Rousing defence of Kenwrong

[chicoazul]

I didn't get a ballot paper - is that what it said : DK or GP?

You could twist it the way you suggest, but would that not be claiming that not voting equates to a vote in favour?

I'm not making any false assertions. The vote was to decide whether the Evertonians asked were in favour of proceeding with DK - less than half of those asked voted in favour - some people subsequently claim that this means the majority of Evertonians are in favour. Please explain how that is an accurate assertion on the part of those who are pro-DK.

Please, read it back mate. And note the responses I've gave.

You're grasping at straws here.

 

[SuitsBlueX2]

Cannot + rep you Chico, but wanted to stick "Nolite te bastardes carborundorum" in there. A few others can be led to water but cannot be made to drink. The saying talks of horses, but I am nore inclinded to think mules.

 

[DENNIS STEVENS]

What were they to do though? The overall biggest majority was the 'yes' group. Granted the No + the dont Know were larger, but that can be flipped to say the yes + the dont know were massive compared to the No's.
Your point looked disingenuous and that is why I had to post what I did. It appears to me that you (amongst others) are not playing fair. It is very difficult to listen to and get onside with speeches about fairness, equality and honour from a bunch that do not practice what they preach. Please pardon any edge you perceive from this or any post, I am simply pointing out the interpretation. (PS you are one of them that is not an uber belter.)

Indeed - I'm just a belter, but I'm striving for promotion. Don't get me wrong - I'm not rying to declaim the result as invalid or that it was fixed or suchlike, merely that it shouldn't be portrayed as more than it was. The club clearly stated a majority of votes would decide, they got their majority & if I'd had a vote it may well have been one vote larger.

 

[chicoazul]

Cannot + rep you Chico, but wanted to stick "Nolite te bastardes carborundorum" in there. A few others can be led to water but cannot be made to drink. The saying talks of horses, but I am nore inclinded to think mules.

It's getting harder and harder on here. But it's easy when you take away the rhetoric they don't have much left.

Davek is inconspicuous by his absence for most of this thread but will contribute a little bit here and there on the Kirkby thread to keep the waters of outrage simmering.

Still, people fall for it so I applaud his efforts.

 

[DENNIS STEVENS]

I'm not making any false assertions. The vote was to decide whether the Evertonians asked were in favour of proceeding with DK - less than half of those asked voted in favour - some people subsequently claim that this means the majority of Evertonians are in favour. Please explain how that is an accurate assertion on the part of those who are pro-DK.

You live in Britain with the 'first past the post' system for voting in Government? Have you just turned 18?

I bloody well wish!
Comparisons with our political elections don't stand up too well, seeing as you normally have a range of options - it's not normally : Candidate A ; or Not Candidate A. Of course a vote with a genuine range of options really would have been interesting, but I can understand the Board not wanting to take that route for a number of reasons - let's just say the liklihood of the lack of a clear outcome is as good a reson as any.

 

[chicoazul]

I bloody well wish!
Comparisons with our political elections don't stand up too well, seeing as you normally have a range of options - it's not normally : Candidate A ; or Not Candidate A. Of course a vote with a genuine range of options really would have been interesting, but I can understand the Board not wanting to take that route for a number of reasons - let's just say the liklihood of the lack of a clear outcome is as good a reson as any.

What, like Labour or Conservatives?

The only options at that time, and still to this point rather tellingly, were Kirkby or Goodison so again I fail to see the flaw in that.

 

[SuitsBlueX2]

Indeed - I'm just a belter, but I'm striving for promotion. Don't get me wrong - I'm not rying to declaim the result as invalid or that it was fixed or suchlike, merely that it shouldn't be portrayed as more than it was. The club clearly stated a majority of votes would decide, they got their majority & if I'd had a vote it may well have been one vote larger.

That is the thing, it was a majority. It was the single largest vote option. I would not dare ask all to like it, but then I did not like the propaganda at the time prompting voters who were unsure to not vote on either option and to send the paper in with an amendment (that went along the lines of neither option is acceptable). The entire idea of the issue was always painful, history, tradition and honour versus money, advertising and sky fu**ing tv. On that basis it is not a difficult choice, but then the loudest 'traditionalists' have often been the first to condemn the lack of spending, the lack of capitalising on behalf of the club.
Simply put, too many people want their cake and to eat it. The loudest want to make the decisions and have none of the repercussions. Life and especially business do not work like that. Everton football club by not moving with the times 50 years ago and more recently dug itself into a hole it is now strangled by. No one likes the Fact, but hindsight is a bitch. What is the realistic option? Any move anywhere will receive opposition, is the fight really down to how much is acceptable? Some supporters are tired, they want this nightmare put to bed, the civil war between once good friends has cost enough. The longer it continues, the deeper the scar tissue.
Can there ever be a solution that suits 100% of those affected?

 

[DENNIS STEVENS]

Neither did those people vote against the proposal. Most big scale votes don't suffer high participation. But the ones that did vote, they voted for the move. Which, incidentally, made us the first club to ballot its fans (twice now) on a ground move. Pretty nice of Uncle Bill wouldn't you say.

Which goes back to your earlier point where I pointed out that your assertion that it was because DK was so bad that they didnt vote was flawed.

Chico, I'm not claiming that the abstentions equate to "no" votes, that would be as inaccurate as those that claim that the largest minority of one group of Evertonians indicates a majority of all Evertonians. Either might be true for all we know, but there's no basis for making either assumption.
I think my assertion about DK being so bad is fairly reasonable, if it was "even" more attractive a proposal I believe it would have generated greater support, as happened with KD where Evertonians clearly indicated their willingness to consider moving from GP if the right proposal was presented to them.

Also, Re Uncle Bill's generosity in offering the vote, I've already stated I believe the decision has to sit with the Board, rather than the supporters, as the Board will always have more information than the rest of us & it is their responsibility. As a test of opinion, it's fine but it shouldn't be the decision point, imo.

 

[DENNIS STEVENS]

Please, read it back mate. And note the responses I've gave.

You're grasping at straws here.

No - if you read back this whole issue was raised in this thread because somebody, not yourself, presented the result of the vote as an expression of the will of the majority of Evertonians - that simply isn't accurate.

 

[SuitsBlueX2]

Also, Re Uncle Bill's generosity in offering the vote, I've already stated I believe the decision has to sit with the Board, rather than the supporters, as the Board will always have more information than the rest of us & it is their responsibility. As a test of opinion, it's fine but it shouldn't be the decision point, imo.

Churlish, had 'the vote' not happened then it would have been another pram to launch at the current board. Damned if they do, damned if they dont.
This chasing the tail scenario gets awful tiresome awful fast.

 

[SuitsBlueX2]

No - if you read back this whole issue was raised in this thread because somebody, not yourself, presented the result of the vote as an expression of the will of the majority of Evertonians - that simply isn't accurate.

Out of those that voted, the yes crew were the majority were they not?

 

[DENNIS STEVENS]

What, like Labour or Conservatives?

The only options at that time, and still to this point rather tellingly, were Kirkby or Goodison so again I fail to see the flaw in that.

Of course no other parties stand in the elections.

As I said, I didn't get a ballot paper so can not argue about it - is that what it said - DK or GP?

 

[chicoazul]

That is the thing, it was a majority. It was the single largest vote option. I would not dare ask all to like it, but then I did not like the propaganda at the time prompting voters who were unsure to not vote on either option and to send the paper in with an amendment (that went along the lines of neither option is acceptable). The entire idea of the issue was always painful, history, tradition and honour versus money, advertising and sky fu**ing tv. On that basis it is not a difficult choice, but then the loudest 'traditionalists' have often been the first to condemn the lack of spending, the lack of capitalising on behalf of the club.
Simply put, too many people want their cake and to eat it. The loudest want to make the decisions and have none of the repercussions. Life and especially business do not work like that. Everton football club by not moving with the times 50 years ago and more recently dug itself into a hole it is now strangled by. No one likes the Fact, but hindsight is a bitch. What is the realistic option? Any move anywhere will receive opposition, is the fight really down to how much is acceptable? Some supporters are tired, they want this nightmare put to bed, the civil war between once good friends has cost enough. The longer it continues, the deeper the scar tissue.
Can there ever be a solution that suits 100% of those affected?

I think we can close on that. Marvellous stuff (clearly as it matches my viewpoint). When you beat back all the hyperbole wrote by so many it comes down to this.

Chico, I'm not claiming that the abstentions equate to "no" votes, that would be as inaccurate as those that claim that the largest minority of one group of Evertonians indicates a majority of all Evertonians. Either might be true for all we know, but there's no basis for making either assumption.
I think my assertion about DK being so bad is fairly reasonable, if it was "even" more attractive a proposal I believe it would have generated greater support, as happened with KD where Evertonians clearly indicated their willingness to consider moving from GP if the right proposal was presented to them.

Also, Re Uncle Bill's generosity in offering the vote, I've already stated I believe the decision has to sit with the Board, rather than the supporters, as the Board will always have more information than the rest of us & it is their responsibility. As a test of opinion, it's fine but it shouldn't be the decision point, imo.

Fair enough mate.


Some to the point comments here:

Liverpool Daily Post.co.uk - Everton FC - Everton FC News - Everton for sale to the right bidder

Including:

“Logic therefore dictates that if we do find a new home EFC would, as a club which has finished inside the top six on three occasions in recent years, be a more attractive proposition to investors.

Which I was trying to make before but probably not very clearly.

 

[DENNIS STEVENS]

Churlish, had 'the vote' not happened then it would have been another pram to launch at the current board. Damned if they do, damned if they dont.
This chasing the tail scenario gets awful tiresome awful fast.

I don't see how that's churlish, it's just my opinion, it's how I felt at the time when I was in favour as I felt it was Hobson's choice, & it's how I've felt since as I've changed my mind.

 

[DENNIS STEVENS]

Out of those that voted, the yes crew were the majority were they not?

They were - how does that equate to claiming that the majority of Evertonians are in favour? It's no more accurate than to say the majority of those asked didn't vote for DK, therefore the majority of Evertonians are not in favour. There's no basis for drawing either conclusion, I'm surprised guys like you & Chico would try to claim otherwise.