John Petrie wrote: I think that it would be far easier for a member of pasoti to be accountable and legitimate than a one off vote amongst season ticket holders or attendees at a game. Unless there would be a chance for candidate statements to be released in advance and some way of then questioning the candidates and getting there answers How do we know that isn't the plan? Thats why its best to wait until the meeting. know it would be very hard to get anyone elected at a match to have any sort of accountability whatsoever, at least those on pasoti would easily be able to question and hold to account anyone who put themselves forward. It would be the same for me with supporters groups, they are constituted and democratic as it is so it would be easy for members to question and hold to account their representative/s.
Although, on second thoughts, it would probably be easier to just let the existing supporters groups get on with representing us. They are already organised to represent fans, albeit in different ways; they are open to members, which means that anyone interested in having a say can join whichever group they feel is relevant; they are already democratic and accountable; and it would just be easier. With democratic mandate sorted we could also then let these representatives appoint someone with a bit of knowledge in certain areas, Graham would be a great example here, to be able to properly scrutinise, and it should have course be chaired by our great leader Sir Chris Webb!
Also, Andy I presume you'd like to stop holding democratic elections in Plymouth because Janners are just too fick to get it init? Do you have such a low opinion of the people in Plymouth and on this site that they would not be able to elect someone capable to any sort of role that may be offered?