New announcer dude on the park

[Oddquine]

Membership of this forum is very much public due to the fact that any member of the public is welcome to join all you need is an email address, no checks are required as to identity of prospective members and membership is not restricted. Even CaleyD has proclaimed his acceptance of the rights of his former employers to take the action which they did. So by your logic and by your statement that if he had done something to offend the board in public he should suffer the consequences you are also in agreement with the board.

Nope...a public forum is one on which anybody and their dog can read all threads and posts without joining...and may join if they are interested in the type of stuff discussed.

The requirement to join in order to read posts makes it a specific interest forum open to any interested member of the public....but that does not make it a forum available to the public.

I repeat, he did not say anything in public.......he said whatever it was that offended within the confines of this specific interest forum to the 2,111 members of it...and somebody within this specific interest forum took offence.

Beats me why that somebody could not just have given the ICT side of the story within the confines of this forum.

[StockholmSyndrome]

Beats me why that somebody could not just have given the ICT side of the story within the confines of this forum.

You would wonder, wouldn't you?

Also, the manner of the sacking was cowardly, in my opinion. If they had concerns would it have been that difficult for them to sit and have a proper meeting with Don? If they had actually been willing to talk about their concerns directly wit him then both sides may have been able to reach a compromise that didn't involve sacking anyone.

But as we know, trying to engage in any sort of dialogue with the people who run the club is like trying to get blood from a turnip.

[Alex MacLeod]

I dont believe CD was sacked for any remarks made against the 'board'. I believe it may have been more to do with his knowledge and investigation into the stadium ownership business. I also believe its time that some investigative journo got his head into the whole story and made things public. From my point of view it seems that the stadium has somehow been stolen from the club.

[DALNEIGHCALEY]

Is it a coincidence that Don got sacked in the same week that Mr. Bannerman suggested he should go to the press with his findings ?

[Heilandee]

I dont believe CD was sacked for any remarks made against the 'board'. I believe it may have been more to do with his knowledge and investigation into the stadium ownership business. I also believe its time that some investigative journo got his head into the whole story and made things public. From my point of view it seems that the stadium has somehow been stolen from the club.

Where's Cyril when you need him

[Kirishima]

Probably a mixture of DS V DJS, Marius, and the stadium...the club don't like it if you give the manager stick, but whatever you do, don't go any higher than that with your criticism, else you are likely to be punted out. What a joke. It really is.

Thing is, they can do it, can't they? No one does anything about it. We are all too heilan' and would rather talk it to death, rather than do anything about it. No jibes there, I'm in the same boat. I'm just getting sick of them to be honest. Love the club, love the team, love the manager, but i'm just so disillusioned by those above that.

It's not just this episode, it's been a multitude of things, for a long time, and the realisation the club isn't a fans club as we thought, it is David Sutherland and co. They aren't scared of the supporters opinions because they know we are all too spread out, divided, apathetic to do anything.We don't have a voice, whichever way you look at it. We have a soft supporters voice and a club with a hard perimeter, thus giving the club carte blanche to do what they like, like firing volunteers on hearsay.

Edited February 1, 2010 by Kirishima

[Yngwie]

Is it a coincidence that Don got sacked in the same week that Mr. Bannerman suggested he should go to the press with his findings ?

I think so, if you look through the thread back you'll see that D was given an ultimatum 3 weeks ago.

[Croylo]

"To toe a company line". Some of the ideas here are a little bit archaic, most of all that an employee must agree with everything his employer does. Do all Tesco employees have to be happy that the company is driving down the price of produce to such a degree that farmers are unable to make a living. Or all Primark employees have to be happy that their product is flouting child labour laws.

All employees whether paid or not have to constantly assess the facts and decide whether or not they want to work in this environment. Employers cannot decide that they dont wont someone to work with them because of their beliefs and or complaints. If Caley D was let go because he wasn't very good or because he was causing trouble at his work then fair enough. But as far as I gathered he wasn't abusing his position, and regardless of his personal opinion was putting his all in making sure that people enjoyed the footballing experience, Also he was going to enhance that with footage of the games which we have all missed. If his employers had judged him to have crossed a line then they should have told him what they expect and Caley D could have decided if he could live with this.

To let him go in such a manner shows a lack of respect and a lack of professionalism, it has also made Darren look like a puppet with no real power. It would have been far better to sit him down after a game and have a quiet word.

[Guest]

Nope...a public forum is one on which anybody and their dog can read all threads and posts without joining...and may join if they are interested in the type of stuff discussed.

The requirement to join in order to read posts makes it a specific interest forum open to any interested member of the public....but that does not make it a forum available to the public.

I repeat, he did not say anything in public.......he said whatever it was that offended within the confines of this specific interest forum to the 2,111 members of it...and somebody within this specific interest forum took offence.

Beats me why that somebody could not just have given the ICT side of the story within the confines of this forum.

Wrong this forum is open to any member of the public who wishes to join and abide by the rules making anything written here in the public domain and therefore "public".

I do not for one second believe that you think there are no reporters, local or national, who use this forum. It is in fact well documented that The Highland News and Inverness Courier have in the past quoted directly from threads posted here. Scotty and CaleyD have also stated that they are well aware of employees of ICT at all levels who use this site, going as far as to say threads are even printed off and handed around at TCS so your point of view is either sadly deluded or extremely naive, sorry.

[Kirishima]

Thing is Croylo, no contract and voluntary work don't seem to garner any respect more than a phone call, despite Don having put more effort into the club than any other fan.

Are the club trying to drive down attendances so they can justify administration, winding up order, and the final stage of the great stadium swindle? Sounds ridiculously far fetched, but when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth? There's no money to be had at ICT anymore, but there's money to be had without it.

[Georgeios]

I'm not judging Darren for doing his bosses bidding to be fair to him, He was only the messanger.

[Guest]

Are the club trying to drive down attendances so they can justify administration, winding up order, and the final stage of the great stadium swindle? Sounds ridiculously far fetched, but when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth? There's no money to be had at ICT anymore, but there's money to be had without it.

That does seem to be the idea being pushed by a few on this forum but is it the truth or is there someone waiting in the wings to come in and take control when the shareholders find the price of their stake in the club plummet after a fan revolt? Sometimes you have to wonder who the puppets really are and who is pulling their strings, maybe it's not as clear cut as we might be led to believe.

[DAM]

Probably a mixture of DS V DJS, Marius, and the stadium...the club don't like it if you give the manager stick, but whatever you do, don't go any higher than that with your criticism, else you are likely to be punted out. What a joke. It really is.

Thing is, they can do it, can't they? No one does anything about it. We are all too heilan' and would rather talk it to death, rather than do anything about it. No jibes there, I'm in the same boat. I'm just getting sick of them to be honest. Love the club, love the team, love the manager, but i'm just so disillusioned by those above that.

It's not just this episode, it's been a multitude of things, for a long time, and the realisation the club isn't a fans club as we thought, it is David Sutherland and co. They aren't scared of the supporters opinions because they know we are all too spread out, divided, apathetic to do anything.We don't have a voice, whichever way you look at it. We have a soft supporters voice and a club with a hard perimeter, thus giving the club carte blanche to do what they like, like firing volunteers on hearsay.

Well, I have "done something about it". I have supported Caley and ICT (home games mainly because of my circumstances) for more years than I care to remember. I stopped going to games two months after Brewster returned for the second time because of the lack of respect from the Board towards the fans and the dealings in transfers. I could see where the club was going. The CaleyD carry on does not surprise me and he has my sympathy. Who's next - IHE? People can slag me off for not going to games anymore but I really couldn't care less.

If ever there is a change for the better I will return or is it just a matter of time before the bulldozers arrive on site?

[Yngwie]

or is it just a matter of time before the bulldozers arrive on site?

The bulldozer drivers will have to have their opinions vetted before they can move in.

[Oddquine]

Wrong this forum is open to any member of the public who wishes to join and abide by the rules making anything written here in the public domain and therefore "public".

I do not for one second believe that you think there are no reporters, local or national, who use this forum. It is in fact well documented that The Highland News and Inverness Courier have in the past quoted directly from threads posted here. Scotty and CaleyD have also stated that they are well aware of employees of ICT at all levels who use this site, going as far as to say threads are even printed off and handed around at TCS so your point of view is either sadly deluded or extremely naive, sorry.

I assume that all those entities who quote directly from threads here and print off posts for passing around have received permission from either the individual/s making the post/s, or the administrators of the forum, depending who holds the copyright?

[Scotty]

I agree it was a poor manner in which this sacking was carried out but some of the responsibility for the ripple effects must lie with Don himself, surely? Don has been outspoken in his views, they may be true or otherwise I do not know. Don must have known the effect that these views would have on the club/website relationship, he would be naive to think otherwise and if the projects which you guys were working on were of a higher priority than getting the information he held out then surely he should have sat on this info until the projects were fully in place?

Yes Birdog, Don probably should (and will) take some responsibility for any projects that get cancelled due to this event and if you read back, you will see he has posted about this very dilemma. However given that all of these projects are being pretty much driven by us rather than the club, I dont think he should be villified for this.

I hesitate to post this as it may be getting a little too personal for my liking, but one thing about Don is what you see is what you get. Yes he is opinionated, yes he can rub people the wrong way with those opinions or with his blunt approach to answering a problem, but that also describes half of our membership on this site !!! As far as I am concerned, I would not have it any other way from Don or from the posters.

As many of you know, Don and I are in business together running our web design company, and I feel we work well together because Don's style actually complements mine. Where I am too soft or naive, or where I usually want to give the benefit of any doubt, he will try to cut through the bull, and deal with the actual issue. Between us (and with the help of the mods on this site) we normally try to have a happy medium. His avatar is a dog with a bone and like his avatar, when the issue is not being dealt with or avoided, then he does get his teeth into it and I think that applies equally to projects we work on together or life in general.

Going back to the issue that precipitated this action .... If there is nothing within the stadium ownership discussion that doesnt pass the sniff test then why does the mere mention of it get hackles rising? Why has there been no denunciation of his theories? Why will none of the principles sit down with him and give him an answer even if it is off the record? And why was he sacked for questioning the issue when the person who he is primarily directing these questions at is not employed by the club nor on the board in anything other than an honorary capacity?

As I mentioned above, the "why" is not that difficult to work out, its the "how" that frequently sticks in the throat and that is a trait that has been evident for quite some time. Govan Jaggie mentioned his father Dougie. Dougie - for those that may not remember - was also a stadium announcer (and a good one too) who managed to survive for years in the post until he too was unceremoniously dumped. Roger will know more details but I do remember that one week he was there and the next he wasnt.

Fast forward a little bit and I too experienced the same treatment over the website. I bent over backwards to help the club for years, never taking a penny from them (although I will admit to the odd free ticket or invitation to hospitality), but some at the club questioned my motives especially as I wasnt trying to coin it in from the site. The simple fact is that I have never been that motivated by money, its nice to have but its not my primary driver. I did it because I wanted to help and it was enjoyable, and I do it now because it keeps me in touch with Inverness and ICT.

Towards the end of our stint as the official website - and after the racism accusation directed at one of my friends in which I chose to back him trather than the club - it became apparent that three individuals in particular, all of whom were in the employ of the club and who I regarded as friends, were speaking nice to my face but stabbing me in the back at every opportunity. I could (and perhaps should) have reacted differently, but being someone who believes in "what goes around comes around", and because I was still settling into life in a new country, I elected to bide my time. We actually created a "temporary" official site including an integrated club shop for the club, hosted it for them for free, and continued to update it for them for 6 months, all the while working alongside them to ensure a smooth transition to the site they have now. During this whole process, the three were still sticking the knife in (something I have documented proof of if they want to deny it). Two of them have now had their comeuppance, there is one to go and that person will also "get theirs" and the best part is ... in all these cases, I have not had to compromise my own principles because they will have failed by their own hands and not by anything I have done. In fact, I have actually worked with all three in the 5 years since this happened and held no grudges when doing so as what we worked on was for the benefit of the fans and/or the club.

It is that same principle of working for the good and benefit of the club despite personal grievances that I would hope to see in terms of the ideas we have submitted to them in areas such as Audio, Video, Twitter and other projects that have been in discussion.

There is zero budget for those at the club to accomplish these things so we have leveraged the 2000+ members on here to help in areas where the membership may have expertise, and on top of that we have offered our own services free of charge - as is our norm when dealing with the club - to try and get a lot of these projects off the ground. We do not want "ownership" of them, nor necessarily to run them, we are just happy to do the legwork and get them running for the benefit of us all ...........

We are happy to continue and the offers we made to help with this are still on the table. Whether they proceed is not up to us, and if the projects disappear, it will not be by our hand.

[Harry Chibber]

3 things...

1.

... that is f*cking brilliant :)

2. Sorry to hear you've been ousted CD, sounds like a shoddy way of being treated, not only as an employee (paid or unpaid) but as a fan who has contributed so much throughout the years and then to be dumped aside because of a few comments is ridiculous.

3.

Where's Cyril when you need him

Cyril's a c0ck :)

[Scotty]

Nope...a public forum is one on which anybody and their dog can read all threads and posts without joining...and may join if they are interested in the type of stuff discussed.

The requirement to join in order to read posts makes it a specific interest forum open to any interested member of the public....but that does not make it a forum available to the public.

I repeat, he did not say anything in public.......he said whatever it was that offended within the confines of this specific interest forum to the 2,111 members of it...and somebody within this specific interest forum took offence.

Beats me why that somebody could not just have given the ICT side of the story within the confines of this forum.

Wrong this forum is open to any member of the public who wishes to join and abide by the rules making anything written here in the public domain and therefore "public".

I do not for one second believe that you think there are no reporters, local or national, who use this forum. It is in fact well documented that The Highland News and Inverness Courier have in the past quoted directly from threads posted here. Scotty and CaleyD have also stated that they are well aware of employees of ICT at all levels who use this site, going as far as to say threads are even printed off and handed around at TCS so your point of view is either sadly deluded or extremely naive, sorry.

This is taking it a bit off topic, but you are both partially correct in my mind.

It is a public website in the sense that anyone can access most of it (the main site etc) without joining. However, to access the full site, and specifically the forum portion of it, you do need complete a free registration and become a member. This by its very nature makes it a private forum open to members only. We can, if we choose to, reject or remove any account which we feel does not warrant membership or abuses that membership.

If you are not a member and you choose not to join you can view only the first post in each thread as noted in the privacy policy:

"If you choose not to register or not provide personal information, you may still visit the caleythistleonline.com websites but you will not be able to access the restricted areas available to registered users...."

When signing up as a member, you do accept the terms of use whether you read them or not and part of those terms are as follows:

"Any redistribution or reproduction of part or all of the contents in any form is prohibited. You may not, except with express written permission of the copyright owner, distribute or commercially exploit the content, nor may you transmit it or store it in any other website or other form of electronic retrieval system."

So basically, you have all agreed to ask for permission if you want to email, print or otherwise exploit anything on this website. This makes it allowable for us - if we choose to - to remove a membership if we believe the facility is being abused or used for other purposes. In practical terms that rule is there more to protect images or other items that may be copyrighted but it does technically extend to all forum content too.

I personally dont have an issue in people printing stuff off for personal use, but if they are doing so and using it as the basis for termination of employment then you could easily argue that they are in breach of the forum copyright rules.

[Kirishima]

Not much else to be said is there. The board are the Borg, resistence is futile, assimilate...or die/get a phonecall.

Though im in China, it makes me proud to be from a country where free speech, democracy, freedom, accountability, openess, justice and fairness are the cornerstones of society...oh :)

[PullMyFinger]

Not much else to be said is there. The board are the Borg, resistence is futile, assimilate...or die/get a phonecall.

Though im in China, it makes me proud to be from a country where free speech, democracy, freedom, accountability, openess, justice and fairness are the cornerstones of society...oh :)

Is that someone at your door Kirishima? :)

[Renegade]

I was going to say that myself! You better delete the last part of that post or it'll execution time for you!

Edited February 1, 2010 by Renegade

[IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER]

I am reliably informed that Caley D got the gig on the back of an agent presenting a dodgy Romanian made DJ promotion video to the Board.

As for all the peeple who dont know the rumours - well they are as they ever were - lets say Savage, McDonald, McLaren and Urquhart - and lets go back into the battling past hypothetically - one lot run the club down and the others save it - happens a lot these days - but WE are the cnuts in the crossfire.

[Joonya]

...I personally dont have an issue in people printing stuff off for personal use, but if they are doing so and using it as the basis for termination of employment then you could easily argue that they are in breach of the forum copyright rules

This could be open to further debate scotty - one question that sprang to my mind intantly was why do you not simply bannish those who are employed by the club, as someone, somewhere, has (it seems) deliberately used a posters opinion to generate unrest and ultimately, a dismissal?

EDIT: by employed I dont mean ticket sellers, programme sellers, catering staff of the reception girls, but those at a higher level who would potentially twist/abuse comments

Edited February 1, 2010 by Gringo_Jnr

[IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER]

It is quite obvious who they were - and where have they gone ?? :wave01:

[Guest]

...I personally dont have an issue in people printing stuff off for personal use, but if they are doing so and using it as the basis for termination of employment then you could easily argue that they are in breach of the forum copyright rules

This could be open to further debate scotty - one question that sprang to my mind intantly was why do you not simply bannish those who are employed by the club, as someone, somewhere, has (it seems) deliberately used a posters opinion to generate unrest and ultimately, a dismissal?

Because by banishing someone from the forum for having a job somewhere is as low as sacking someone for having an opinion?