[timshorts]

The non league football scene is full of small clubs battling against under funding, clubs with committee members spending hours of their own time trying to keep clubs afloat.
The football on offer might be rubbish, but they are clubs worthy of support.
This latest turn of events is the end of the road for me. This coq must know how much running one of those freedom of information searches can cost small companies. It smacks of bullying, conceit, self-importance and selfish arrogance of a kind regularly displayed in public only by some of those erg-types in the present tory ranks and their baying cohorts that appear on question time sporting their intolerant bile.
If this is the way Mr bean and his buddies want to behave then please f off back to the 1940's where your attitudes belong.

[Wooden Spoon]

[quote name='Westbars Spireite' timestamp='1570552030' post='1490036']<br />Does he still think he's a copper? Maybe he's struggling to adjust and needs to talk to someone.<br /
He’s been brought in for exactly this reason.







Stop leaks. stop embarrassing scandals being leaked to fans.





He’s doing exactly what he was brought in to do.




What reason would you employ an ex copper? Hut down moles? Build bridges? What sort of mentality and methodology suits which idea?

[DIFH]

Benno Spire, on 07 October 2019 - 09:38 PM, said:

<br /><br /><br />
I am more than happy to tell him its bang out of order but he will probably take no notice of what I say and carry on doing whatever he does.

Obviously second helpings on the pudding front

[Wooden Spoon]

[quote name='Westbars Spireite' timestamp='1570552030' post='1490036']<br />Does he still think he's a copper? Maybe he's struggling to adjust and needs to talk to someone.<br /
He’s been brought in for exactly this reason.







Stop leaks. stop embarrassing scandals being leaked to fans.





He’s doing exactly what he was brought in to do.




What reason would you employ an ex copper? Hut down moles? Build bridges? What sort of mentality and methodology suits which idea?






Surely no one still doubts the motives and dishonesty of this regime? Everything is against openness, against honesty and everything against the truth






Well maybe one disgraced poster who’s prominent by his absence

[stokey]

timshorts, on 08 October 2019 - 07:23 PM, said:

The non league football scene is full of small clubs battling against under funding, clubs with committee members spending hours of their own time trying to keep clubs afloat.
The football on offer might be rubbish, but they are clubs worthy of support.
This latest turn of events is the end of the road for me. This coq must know how much running one of those freedom of information searches can cost small companies. It smacks of bullying, conceit, self-importance and selfish arrogance of a kind regularly displayed in public only by some of those erg-types in the present tory ranks and their baying cohorts that appear on question time sporting their intolerant bile.
If this is the way Mr bean and his buddies want to behave then please f off back to the 1940's where your attitudes belong.

Couldn’t agree more

[calvin plummers socks]

Of all the crooked and low down things in club in past years, of all the lies and vileness I think this has one of the worst aftertastes about it.

Why would someone so spineless and weasel like do such a malicious and petty thing?

Unbelievable

[Sammy Spireite]

I dont think anyone would think any less of Oldgoat if he released details of the email exchange on here, it would certainly give people a better understanding of what caused Bean to jump like he did.

[Westbars Spireite]

He should.

[oldgoat]

Sammy Spireite, on 09 October 2019 - 07:28 AM, said:

I dont think anyone would think any less of Oldgoat if he released details of the email exchange on here, it would certainly give people a better understanding of what caused Bean to jump like he did.

His replies to my query re tickets were headed by - STRICTLY PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL – NOT FOR CIRCULATION OR PUBLICATION

So I cannot publish or share them however the final one wasn't - It had no header - personal identifying stuff removed -


Dear *******



I have made it clear that I will happily engage with any supporter on any issue.



I am sorry if you do not agree with the content or construction of any response I may make. I try to be as open as possible (without breaching any confidentiality) with supporters but what I will not do is enter into dialogue on issues which is simply used by an individual to fuel further discussion in an effort to undermine the club.



I am saddened that you have taken such a response especially when using a public service *** email address to do so.



I do not intent getting into a lengthy exchange with you on this issue. I have answered you in a honest and courteous manner and would expect the same level of respect back irrespective of any difference that we may have on the issue.



Kind Regards

[Oldtimer]

My guess that when the OP talks of not being allowed to share the email from Mr Bean he is simply looking at the disclaimer that is printed as a footer. Something that is on all business emails. It's something that is basically meaningless and ignored by millions on a hourly basis.

While I don't condone Mr Bean's FOI request, he was within his rights to do so. What is in question is his intent, was it malicious or did he have a genuine need to know something ??

I can only speak for my company in that we all know to use company emails for private business is not permitted. although to differing levels it's something we all do. I don't profess to know rules in the public sector but imagine something similar.

As I said earlier I'm not trying to fight Bean's corner but once again I think many of you guys are being a little premature in your eagerness to push someone under the bus.

[Westbars Spireite]

If someone types 'not for circulation or publication' on an email does it have any legal implication? Happy to see evidence to the contrary but suspect not.

His reference to confidentiality is laughable given I know for certain he has openly spread information about matters that genuinely do require discretion.

[Goku]

Oldtimer, on 09 October 2019 - 09:32 AM, said:

My guess that when the OP talks of not being allowed to share the email from Mr Bean he is simply looking at the disclaimer that is printed as a footer. Something that is on all business emails. It's something that is basically meaningless and ignored by millions on a hourly basis.

While I don't condone Mr Bean's FOI request, he was within his rights to do so. What is in question is his intent, was it malicious or did he have a genuine need to know something ??

I can only speak for my company in that we all know to use company emails for private business is not permitted. although to differing levels it's something we all do. I don't profess to know rules in the public sector but imagine something similar.

As I said earlier I'm not trying to fight Bean's corner but once again I think many of you guys are being a little premature in your eagerness to push someone under the bus.

Oldtimer in defending member of our farcical hierarchy shocker

[Sammy Spireite]

I hope Bean hasn't been exhcanging emails with Rebekah Vardy, he might be in for shock!

ha ha

[Oldtimer]

Goku, on 09 October 2019 - 10:15 AM, said:

Oldtimer in defending member of our farcical hierarchy shocker

Nope. Certainly not defending him but neither am I willing to push someone under the bus on what amounts to little more than hearsay and innuendo. However if you prove his FOI request was intended to be malicious rather than a genuine need to an answer to a question, now that would be different. Until then I'll abstain from hanging the guy at the present time thanks.

[Middle East]

Oldtimer, on 09 October 2019 - 11:05 AM, said:

Nope. Certainly not defending him but neither am I willing to push someone under the bus on what amounts to little more than hearsay and innuendo. However if you prove his FOI request was intended to be malicious rather than a genuine need to an answer to a question, now that would be different. Until then I'll abstain from hanging the guy at the present time thanks.

My interpretation is that there can have only been two purposes:

a) To deliberately cause the OP grief at work
b) To identify if the OP had been in communications with anyone regarding his thoughts on bean/cfc. Presumably with the purposes of identifying them, which appears to be his M.O.

Neither sit well with me as neither are necessary considering all the OP had done was to raise legitimate concerns in a reasonable manner.

Ask yourself this. Are these the actions of man trying to build bridges with disenfranchised supporters? Not for me...as another poster mentions roll on the AGM when it will be us making the enquiries!

[Oldtimer]

Middle East, on 09 October 2019 - 11:37 AM, said:

My interpretation is that there can have only been two purposes:

a) To deliberately cause the OP grief at work
b) To identify if the OP had been in communications with anyone regarding his thoughts on bean/cfc. Presumably with the purposes of identifying them, which appears to be his M.O.

Neither sit well with me as neither are necessary considering all the OP had done was to raise legitimate concerns in a reasonable manner.
on
Ask yourself this. Are these the actions of man trying to build bridges with disenfranchised supporters? Not for me...as another poster mentions roll on the AGM when it will be us making the enquiries!

No one can deny this regime has done some dastardly deeds over the years. However I do think you sometimes read far too much into the most innocuous actions.

I have no idea what Mr Bean's intentions were as I suspect neither do you. However if someone feels entitled to use a public sector email address to communicate surely the recipient is entitled to query the reason for its use.

[Westbars Spireite]

There is no possible honourable intention here Oldtimer. What possible reasonable could there be?

[calvin plummers socks]

Who would he do an FOI if not to get him in the sh17e with his employer?
The rancid stench of a club gets worse.
Community Club my arris

[hilly81]

Oldtimer is surely a parody account?

[Westbars Spireite]

The OP was naive to assume that innocent correspondence from his work email account wouldn't trigger malicious scrutiny given who we are dealing with. That was his only mistake.

To suggest GB may in some way be acting honourably is farcical.