Constitutional Review

[DeelightfulPlay 2,547]

1 hour ago, pitmaster said:

It's a curious one. An email address is just that and easily changed. it reveals next to nothing.

A postal address reveals where you live, unless you have a post office box, and is potentially more sensitive than a location in the ether.

Given an email address can be linked to so many online services and accounts these days, it can also be quite sensitive.  Certainly I would prefer neither to be accessible for myself!

[Satan 2,871]

This has the collingwood board fiasco in the making for us

[Satan 2,871]

9 minutes ago, DeelightfulPlay said:

Thanks for the excerpt of the privacy policy!

The club would likely be unwilling to rely on the privacy policy here as a source of implied consent for third party disclosure because the section in question is all about the AFL's or club's corporate partners or sponsors. It would be a stretch to say this extends to a third party who is neither a corporate partner nor sponsor.  Potentially there is more luck regarding facilitating internal business... except it is still going to an external third party.  

Even before the Optus data breach, the Office of the Information Commissioner was very clear express consent is best for disclosure to third parties - and so drawing a long bow from a privacy policy (which is implied consent at best, depending on implementation on a website) is really sticking one's neck out.  

That being said, seems like Judge Riordan is being very practical about this (thankfully) and seems he will likely ask the club to provide the communications on Lawrence's behalf.

Watch this peter voldermort  complain if a few members say the didnt  get the email . Out of 65k members a few emails will bounce

[Dr. Gonzo 24,207]

13 hours ago, Demon17 said:

I do not want my email/contact details made available to just anyone and I do not give permission for the club to release them to third parties.

I expect the club to defend this issue.

A local govt councillor friend of mine says its against the State's electoral Act , for example, to use business mailing lists to cold-canvas voters in Council elections.

Why is this any different?

Go Dees for 2023. 

Yet I get spam calls every other day from people telling me theyre from the ATO, Commonwealth Bank, Amazon, Telstra etc

He's already entitled to postal addresses, I don't see what the big deal is with releasing email lists.

[Satan 2,871]

1 minute ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Yet I get spam calls every other day from people telling me theyre from the ATO, Commonwealth Bank, Amazon, Telstra etc

He's already entitled to postal addresses, I don't see what the big deal is with releasing email lists.

Because 65k email addresses potentially hacked ( see optus , medicare private ) despite good intentions  could generate so much spam . 

[Dr. Gonzo 24,207]

9 hours ago, Spaghetti said:

I stand 100% with the Board on this issue. I’d be furious if they gave out my email address without asking me. Especially if not required to by law. 

Lots of people here seem so willing to give up their personal information… it’s bizarre.

They give all that information to sponsors anyway, why would you be furious if it was given to a member to enable a democratic process to proceed? What are you worried is going to be done with an email address?

[Dr. Gonzo 24,207]

1 minute ago, Satan said:

Because 65k email addresses potentially hacked ( see optus , medicare private ) despite good intentions  could generate so much spam . 

Goes straight to spam folder. You don't think these spammers and scammers already have access to databases of email lists (including yours) by other means? It seems a pretty long bow to draw, for those not old enough to remember we used to have giant books thrown on our doorstep with all this personal information included.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,207]

14 minutes ago, Satan said:

Because 65k email addresses potentially hacked ( see optus , medicare private ) despite good intentions  could generate so much spam . 

Additionally the main concern with data breaches like Optus and Medibank is around personal sensitive information such as driver's licence details, passport details, banking details, medical details. Not names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses.

[Tim 3,418]

13 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

It takes the best part of 2 terms (6 years) for a board member to really get up to speed. Why would you limit them to 3 years in the job? You’d have a new or inexperienced president every 3 years and that’s a disaster waiting to happen.

15 years for the president is spot on. 6 years learning the ropes and 9 years in charge if they’re up for it. 

Wow, can’t believe someone would seriously put that forward as an argument, but there you go….

We’re not talking about recruiting callow young ruckman here, where it takes several seasons to get them to maturity. I want quality board members who can hit the ground running and help make our club the best it can be from top to bottom for the whole of their terms. You make it seem like getting on the board is like being inducted into a cult.

Edited October 19, 2022 by Tim

[Spaghetti 264]

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

They give all that information to sponsors anyway, why would you be furious if it was given to a member to enable a democratic process to proceed? What are you worried is going to be done with an email address?

I would have thought the difference is obvious.

I consent for my information to be given to sponsors. In fact, I opted out of sponsor emails so I don’t even get those.

[The heart beats true 18,123]

I’m an Optus and Medibank customer. Any email he tries to send me will end up in Russia’s with whoever’s assumed my identity.

It makes me laugh to think that somewhere a hacker is shuffling through my digital footprint and wondering who the hell ‘Brett Lovett’ is, and why he’s the password to all my streaming services.

[DeeSpencer 25,678]

1 hour ago, Tim said:

Wow, can’t believe someone would seriously put that forward as an argument, but there you go….

We’re not talking about recruiting callow young ruckman here, where it takes several seasons to get them to maturity. I want quality board members who can hit the ground running and help make our club the best it can be from top to bottom for the whole of their terms. You make it seem like getting on the board is like being inducted into a cult.

How can someone be ready to be President without doing at least 1 term (3 years)? And wouldn’t they be even better with 2 terms so they’ve gone through some ups and downs of the team, maybe moved around subcommittees, built relationships with club staff, got a feel for the AFL commission/executive, worked out who to trust in the media and so on. Doesn’t mean they aren’t great board members from day 1, just means they aren’t ready for the top job and the far greater scrutiny. 

And why would you toss out a competent President after at most 6 years and quite possibly under 3 in the top job? That means constant churn which leads to instability.

If you want a better analogy try coaches.

Even a great assistant coach prospect is better off with 3-6 years experience.

And then you’d be mad to not let a great senior coach do a full 9 years in the top job if they are successful. 

Term limits are only the end limits. Directors who don’t pull their weight should be let go. And the 9 year limit stays the same. The 15 year exemption is so you don’t rush Presidents in or out of the top job which requires more time. 

 

Edited October 19, 2022 by DeeSpencer

[DeeSpencer 25,678]

1 hour ago, Tim said:

Wow, can’t believe someone would seriously put that forward as an argument, but there you go….

We’re not talking about recruiting callow young ruckman here, where it takes several seasons to get them to maturity. I want quality board members who can hit the ground running and help make our club the best it can be from top to bottom for the whole of their terms. You make it seem like getting on the board is like being inducted into a cult.

In practical terms:

Kate Roffey joined the board in 2013, 9 years ago. If she was a regular board member it would be time for her to wind it up. Seems about right.

But after 8 years of solid service on the board she’s only been President for 1 year, it would be crazy to finish her up now. Makes perfect sense that she stays for up to 2 more terms in the top job. If she’s done well she’ll have served 7 years in the top job which is probably the perfect amount of time to make a difference then hand over. 

[deespicable me 1,486]

On 10/4/2022 at 12:05 PM, george_on_the_outer said:

4. We have only had a handful of women on the MFC board in our history.  We still don't have a true representation of our members.

Does this mean Collingwood should have a dog on their board.

[Sir Why You Little 37,033]

19 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

How can someone be ready to be President without doing at least 1 term (3 years)? And wouldn’t they be even better with 2 terms so they’ve gone through some ups and downs of the team, maybe moved around subcommittees, built relationships with club staff, got a feel for the AFL commission/executive, worked out who to trust in the media and so on. Doesn’t mean they aren’t great board members from day 1, just means they aren’t ready for the top job and the far greater scrutiny. 

And why would you toss out a competent President after only 3-6 years in the top job? That means constant churn which leads to instability.

If you want a better analogy try coaches.

Even a great assistant coach prospect is better off with 3-6 years experience.

And then you’d be mad to not let a great senior coach do a full 9 years in the top job if they are successful. 

Term limits are only the end limits. Directors who don’t pull their weight should be let go. And the 9 year limit stays the same. The 15 year exemption is so you don’t rush Presidents in or out of the top job which requires more time. 

 

People coming in from the Business world should get up to speed within weeks, not 3 years. 
That’s 3 cups down the gutter 

[Diamond_Jim 12,568]

Of course the simple solution to the Court case is for the club itself to send out the other sides info.

No sharing of email address lists required that way.

The joys of politics in sport

[Ugottobekidding 1,184]

Open fair democracy is good. Just send the email address but do it through the MFC. Anyone who wants to join the board should be able to and have the same ability to communicate with members as current board members.

[rpfc 28,383]

Well I read the flyer so no need to send me something in gmail I will read next month…

As for the challenge, I’m not convinced; it is written poorly and far too biased in its construction.

I don’t think we should kid ourselves that football clubs should have pure ‘democratic’ functions and making it more difficult to create fissures is good for a club that just can’t seem to help itself be stable ever since you know what.

This bloke hasn’t got my vote for his changes to the constitution, or to be on the board, or whatever he decides to do next because someone in the coterie was rude to him or something.

rp out

[Fritta and Turner 4,403]

This unnecessary kerfuffle has given me the motivation to nominate a proxy.

[Mel Bourne 4,515]

Your email address is not the gateway to your soul, people.
 

Does the idea of receiving one unsolicited email genuinely bother anyone here? 
 

I mean, it seems to. I genuinely don’t understand why, though. 

 

 

 

Edited October 19, 2022 by Mel Bourne

[pitmaster 3,544]

12 hours ago, deespicable me said:

Does this mean Collingwood should have a dog on their board.

Dogs are cool so that would be a 'no'.

[pitmaster 3,544]

3 hours ago, Mel Bourne said:

Your email address is not the gateway to your soul, people.
 

Does the idea of receiving one unsolicited email genuinely bother anyone here? 
 

I mean, it seems to. I genuinely don’t understand why, though. 

 

 

 

Yeah, it's not like it would be from that Nigerian prince who has been hassling me to pay for his palace renovations.

[daisycutter 29,613]

i just received a letter in snail mail from deemocracy (peter lawrence)

given he is mailing by letter i don't see why he needs my email address

[Ugottobekidding 1,184]

Is the letter good? Are we in for a dee revolution. Don't like the current board.

[Sideshow Bob 2,369]

Got my snail mail propaganda. Have read through it and nominated a proxy…… The current president And will voted for the prezs reforms.

really not appreciative of all this data transference he wants!!