Perhaps I'm being cynical, but I'm edging towards working 'for' the club, yet without knowing so or having the intention to do so.
The idea of a fan board is great, however if they're curtailed by what they can ask and publish, and come out to defend the board like previously*, it's pointless.
*defending the board for the sake of doing so as per the chair's interview a few months back, rather than when justified.
It just lacks any teeth mate, compared to what used to happen at the AGM.
The objective was this was supposed to be a better alternative, we've learned nothing from that feedback on the meaty issues at the club and about its welfare - maybe it will come, but if it does why the delay, why a memorandum of understanding on what can be shared.
It all seems a bit cozy to me, the junket in the states - you have to turn that down, for the sake of objectivity and independence. How can you be objective and independent if the club are giving you a holiday for a month around the world. Are you more or less likely to ask the hard questions. Are you more or less likely to defend the club in the media.
Seems like another barrier and filer for the club, to look like they are engaging with fans but just filling us with fluff and the board cultivating a cosy relationship to control the flow of information. Lets see, but thats my initial analysis.