by plainmoorpete on Jan 4, 2017 19:45:43 GMT
I do not think Fishtown gull was genuine but transgender people are welcome to post on here and should not be labelled as sexually confused as a general note to all. In my defence, I didn't say 'sexually confused', I deliberately said 'sex-confused' as a direct reference to the gender confusion caused by fishtowngull saying his name was Faye. It was plainmoorpete who asked the question as to why a female registered on the forum as a male. fishtowngull then corrected matters by saying he is a male but then alluded to his sexuality, which is a completely different thing to sex, by stating his partner is male. Why he would choose to point that out is his business; I was more taken aback that he owned up on a TUFC forum that his partner is an Argyle fan. For the record, I couldn't give a toss about someone's sexuality. It doesn't even appear on my list of qualities I look for in a person. If it did it would probably not appear until about page 12, well after traits such as honesty, integrity, loyalty, and so on. Had fishtowngull been a genuine person, he/she would have registered as a female. Transgender people are those who are 'born in the wrong body'. Faye, despite being born outwardly male, would identify as a woman, because psychologically and emotionally that is what she/he is. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2017 20:55:00 GMT
plainmoorpete I'm assuming that Faye confided this 'transgender' information to rjdgull by personal message As far as the rest of us knew Fishtown could just have easily been 100% homosexual without a single emotional womanly trait, nor any desire to be a woman......but refers to himself as 'Faye' to please Alex  . How can we concentrate on the future of TUFC with unanswered questions relating to our Brixham soap opera hanging over us ? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2017 21:16:39 GMT
Hello all
Alex here and yes i am an Argyle supporter and Faye's partner. Alpine Jo - good post. Florry so you were taken aback that Faye's admitted to having a partner that supports Argyle? This is stuff from the dark ages and prejudice. It is not a war luvvy, it's football! Maybe you guys on here have short memories ........remember when Argyle helped you out by attending that midweek match?
Also i am taken aback.....at the homophobic reactions to Faye and narrow minded assumptions about her being a transgender. Also sad to see this comment from Florry "And with that final flourish, fishtowngull was gone. If he thought our kitchen was a bit too warm it is nothing compared to the way BTPIR would have fried his fishy bits"
Faye went not because it was too hot in the kitchen but because she found attitudes on here boorish. Further, reference to BTPIR giving her worse treatment reinforces her claims about that site being undesriable for decent people.
I trust that TUFC will survive what is happening despite all this nonsense and bigotry that i thought was all behind us.
|
|
rjdgull
TFF member
Admin
Posts: 12,227 
|
Post by rjdgull on Jan 7, 2017 20:49:30 GMT
Just talking to a few people after the game today and looking around at the facilities at Plainmoor, we are going to have to go some to replicate them elsewhere and then as a club get it at a low rent on a long term deal. But why as fans would we want to risk that unless there is a substantially beneficial effect that puts the club in a much better position to take us forwards.
So until GI spells out exactly why and how they plan to undertake the redevelopment then it is not something that I as a fan will support.
|
|
Rob
TFF member
Posts: 3,607
Favourite Player: Asa Hall
|
Post by Rob on Jan 7, 2017 21:18:16 GMT
Poster called finchgull elsewhere stating that Osbourne said to him "We need a centre forward. Funds available to Manager".
Unconfirmed, of course, but I have long thought we might get a few quid chucked at us before they kill us on the road to new or imaginary stadia, so am hopeful for Kieffer Moore's arrival. That might win a few over for a while and keep GI Joe happy with his imaginary militants.
|
|
rjdgull
TFF member
Admin
Posts: 12,227
|
Post by rjdgull on Jan 7, 2017 22:33:27 GMT
Heard a rumour of £500k per year for the next three years which would certainly sway more than a few!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2017 22:47:57 GMT
Rob While we know we can count on you Rob, to try your best to convince fans that seeing G.I strengthen the team is a bad and dangerous sign, you may struggle to persuade many to see things your way. There'd be no Kieffer Moore arriving under the old regime, and there'd certainly be no Kieffer Moore under a TUST owned Torquay United. So IF Kieffer should return there's no disguising the fact that it won't help your case. That said, and you'll appreciate that any conversation between two TUOSC members pre -match, must stay mostly confidential , but my advice wasn't necessarily to throw money at the team this season. A little strengthening in certain positions, and some added experience yes, but we'll be clear of relegation, while promotion is almost definitely out of reach. Spend your money now on a selection of good players and you're limited as to the financial return you can reap via the turnstiles because so many have already made their financial commitment for this campaign via the Season Ticket Scheme. Also, even with money to spend, it's going to be harder to get quality players wishing to join a team just 4 places above the National League relegation zone. Splashing the cash to a greater extent in the Summer, showing we're determined to build a side that can really challenge in 2017/18, and you've a much better chance of capturing the signings you really want then. I can do no more than advise Clarke against going mad with the chequebook. New TUOSC members can be very passionate about the team, and while it's natural to want to demonstrate that those wishing to hold back progress and impose their broken model upon the club are misguided, even steady progress will be enough to persuade the more moderate fan to have nothing to do with the militants and their outmoded views, designed as they are to hold the club back from the bright future that awaits.  |
|
Rob
TFF member
Posts: 3,607
Favourite Player: Asa Hall
|
Post by Rob on Jan 7, 2017 23:19:44 GMT
Good to see you've been won over already, AJ.
It must have been a tricky journey what with DT saying they're not doing anything until later in the month, but congratulations on getting there, nonetheless.
Forget buying lawn mowers, maybe you should set up a supporters club OFFICIAL splinter group which could buy a bulldozer. Leaflet drop at the Town Hall meeting?
|
|
hector
TFF member
Posts: 1,311
|
Post by hector on Jan 8, 2017 13:54:19 GMT
I reckon Alpine is dusting off his old 'I agree with my mate, Chris Roberts' badge, as we speak!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2017 16:19:16 GMT
TUST AT LAST WILLING TO CUT MILITANTS ADRIFT ?
Some further positive news as we start the New Year, with an indication at long last that TUST is willing to cut it's Militant Tendency adrift in order to gain inclusion to the G.I fold. And if this speculation proves to be correct,then who could really blame the TUST hierarchy ?. They've also slipped out some disastrous figures showing just how few of their own members, let alone the wider community, wanted anything to do with their 'share issue', and it seems that members who take part in the TUST lottery could almost be squeezed into a telephone kiosk.
Perhaps the new years resolution of the TUST leadership is to finally read the writing on the wall, particularly as it's now in big bold letters.Accept the hand of friendship,convert to G.I Trust ( you can make all the noises about retaining independence that you think necessary ) and recognise that setting out on a new course is imperative. The Luddite Tendency within your own ranks will not be pleased, but pandering to the militants was getting you nowhere. Be part of TUFC's bright and successful future, rather than carping from the sidelines.
'The positive and open atmosphere of the meeting was encouraging' announces TUST today. Let this signal a fresh start for TUST. Let them just accept that the militants will never ever be 'encouraged' by any progress made in conjunction with G.I. The militants must be left behind to wave their red flags on their own, for the future good of the club, and the future good of TUST itself. Let's hope there is further, and more substantive good news to come, indicating that G.I and TUST can work together in the best interests of the club .
|
|
Rob
TFF member
Posts: 3,607
Favourite Player: Asa Hall
|
Post by Rob on Jan 9, 2017 17:22:53 GMT
An interesting and misleading interpretation, AJ. Here's a link to discussion of the meeting they have had with GI and other matters for those wanting to make their own mind up/access the information. us10.campaign-archive1.com/?u=9b41d9876a62f81c115159e85&id=5a29153f6dAlthough I would agree with AJ that, as ever, TUST's communication is most businesslike and, for it's 429 members and wider community, clearly something with the interests of supporters and the preservation of the club at it's heart. Interesting to read GI will be outlining their 5 year plan to TUST at a more formal meeting later this month. I thought this was something they had proposed to work on to formulate with stakeholders over the remaining months of the season? Have GI forgotten they mentioned that in their prior solitary press release? AJ will no doubt be scrutinising this closely, perhaps concluding supporter error. How many in your "Chris Roberts's Mate" boat, btw, AJ? Are you still sailing that one alone or are you full steam ahead on the "GI Official" now? Incidentally, careful with mentioning telephone kiosk numbers, AJ, as I make it that more do that lottery than there are in another grouping you are fond of. |
|
|
|
Post by plainmoorpete on Jan 9, 2017 20:19:35 GMT
I think it was pretty magnanimous of GI to meet with TUST and offer the hand of friendship given that the poor response, and make no mistake it was poor, to the pre share offer shows that there is little real commitment amongst its membership.
|
|
|
|
Post by unitedwestand on Jan 9, 2017 21:20:51 GMT
I think it was pretty magnanimous of GI to meet with TUST and offer the hand of friendship given that the poor response, and make no mistake it was poor, to the pre share offer shows that there is little real commitment amongst its membership. I love the way that certain posters try to pick the bones and negativity out of any TUST communication. As has been clearly stated in other TUST notes recently, the Pre-Share Issue was set up as a process by which TUST could lobby its members and the wider fan base if the position arose where it was potentially necessary to generate capital in a short period of time. It was not marketed outside of the member base and was not "pushed" in any way as it was not seen appropriate to jeopardise any other bid for the club at the time. I am sure the very same posters would equally show the same negativity if TUST were trying to market this more at the time. They can't really win can they..If you step back and think about it for a moment, there was never going to be much "commitment" for a pre-share issue at the time it was launched given the fact we were waiting to hear on news for the new owners. Why would you want to commit until you knew what the position was? As for GI being magnanimous in meeting with TUST, well that really is a bizarre comment. Presumably you are so confident with the ownership structure now that you don't feel it necessary for anybody to have the opportunity to engage with GI and represent the fan base or query their motives for our club moving forward. I wish I could share your confidence..... |
|
jerry
TFF member
Posts: 165
|
Post by jerry on Jan 9, 2017 22:06:09 GMT
I think it was pretty magnanimous of GI to meet with TUST and offer the hand of friendship given that the poor response, and make no mistake it was poor, to the pre share offer shows that there is little real commitment amongst its membership. I love the way that certain posters try to pick the bones and negativity out of any TUST communication. As has been clearly stated in other TUST notes recently, the Pre-Share Issue was set up as a process by which TUST could lobby its members and the wider fan base if the position arose where it was potentially necessary to generate capital in a short period of time. It was not marketed outside of the member base and was not "pushed" in any way as it was not seen appropriate to jeopardise any other bid for the club at the time. I am sure the very same posters would equally show the same negativity if TUST were trying to market this more at the time. They can't really win can they..If you step back and think about it for a moment, there was never going to be much "commitment" for a pre-share issue at the time it was launched given the fact we were waiting to hear on news for the new owners. Why would you want to commit until you knew what the position was? As for GI being magnanimous in meeting with TUST, well that really is a bizarre comment. Presumably you are so confident with the ownership structure now that you don't feel it necessary for anybody to have the opportunity to engage with GI and represent the fan base or query their motives for our club moving forward. I wish I could share your confidence..... I'm not anti-TUST, in fact I am a member and contributed to this pre-share issue but I have to agree with Plainmoorpete here. No it wasn't marketed to the wider fanbase but TUST has over 400 members and only 19 of them were prepared to contribute a paltry £100 to this (and don't forget this money was refundable so hardly a great commitment). It would seem that many of the people regularly bemoaning GI's ownership can't actually be bothered to do something about it when asked. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2017 23:05:22 GMT
unitedwestand There were critical friends of TUST (mentioning no names ) who did stand back and think at the time, and expressed their reservations. However the people who should have been doing more standing back and more thinking 'at the time' were the TUST leadership,but what were they proclaiming 'at the time it was launched' ? They were announcing that the pre-share offer was a way for 'the wider community to 'show their support for a community owned club'. And it's only because we know there is no organisation more committed to transparency than TUST, that we're eager to learn the extent of the support that the wider community demonstrated. If TUST are able to tell which of the 78 participants in their lottery is or isn't a TUST member, it does seem odd that as yet they've not been able to make a similar differentiation when there were only 19 contributors to the share scheme. You can understand why entries from the Official TUST book of excuses, be it poor marketing or something else, rather than the transparency that TUST themselves claim to prize so highly when they're demanding it from others, isn't being received warmly. unitedwestand
The suspicion remains that TUST are willing to flip-flop position at the drop of a hat in order to suit themselves. As Matt Norman said in his Happy New Year message, TUST thought long and hard before going ahead and breaking the confidentiality agreement as it "was no secret that cash flow was tight and therefore the only alternative we could see was the club falling into administration or being passed across to GI"Only two possible outcomes. Would it be G.I or would it be administration. TUST had thought long and hard, and ruled out the possibility of any other bids ! Other bids weren't an alternative. Yet now, TUST are putting their pre share issue marketing operation on hold because, you never know how many new bids the club might receive in the morning post ! The lines being spun by The Ministry of TUST just don't wash anymore. A handful of militants try to maintain the Party line, but other than that the game is up. I remain hopeful that TUST will have the good sense not to attempt spending 2017 swimming against the tide, but instead adopt a more cooperative stance and work in conjunction with the club's owners for a brighter future.  |
|
.