General Supporters Panel Elections

[Manorlounger]

I’ve said it on a previous thread about the tone of some of the people, who are planning to be on this supporters panel, being on the side of aggressive when replying to people who have concerns about this all working.
It seems that is still the case.
I actually think asking about the confidentiality of minutes and time frames are valid questions. Surely if the panel is not going to be in place until 2022/23 season it would make sense to drum up plenty of interest for people to think about running for election rather than just having a few people ask to be elected and they are then automatically elected by default.
There are various things surrounding the confidentiality, the rules regarding only positivity when talking about the club on social media and the fact this panel was thought up by the club shows that @Paul Cannell is probably right in thinking it is just a mouth piece for the club.

Having posted on another thread and now on here, I would have expected you to have read a bit more and gained a better insight into the panel and it's concept.
I don't know where you get this time frame question? 2022/2023? We are looking for candidates now. the election process is due to close on 4th October 2021 - next month, just 3 weeks away. The process is quite clear and a read of the relevant documents will clarify the whole deal. There is plenty of time for supporters to fill in a simple form, find two other supporters to nominate and second and submit.
As for drumming up interest, Radox and the Oxmail will be getting involved, there will be articles on the website and in the match day programmes.
The subject of confidentiality has been discussed ad infinitum. The documentation again makes clear how this will be handled and how the panel wants to avoid, as much as possible, even having anything remaining confidential.
Surely it makes sense to caution representatives against making adverse comments about the panel and/or the club? That's not stopping criticism, that's making it clear that representatives should uphold a standard. That is not, as has been suggested, making an argument for or against policies, toilet cleaning, or anything else. It is setting standards of behaviour. Any committee, anywhere does the same.

And, when it comes to your opening statement about a perceived aggressive tone of some of the people planning on being on the panel, who are you referring to? I have made no secret of my intention but who else is there?
Is it aggressive to respond to misinformation? To put the right information out. Perhaps you would have preferred that there had been no mention at all on here? Or perhaps continued with the speculation?

And to malign those who have given up so much time already as being no more than a mouth piece of the club is unjustified. In fact I would go so far as to say that it shows a contempt for your own club in believing that OUFC would need such a thing.

The Supporters' Panel is an opportunity, a chance to focus on issues raised by supporters, the day to day issues that can get overlooked. Supporters who are undertaking to make themselves visible to their fellow supporters in order to communicate. To hold constructive dialogue with the club. To do what is already being done at many other clubs alongside the other supporter organisations, not in competition but in co-operation.

Very sadly, the rather critical standpoint of some will deter many from volunteering their time to represent other supporters, they will have concerns about how they will be treated by other supporters.

 

[Sheik djibouti]

What a bunch of whinging ninnies!

Goodness me it must be tiresome trying to please (or at least explain to) everyone on here. I am sure the vast majority of fans are either supportive or cannot see any downside to this initiative.

Shame about the odd squeaky wheel/empty vessel/paranoid conspiracy theorist/shoulder chip balancer, mind[emoji6]

 

[bazzer9461]

What a bunch of whinging ninnies!

Goodness me it must be tiresome trying to please (or at least explain to) everyone on here. I am sure the vast majority of fans are either supportive or cannot see any downside to this initiative.

Shame about the odd squeaky wheel/empty vessel/paranoid conspiracy theorist/shoulder chip balancer, mind[emoji6]

A tad negative aren’t we?

 

[Wallop]

What a bunch of whinging ninnies!

Goodness me it must be tiresome trying to please (or at least explain to) everyone on here. I am sure the vast majority of fans are either supportive or cannot see any downside to this initiative.

Shame about the odd squeaky wheel/empty vessel/paranoid conspiracy theorist/shoulder chip balancer, mind[emoji6]

Quite - I’ve read most of this thread and the other Fans Council one and ye Gods some people see a conspiracy where imho there really isn’t one to see.

That’s my opinion like it or not, I won’t be responding to any replies positive or negative to this post as I haven’t got the time or the energy to engage on a thread related to what for me is a sensible initiative that many have got their knickers in a twist over for little reason.

Good luck @Manorlounger

 

[bazzer9461]

I have a serious question to potential council members. If something is going to be redacted will annotations be placed over the redaction?

edit, Will the redactions ( if there are any ) be removed so no one would know there has been a redaction

 

[Scotchegg]

I have a serious question to potential council members. If something is going to be redacted will annotations be placed over the redaction?

That's already been answered hasn't it? Can't be bothered to go through the posts but doesn't it say in the Terms of Reference that where confidentialities apply, an explanation will be given.

 

[bazzer9461]

That's already been answered hasn't it? Can't be bothered to go through the posts but doesn't it say in the Terms of Reference that where confidentialities apply, an explanation will be given.

Yes but will the redaction be shown in the minutes with the annotations in the place of the sensitive information?

 

[Scotchegg]

Yes but will the redaction be shown in the minutes with the annotations in the place of the sensitive information?

I don't know. But whether it is or isn't changes little. The annotation may simply say "removed due to confidentiality" or there may be no annotations but a wider explanation given elsewhere.

It's as irrelevant as asking about font size or double spacing!!

 

[bazzer9461]

That's already been answered hasn't it? Can't be bothered to go through the posts but doesn't it say in the Terms of Reference that where confidentialities apply, an explanation will be given.

I have had a glance so when the minutes are published and there is a redaction people are going to ask questions some will be awkward. I don’t think if it’s to do with contracts or wages then they shouldn’t be made public although I believe wages have been made known, but as that’s privileged information that should be between the club and the individual. That should be of no concern if the fans or any committees.

 

[bazzer9461]

I don't know. But whether it is or isn't changes little. The annotation may simply say "removed due to confidentiality" or there may be no annotations but a wider explanation given elsewhere.

It's as irrelevant as asking about font size or double spacing!!

So you read the minutes and there is a redaction covered by annotations or has been removed and is made known that it has been removed, do you not think that questions will be asked?
This isn’t China or Russia and why would the club speak to the council of sensitive negotiations?

 

[Scotchegg]

I have had a glance so when the minutes are published and there is a redaction people are going to ask questions some will be awkward. I don’t think if it’s to do with contracts or wages then they shouldn’t be made public although I believe wages have been made known, but as that’s privileged information that should be between the club and the individual. That should be of no concern if the fans or any committees.

And it won't be.

Do you honestly think the club and the Supporters Panel will have nothing better to do than chat about wages and goal bonuses?

 

[bazzer9461]

And it won't be.

Do you honestly think the club and the Supporters Panel will have nothing better to do than chat about wages and goal bonuses?

Off course not it’s none of the committees buisness contracts or wages, but as someone posted in the past couple of days they get told by the board we’re ground sharing and we are building a new ground or even redevelop the Kastad but don’t say anything but it has been so has to be redacted people will ask questions.
there is no need for any information to be given to the council but hush it up, otherwise there will be issues and if you think there won’t be there you need to have a reality check.

 

[Scotchegg]

So you read the minutes and there is a redaction covered by annotations or has been removed and is made known that it has been removed, do you not think that questions will be asked?
This isn’t China or Russia and why would the club speak to the council of sensitive negotiations?

Round and round we go!!!

I've been involved in hundreds/thousands of meetings with sensitive information.

I produce daily staff sickness reports, one with reasons for absence and other confidential details that goes to line managers and HR, whilst that information is removed for other managers with only name and start of absence. There are no redactions/annotations or explanations. One is extremely sensitive the other less so.

I see a dozen security reports every week, and summarise these for wider publication. I have been in hundreds of trade union meetings where many things are "not for the minutes".

It isn't China, or Russia! Its the real world and its not difficult to see why, on very rare occasions, some things may not be for open discussion. It is the same with every OxVox meeting but no one is screaming about that.

If you're so concerned, why not apply and police the process from the inside?

 

[bazzer9461]

Round and round we go!!!

I've been involved in hundreds/thousands of meetings with sensitive information.

I produce daily staff sickness reports, one with reasons for absence and other confidential details that goes to line managers and HR, whilst that information is removed for other managers with only name and start of absence. There is redactions/annotations or explanations. One is extremely sensitive the other less so.

I see a dozen security reports every week, and summarise these for wider publication. I have been in hundreds of trade union meetings where many things are "not for the minutes".

It isn't China, or Russia! Its the real word and its not difficult to see why, on very rare occasions, some things may not be for open discussion. It is the same with every OxVox meeting but no one is screaming about that.

If you're so concerned, why not apply and police the process from the inside?

Probably not apply, no problem in getting two people to second me.
I too have read very sensitive information classed as top secret with some redacted as well but it gets your mind thinking why is there a redaction. That is the reason WHY nothing sinister.
I know Oxvox receive information but the whole of Oxvox get to know and that inform filters through onto social media.
I also noted where it was mentioned that the council doesn’t want information made known that would be sensitive then surely it should be up to the council to state this from the inaugural meeting so as to not be put in a position of knowing something but being told not to say anything.

 

[Scotchegg]

I know Oxvox receive information but the whole of Oxvox get to know and that inform filters through onto social media.

In the last several releases from Oxvox they say that they are aware of ongoing discussions about the stadium but can't say anything due to confidentiality issues.

That is entirely fair, and I respect their position. But I've never seen you demanding a full verbatim record of their meetings with relevant parts redacted and replaced with annotations. Why not? I guess it's that we trust our elected representatives to act on behalf of the wider membership?

So what's the difference with doing the same with the Supporters Panel? After all, they will likely focus on areas which are significantly less important than a new stadium!

As others have said, some are looking for conspiracies that simply don't exist. Equally the constantly circular discussions are both tedious and pointless so I will also step away from these threads until a Panel has been elected or voting begins.

Good luck to everyone looking to get involved, you'll have my full support.

 

[Carpy]

And more than a few No 2s.

And we all know you’re No 69

 

[carefreeoufc]

As @WuTang mentioned in his post previously OxVox did/do a lot in terms of fan engagement and operational elements to improve the fan experience. I remember us meeting Mark Sennett at the time that hooks were bought and installed (by OxVox) for banners on the back of the East Stand.

I’ve read all of the stuff on here that’s been shared and I’m still unsure what the point of this group is. I don’t have any doubt that those involved genuinely care and I admire them for taking the time to do these (relatively) unenviable jobs.

That said, I do feel that this dilutes the reach of OxVox and muddies the water between the two. I also think it will impact OxVox in its ability to grow. It’s done now and we’ll have to see what happens but a working group within OxVox (with these new things individuals) focused solely on the supporter experience etc. would have been better than this.

 

[Essexyellows]

Which doesn`t have to be swallowed whole and should be open to question, the first being "Do the supporters want it?"

As it stands it appears to be "This is good for you - take the medicine".

I wonder why the founding question was never asked?

"Do we, the supporters, want or need it? "

We say "Yes" it has a strong foundation and the majority wins.

It has unquestionable, democratic support.

Or has it been driven by the poor "customer satisfaction levels" in surveys, so the Club needs to be seen to be doing something so "do it we will" ?

 

[Sheik djibouti]

I wonder why the founding question was never asked?

"Do we, the supporters, want or need it? "

We say "Yes" it has a strong foundation and the majority wins.

It has unquestionable, democratic support.

Or has it been driven by the poor "customer satisfaction levels" in surveys, so the Club needs to be seen to be doing something so "do it we will" ?

Why don't you conduct a survey by contacting all the fans you know

 

[Essexyellows]

Why don't you conduct a survey by contacting all the fans you know

Your wish is my command.

You can message me your Fan number, as can anyone else.