Not in Front of the Children

By

Drew Peacock says: August 16, 2013 at 11:49 pm (Edit) I trust …

Comment on Not in Front of the Children by TSFM.

Drew Peacock says:

August 16, 2013 at 11:49 pm (Edit)

I trust you have inflated the numbers for JI’s benefit.
________________________________________________________

If anything, the figures are conservative. I can’t see any point in massaging them for anybody’s benefit – far less JI’s. Maybe if we were looking for advertisers πŸ™‚

TSFM Also Commented

Not in Front of the Children
wottpi says:

August 16, 2013 at 9:06 pm
_________________________________________________________
Current figures are as follows.
Daily page views c. 32,000 (1.5m since the site started)
Posters who have posted on the site in the last six months c. 1200 (total since site started: 1600)

I wouldn’t make the claim that this tells a story of huge success or a mainstream breakthrough, but definitely not just a few guys talking to themselves.

When new and interesting stuff comes on the site, like during the reconstruction debate and the various crises at Ibrox, a relatively fewer quota of posters is accompanied by ridiculous peaks in views. Giving rise to the notion that people (in huge numbers) will come along to hear the interpretation of big news when it breaks elsewhere.


Not in Front of the Children
iamacant says:

August 15, 2013 at 9:49 pm (Edit)

TSFM says:
August 15, 2013 at 9:35 pm

” I am an idiot”
β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”

Is that you CG? πŸ˜€
___________________________________________________________

Outed!
Damn you Bampots πŸ‘Ώ !


Not in Front of the Children
verselijkfc says:
August 15, 2013 at 8:22 pm

TSFM
well that was a short-lived blog:
β€œcairney67.wordpress.com is no longer available.
The authors have deleted this site.” ❓
________________________________________________________

No he hasn’t. I am an idiot. The address is
http://cairney2.wordpress.com

Spoke to the man himself. It was developed using the 67 thing, but some guy has that name on Twitter, so he went for his shorts number instead πŸ™‚


Recent Comments by TSFM

Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
bogsdollox says:

March 7, 2014 at 1:08 pm

Alan Price says:
March 7, 2014 at 12:54 pm

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Rangers were not the lender. The Sub-Trusts, into which Rangers made a contribution via an EBT, are the β€œlender”. Rangers gave the money away and there can be no suggestion of repayment to them.
__________________________________________________________________

Yes, but had the loans been repaid by the lendees, Rangers would have been able to apply for one themselves had they set up a sub-trust in their favour. Therefore the money would have been available to the club in times of hardship.

Or perhaps I am missing something here?


Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
Auldheid
Res 12 is as you say important, but I am convinced that Celtic have no desire whatsoever to pursue its aims.
We could have a discussion about the possible reasons, but ultimately if DD is disinclined to seek a proper answer to these questions, then the SFA will dodge the bullet.
Thus my question to Campbellsmoney: do individual (or groups of) shareholders have locus to seek legal redress here?
Going at it in that fashion may even force Celtic and other clubs for that matter to come on board.


Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
Campbellsmoney

Is there anyone outside of the clubs who may have locus to challenge LNS? Is there any basis for a challenge?

β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”β€”
I don’t know is the answer, but I doubt it. You see its not a question of law really. Its not a proper court – its a made up thing by a private body.
_________________________________________________________________

I meant a challenge in law. For example, is there a framework whereby a shareholder(s) of a club(s) could challenge the outcome?

It does seem rather odd that, if a most people here believe, RFC achieved honours dishonestly and in doing so denied other clubs prize-money and opportunity that those clubs are reluctant to seek redress.

My guess I that the must have something to lose by bringing that up – but what?

Is there a mechanism through which the SFA/SPL could be sued by individual shareholders for loss of earnings caused by a lack of proper regulation by the governing bodies.


Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
Campbellsmoney

Is there anyone outside of the clubs who may have locus to challenge LNS? Is there any basis for a challenge?


Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
Kicker Conspiracy

Double click or tap on the TU and it will change your vote πŸ™‚


About the author