Winning a premiership doesnt give them license to treat the membership with disrespect.
Maybe not, but it buys them a hell of a lot of brownie points.
On my understanding of things, I don't have a problem with the proposed changes. I get that some people might want one change and not the other, so it could be handled better by splitting them. And I agree with your earlier post that commons sense would suggest both motions would pass on their own merits if voted on separately.
But that aside, I am not sure I get the angst, and I certainly don't get the somewhat derogatory attacks on a board (or certain individuals) that showed a lot of leadership in getting us to a flag.
And to be honest, I don't feel disrespected by what they are doing. Singapore has done pretty well under the benevolent dictator model.
I'd argue that both wouldn't pass on their own merits
12 months ago the EGM motion was defeated.
I said right back on page 1, that I have a real issue with them putting it forward again 12 months after it was defeated. I voted in favour of it last year because I believe that needing 100 signatures for an EGM was far too low when you have 50+ members. However (again as I said on page 1), putting it up again 12 months later is poor on the part of the board. They are refusing to accept the will of their membership; that's disrespectful
I voted in favour of it last year. But this year in good conscience I can't support it because to try and push it through 12 months later reeks of desperation
Clearly, they are using the premiership to get it over the line and while I understand it; it doesn't make it right. It makes it mischievous at best
Now to find out that the motions won't be put forward separately but together is in my view extremely disrespectful to the members.
Again IMV, they are holding the membership to ransom.
Why? Because they are saying to allow premiership players to be awarded life membership you must accept the change to 100 signatures. That's not how it should be... legally I am sure they are allowed to do what they are doing but that doesn't make ethically right... It isn't
Yet again it appears that they don't seem to be willing to trust the membership to make well considered decisions on each point
I've been a huge supporter of this board but in this one they are so wrong with what they are doing and more importantly HOW they are doing it that they deserve every single whack they receive