Schwab re-signs for three years

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

Not long after Jim Stynes took over from the previous Board, journalist Charles Happell wrote an article in Crikey entitled Chairman Jim Stynes puts the Hollywood back into Melbourne

I felt at the time that the source of Happell's article was most likely a disgruntled former board member or employee and that there was no love lost for Jimmy or his appointee for the CEO job who just happened to be Cameron Schwab.

"Former chairman Paul Gardner was never one of the boys and became a victim of the Stynes putsch. Then Paul McNamee was given precisely 106 days as chief executive before the freshly-installed Stynes board decided last week his time was up.

Now Stynes is looking at bestowing patronage of another “mate”, Cameron Schwab, whom he has openly urged to apply for McNamee’s vacant position."

Timely of you to raise this article. It would seem that Mr. Happell's concerns about the Hollywood culture have been borne out with Schwab's three year contract being the most recent example.

[Hannibal 5,814]

Hey Haze, if only you liked footy as much as politics.

Run for the Board next time, [censored].

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

Hey Haze, if only you liked footy as much as politics.

Run for the Board next time, [censored].

I don't really want to reply to this directly. I just want there to be an accurate record of your contribution so that you can't go back and edit your posts as you have done on previous occasions.

[Hannibal 5,814]

As I know you're on-line and this is time stamped answer two questions for me - please.

1. What do you think the weaknesses of Gardner's Board were ?

2. What are the strengths and weaknesses of Michael Evans ?

EDIT: don't ask me to start a new thread as this one is just fine.

Edited August 28, 2012 by Ben-Hur

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

Start your own thread

[BIG JIM 508]

Start your own thread

Your balls are showing bumble bee tuna.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

Your balls are showing bumble bee tuna.

no, you are

[rpfc 28,447]

I hope the Demons do well and I think we would be better off without Cameron.

Well, I guess this line sums up what you are saying doesn't it?

I don't think your mind is changeable, is the subject?

He's got three years.

So either deal with it or convince Gardner to run again so you can give Schwab his payout.

Peace.

[Hulett Packard III 166]

Timely of you to raise this article. It would seem that Mr. Happell's concerns about the Hollywood culture have been borne out with Schwab's three year contract being the most recent example.

Only if you agree with Happell which I think is highly dubious.

Your response suggests that Freddy was right on the money four years ago.

Well done Freddy.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

Well, I guess this line sums up what you are saying doesn't it?

I don't think your mind is changeable, is the subject?

He's got three years.

So either deal with it or convince Gardner to run again so you can give Schwab his payout.

Peace.

I change my mind in the face of conflicting evidence. I've noticed that I have been doing most of the heavy lifting as far as evidence goes. You just ignore it because it interferes with your preferred reality (I use the term loosely).

Who is the real fanatic?

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

Only if you agree with Happell which I think is highly dubious.

Your response suggests that Freddy was right on the money four years ago.

Well done Freddy.

You don't think that the events of last year indicated some Hollywoodesque problems at the club? Even when you consider that Garry came out of retirement to play a starring role?

Is there something else you want to say to me?

[Axis of Bob 11,829]

Who is the real fanatic?

It's you.

Otherwise you would answer these questions, rather than skip around them like a snake oil salesman.

1. What do you think the weaknesses of Gardner's Board were ?

2. What are the strengths and weaknesses of Michael Evans ?

I'm not in one camp or another, since I don't know enough about the inner workings. But I know when someone is full of [censored] - your continued posting is actually working against your argument, HSOG. You are the political version of Hardnut and tonatopia. Almost like a plant that has been sent here to unite the supporter group against your point.

[Hulett Packard III 166]

You don't think that the events of last year indicated some Hollywoodesque problems at the club? Even when you consider that Garry came out of retirement to play a starring role?

Is there something else you want to say to me?

Yes.

Freddy's argument is that Happell is a mouthpiece for disgruntled former board members and/or club officials.

Do you have an opinion on that?

[Hannibal 5,814]

Start your own thread

Weak as [censored].

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

It's you.

Otherwise you would answer these questions, rather than skip around them like a snake oil salesman.

I'm not in one camp or another, since I don't know enough about the inner workings. But I know when someone is full of [censored] - your continued posting is actually working against your argument, HSOG. You are the political version of Hardnut and tonatopia. Almost like a plant that has been sent here to unite the supporter group against your point.

One of the consequences of having an unpopular opinion is that there are many people to disagree with you.

I have no intention of "spamming" the website, but the sheer volume of posts that are aimed directly at me means that if I decide to respond to even half of them, it can seem as though I am spamming the thread. Of course, I don't have to respond to everyone but I feel I have a right of reply so if I feel like responding I'm not too bothered about it.

I can see how it might be frustrating for some people to read several posts in a row from one poster, particularly when they strongly disagree with that poster. No doubt this is why people start to go off topic and end up writing posts that do nothing to contribute to the conversation but instead just try to insult me.

I know I'm not perfect, but I like to think that most of the time, I give pretty good responses to thoughtful posts, and I tend to not get too bogged down in the stupid insults (hence, "no, you are").

What I think people would find even more frustrating would be if I were to indulge posters who try over and over again to change the subject of a thread to be about me instead of the issue at hand. To some extent I am doing this now, but from time to time I feel the need to point this out.

As well as this, I have addressed these sorts of arguments about me several times before and I am a little sick of repeating myself to be honest.

These are the reasons I will not be indulging Ben Hur in his irrelevant ad hominem games in this thread.

If you don't like it, too bad (hence: "start your own thread").

Now please try and stick to the topic for my sake, and for the sake of everyone else who is sick of this p1ssing match.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

Weak as [censored].

no, you are

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

Yes.

Freddy's argument is that Happell is a mouthpiece for disgruntled former board members and/or club officials.

Do you have an opinion on that?

I'm still not sure what you are trying to say and how it is relevant to the merits of Schwab's new contract.

And was that a "Yes" as in, "yes I think that Schwab is part of a Hollywoodesque problem with Melbourne's culture"?

[Axis of Bob 11,829]

HSOG:

You are driving an agenda. It's like when a politician turns up and offers his 'opinion' on government policy - nobody believes them.

Your evasiveness is hurting your reputation and, hence, the agenda that you are driving. You last post evading and deliberately misconstruing Nark Meeld's point is but one example of your slimey behaviour on this thread which makes your unpopular opinion even less popular. You are doing your cause more harm than good.

If only you could see it from everyone else's perspective ......

Posts like yours are one of the key reasons I didn't post on demonology.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

You are ... almost like a plant that has been sent here to unite the supporter group against your point.

You are driving an agenda.

pick one.

Your evasiveness is hurting your reputation

I'm not fussed about my internet reputation

also:

start your own thread.

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

So what are you going to do Hazy?

He got the job for 3 years.

I was suprised after the Energy Watch debacle..but the contract has been stamped.

So what are you going to do?

It must be very hard for you to support the club right now.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

So what are you going to do Hazy?

He got the job for 3 years.

I was suprised after the Energy Watch debacle..but the contract has been stamped.

So what are you going to do?

It must be very hard for you to support the club right now.

The difference between you and me is that I support the club and you support the administration.

[Axis of Bob 11,829]

HSOG:

pick one.

They are closely aligned. The first one "almost like a plant that has been sent here to unite the supporter group against your point" is how your attempts at the second one ("driving an agenda") manifests itself in the eyes of those looking on.

To put it more simply, you think you are helping your cause of creating anti-Schwab sentiment but, in reality, you are driving the unaligned away from your cause because your have attached your constantly dwindling credibility to it.

And, on another note, don't [censored] up Demonland like you did to demonology.

[Sir Why You Little 37,046]

The difference between you and me is that I support the club and you support the administration.

No administrations come and go. I support the club. Have done for over 40 years.

I read all your above posts with interest. A lot of what you say has merit, considering the last 5 years.

You have more info than i. I am merely wondering how you can support the club whilst certain people run it.

[Hazyshadeofgrinter 80]

more of the same

You are basing this tripe on the assumptions that:

- I am here to fulfill some kind of agenda that extends beyond your own (i.e. discussing the MFC on a supporter's website)

- After entering into many of these arguments over several years I have somehow managed to remain ignorant of the fact that my evidence based arguments do little to win hearts and minds

I'm not going to bother arguing further about these ridiculous assumptions. You obviously have a low opinion of me if you think I am that stupid. Luckily, I don't care.

start your own thread

Edited August 28, 2012 by Hazyshadeofgrinter

[angrydee 842]

Meh.

It is what it is. He's there for the next 3 years unless he REALLY stuffs up. Those of you who hate the FACT - stamp your feet, hit your head against a brick wall and throw a tantrum. Or even start another thread.

And when you wake up tomorrow nothing will have changed.

So if you want to continue pissing into the wind, be my guests.