"Preferred" may be going to far, perhaps "formal" in the sense of organised two-way communication. I did make the effort to read the club's own leaflet:




As hairy j has rightly pointed out, there is a vote and so it is a popularity contest but you are right, a successful PASB will require the right MIX of skill-sets to be truly successful.

After what we have been through, people with an understanding of business/finance would be an asset, but you don't want 12 accountants. Nothing vexes the fanbase more than a good (or usually, otherwise) pasty but you don't just want 12 fat people. Maybe 12 fat accountants is the answer!?

Seriously though, ideally you want people who can both represent the breadth of the fanbase and provide the mix of skills to "hold the legal board accountable for its decisions". You almost want a sort of shadow cabinet with management, legal, finance, marketing, communications, operating skills.

It's all very well moaning about something but far better to have someone on board who can make constructive suggestions to make things better.

For want of a better phrase, some straight "consumers" are also invaluable and controversially, it might even benefit from having a non-Argyle fan on board to try and ensure that the head has some influence over the heart but that is another matter altogether.

_________________
Plymouth Argyle Supporters Trapped in Avon

Keeping the Green Army in the vague vicinity of Brizzle in touch by email and through Facebook

I dont think I am alone in thinking that this whole thing is a complete waste of time.

Badly organised, hardly publicised (certainly very little non-interweb publication), forms and info not being given out when they should, utterly utterly shambolic at every single stage. By the time the process becomes widely known the election will be over.

In my opinion if less than 1,000 votes are cast the idea should be scrapped.

I cant wait for the mods to ditch the PASB message board, al-la the trust, so I dont have to read about some attention seeking electioneering nonsense. When did this cease to be a football forum?

_________________
Unless stated otherwise all my posts reflect not just my own opinions but also those of the “silent majority”.

Morning Jon

I normally read your posts with interest but was rather taken aback when I read:

"Further, I think that the popularity-contest approach that we seem to be entering is distasteful & ill-fits with what I think the aim & objectives of the PASB should be. Surely we want the right skill-set above all else?

I am of course, hopeful that I will attain a position on the PASB. Indeed, as I've said before I'd be happy to chair it. I appreciate that this will necessitate some publicity, but I won't however, be participating in an X-Factor stylee election campaign."

If I may say, I think you are missing the point. You appear to be decrying the idea of an election, but have entered it anyway and now in will not be taking a full part as it appears to be beneath you? If this is a mistaken impression I hope you will correct me. Although unless you are hoping for divine intervention Im not sure how any one hopes to be elected if you are not widely known. Or what your skill set is and if it is as good or better than the other 9 candidates when you appear confused what the mandate of the PASB will be.Odd.

Having decried the process I find it rather arrogant that you then are quite happy to chair it! Again, I am sure this is not how you meant it to come across.

I look forward to all these points being clarified at the Hustings.

I think the original idea is a good one but the election process has become far too drawn out and complicated.

I'll be surprised if as many as 1,000 people bother to vote.

Hi TC,

You're mixing up 'the process' with the actual work of the PASB. One I like, the other I dislike.

My very real concerns are that the electioneering route of selection, by default requires candidates to try & appeal to as many people as possible, thereby seemingly (to me) to blur the edges between the PASB & the Trust ever further.

It's not that elections are beneath me, it's that I think it's not the most appropriate approach ( as I've said from day one in most (mostly dull) postings).

As for stating that I'd be happy to chair the PASB, this has rankled you before. I suppose one person's transparency & honesty is another's arrogance.

For complete transparency to the few of us that are expressing an interest in voting in these elections, I'd like to be part of the PASB & I'd be happy to chair it in a fair but robust manner if the opportunity arose.

Further, I won't be drawn into making public comment about the opinions of others. This I find distasteful & unnecessary, but as ever, that's just my opinion.

I thinks think that the PASB is a good, relatively unique opportunity & I'd like to encourage everyone to give it a go. There really isn't anything to lose, but potentially, there's an awful lot for us fans to gain.

_________________
Jon

Twitter : @JonBack1
PASB email : JonB.PASB@gmail.com
www.pasb.org.uk

Womble

Firstly I have to say that the process has been far from flawed and has indeed been untimely. Mistakes have been made and to be fair for a number of months everyones concentration (rightly) was on avoiding relegation.

We have no moved on and there should be a PASB update out later.

You are incorrect on the publication. PACB nomination process has been promoted at the ground, in the herald (several times) on BBC radio Devon (several times), on the BBC sport website and on spotlight. For an organisation in its infancy that is a lot of coverage. The Herald and Radio Devon will also cover the election.

Your 'scrap it if we get less than 1,000 votes' comment is madness. in % terms this would be around 30% of the current Club membership. In direct comparison the Trust elections saw people elected with 400ish votes and that was after a year when the profile of the organisation could not have been much higher. Does this mean we should scrap the Trust? Of course not!

The PASB will have to find its feet post election and the responsibilities for the 12 representatives will be significant. Good luck to all those that have thrown their hats into the ring!

And how many people were eligible to vote on the Trust elections? If you're going to play the percentages game, give us all the figures.

30% of 5,000 (that's what I am assuming the membership will be - including under 16s) isn't 1,000. What would happen if that 1,000 was less than 500? If that was the case, it'd be less than 10%. 30% turnout isn't very good really is it - even if this is in its infancy.

_________________
Bottoms not flags

From memory it was around 40% of the vote. In general terms (based against other postal elections) this isn't too bad but considering the news coverage the Trust enjoyed at the time it isn't great either.

1,000 in the PASB would be currently about 25% of the electorate. Again not terrible based against other postal ballots (unions, elections etc) but not great either. This though will be based on about 1% of the coverage the Trust had at the same period in its existance.

All I am saying (because this debate is in reality irrelevant because this mythical 1,000 figure has been plucked out of the air) is that a bad election turnout doesn't mean the PASB should be scrapped just the same as a big turnout (which may well happen) doesn't make it the best thing since sliced bread.

The key will be the work that the newly elected PASB do to represent the Argyle supporters.

We'll never agree Mr President so we'll agree to disagree.

Where are the other candidate threads?

_________________
Bottoms not flags

When the Trust held their election we created a thread on Pasoti for each candidate to answers some questions and state their reason for standing etc, some threads were used more than others and one thread not at all.

If there's a need we'll do the same for the PASB election, although it may be a case that not all candidates are Pasoti members.

If anyone is a PASB nominee let us know if you want a thread started and "stickied" on your behalf.

_________________
Deliverable ambition

Two things:-

i) Speculating about the size of the voting constituency and the percentage that turn out to vote is pointless.

National and local elections are routinely decided with turnouts below 50%, with the winners generally getting no more than 40-45% of that subset of the electorate. Why should the PASB be any different?

ii) Any candidate that engages in negative campaigning, or seeks to criticise another candidate on a personal basis, will not see my X in their box.

I've long since warned about the retrograde effects of the personalisation of debate on here - the PASB process deserves better, and so does the club, the fans and the community it seeks to represent.

I'd hope that others would agree with me and also adhere to that principle.

Campaign on issues, not personalities.

End.

_________________
This Land Is Your Land

Tony's better looking than JohnB but JohnB does kiss babies. John, I've always respected your views and I agree - most elections have poor turnouts but this whole thing, six months ago (or whenever it was) was heralded as a new dawn etc. and people just don't seem at all interested.

_________________
Bottoms not flags

Hi Postey,

Thanks for the offer.

If anyone has a desire to ask any questions of me, I'd be more than happy to answer them in any form that best suits...

Cheers,

Jon

Ps - counsel noted & taken, JL.

_________________
Jon

Twitter : @JonBack1
PASB email : JonB.PASB@gmail.com
www.pasb.org.uk

Ps I take umbrage to this. Can't stand kids or pets. Particularly my own.

_________________
Jon

Twitter : @JonBack1
PASB email : JonB.PASB@gmail.com
www.pasb.org.uk

To be fair John, we can't get a word out of the other 8 candidates and I have checked:)

JonB has at least popped his head above the parapet and declared he doesnt wish to be involved in campaigning:) I wish people would engage in issues or anything really, just as long as the greatest opportunity offered to Argyle fans ever wasnt wated by inertia. At least you have made a decision to vote against me it seems, which is much better than indifference.

If I wasnt so committed to the idea of the PASB I would be liable to join hairy and say scrap the lot as its been farcical to date in the main and the lack of committment to any sort of campaign worrying for a democratic process. We are going the same way as the Trust election................nowhere.

Still, I shall be at Weston on Friday with Campaign News 2 and look forward to meeting as many fans as can tear themselves away from the Olympic thing:)