What's going on?

[Boy Genius]

It's back, but has been locked so nothing further can be added to it. My post asking about the censorship of a thread discussion censorship has however been removed.

so much for free speech......does Stalin overlook everything?

 

[Real Sharapova]

It's back, but has been locked so nothing further can be added to it. My post asking about the censorship of a thread discussion censorship has however been removed.

:icon_cool

 

[SilverFox]

because she is a woman and were always right :icon_lol:

Oh how iroinic!


This sounds like serious stuff. Lets fllood the LCFC OS with the same thread a million times over until the fookers address what is going on.

Any Ideas for a message we could use to flood?

 

[Real Sharapova]

Oh how iroinic!


This sounds like serious stuff. Lets fllood the LCFC OS with the same thread a million times over until the fookers address what is going on.

Any Ideas for a message we could use to flood?

The dams burst?:icon_wink

 

[Mike - True Blue Tinter]

As we seem to be the only one with the story still on does anyone know a proper sports journalist who after reading the thread could ask some questions of the club?

 

[Steven]

As we seem to be the only one with the story still on does anyone know a proper sports journalist who after reading the thread could ask some questions of the club?

The Club bullies people by labelling items libellous and not tell anyone where the libel is in order to suppress articles. Under those circumstances do you think they would answer any questions? :icon_conf :icon_wink

 

[Leigh]

so much for free speech......does Stalin overlook everything?

 

[Chrysalis]

Wow I missed a lot, I checked 3 different forums all posts removed can someone please pm me or something with the gory details I wont reveal who passed it on. Thanks.

 

[beaumontfox]

awww you poor thing.

 

[webmaster]

I have just had a phone call asking me if I know about a 'head of department' at lcfc being suspended from duty. Can anybody throw any light on this? Others are apparently on the hit-list.

Now the club has denied all of this would you like to ask your source where they got the story from?

And next time I see 'Bruin' I'll ask him too, and maybe we can see whether this came from a reliable source and the club has done a U turn, or whether it's someone trying to make mischief.

 

[Joe_Fox]

Storm in a D-cup.

 

[bocadillo]

Now the club has denied all of this would you like to ask your source where they got the story from?

And next time I see 'Bruin' I'll ask him too, and maybe we can see whether this came from a reliable source and the club has done a U turn, or whether it's someone trying to make mischief.

Has the club denied that a 'head of department' has been suspended from duty?

 

[Steven]

Has the club denied that a 'head of department' has been suspended from duty?

The only thing I have seen is that TD has denied that any redundancies have been made. No denial of intention, or notices being issued, or sackings or suspensions. :icon_wink

 

[PFKAKTF FOX]

IMO it appears reality, at present, is somewhere between the two extremes, and that neither account of the events unfolding is 100% true, I still believe that there has been some element of backtracking by the club and more will come out in the wash.

 

[Real Sharapova]

No denial of intention, or notices being issued, or sackings or suspensions. :icon_wink

To be fair to TD, I wouldn't expect any company to make that information public, as it would completely breach any duty of confidentiality owed to its employees.

 

[1966]

These sort of things always amaze me, with everyone running around reacting to and fueling rumours, only to find that it's all a load of old bollocks.

By all means ask questions and demand answers, but don't create problems were there aren't any by adding to rumour's with our own prejudices (normally that the club and FT are always at fault).

As for the FT, for those that slagged them off for not nowing that nothing is happening is maybe an apology is in order.

In future maybe the FT could simply communicate that a story is news to them and they will go away and find out what is happening and report back at a later stage, ensuring that everyone is aware that this may take a while.

 

[PFKAKTF FOX]

These sort of things always amaze me, with everyone running around reacting to and fueling rumours, only to find that it's all a load of old bollocks.

By all means ask questions and demand answers, but don't create problems were there aren't any by adding to rumour's with our own prejudices (normally that the club and FT are always at fault).

As for the FT, for those that slagged them off for not nowing that nothing is happening is maybe an apology is in order.

In future maybe the FT could simply communicate that a story is news to them and they will go away and find out what is happening and report back at a later stage, ensuring that everyone is aware that this may take a while.

Lets wait and see first, I havent read anywhere that it is has been confirmed as a "load of old bollocks". Also the FT originally posted that if the source of said rumour was identified, then they could comment further, suggesting that we were indeed in possession of more fact than they were prepared to discuss, hence the criticism.

 

[Boy Genius]

Lets wait and see first, I havent read anywhere that it is has been confirmed as a "load of old bollocks". Also the FT originally posted that if the source of said rumour was identified, then they could comment further, suggesting that we were indeed in possession of more fact than they were prepared to discuss, hence the criticism.

maybe FT need to word things different. When I read that post I took it the same way that they knew more than they were letting on

 

[1966]

Without wishing to sound like a FT mouthpiece / sympathiser, I think we have to accept that senior members of the FT are going to be aware of information that they are not allowed to communicate.

This is all part of accepting the responsibility that goes with being on the board, I would be far more worried if they were discussing issues that they had promised not to.

Maintaining a professional position should ensure that they quickly become aware of any mismanagement, if it ever happens, and are therefore able to act decisively. Then we will find out if the FT are credible or not.

 

[PFKAKTF FOX]

Without wishing to sound like a FT mouthpiece / sympathiser, I think we have to accept that senior members of the FT are going to be aware of information that they are not allowed to communicate.

This is all part of accepting the responsibility that goes with being on the board, I would be far more worried if they were discussing issues that they had promised not to.

Maintaining a professional position should ensure that they quickly become aware of any mismanagement, if it ever happens, and are therefore able to act decisively. Then we will find out if the FT are credible or not.

Fair points, but what could they not tell us, if there was nothing to tell in the first place ? Somewhat contradicts some of your earlier points.